3 ms·

That sounds like internet access should be a public utility, with all that implies.

MereInterest 6y ago
What finally convinced some of my family members of that was that internet access is required in order to apply for housing. The last two times I moved, all rental applications were online only, without a physical form as a backup. Having a roof over your head requires not only having internet access, but having secure internet connection. I wouldn't trust putting personal details in on a library computer, for example.
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  I think you're renting classier apartments than me. I've always just seen the state's sample form often without any modification.
  - bovermyer 6y ago
    It's definitely changing. Even a decade ago, I was seeing home-grown leases, including some with clauses of questionable legality. Now, a lot of the rental complexes either have their own online system (if they're owned by a big management company), or they use something like Avail if they're a one-off. I pay my rent through Venmo for my current house. Times have changed.
  - pnutjam 6y ago
    Woah, look at Mr. Fancypants with a state that cares about renters and provides a sample form.
seveibar 6y ago
How does the logic work? There are many necessities you pay for that aren't a public utility. The necessity of a resource doesn't seem to dictate the government should take care of it. A government monopoly is most effective when the cost of infrastructure dictates the inefficiency of a monopoly is a better alternative than a duopoly or competitive market no?
- bob1029 6y ago
  I think the logic works in exactly the same way as with roads, power, sewer, water, etc., Just because the mode of access is intangible does not depreciate the importance of the resource. Do you feel there is justification for our roadways being classified as a public utility? How does that logic work? I feel the analogy of calling the internet an "information superhighway" is extremely apt here.
Shivetya 6y ago
Which could have adverse results in that most every utility has metered rates. far too many assume utility means high speed and limit free connectivity where it really means you are just guaranteed access
missedthecue 6y ago
Saying something should be run by the government because it's important seems like backwards logic to me. Should the government manage the production and distribution of food as well? Should all housing be government housing projects? Basic food and shelter are far more important than internet access.
- bleepblorp 6y ago
  The US government pours tens of billions into food production.[0] Direct subsidies account for 15% of agribusiness ("farm") revenues and the US government both underwrites and pays 63% of the costs of crop price insurance. Every developed country subsidizes their food industry to some extent or other. In the EU, the Common Agricultural Policy is the largest item in the EU budget. Food subsidies seem to be economically essential for a stable food supply, and politically essential to ensure stability in rural areas. Shelter, for its part, is heavily subsidized through the GSE[1] system. The GSEs underwrite mortgages, lowering interest rates for homebuyers, and stabilize the mortgage system by allowing mortgage issuing banks to offload the costs of internal failures onto the public instead of locking up the mortgage lending system. Tighter government regulation of internet availability, including public or quasi-public ownership, would be far from exceptional given the degree of government involvement in other essential economic areas including food and housing. [0] https://usafacts.org/articles/federal-farm-subsidies-what-data-says/ https://usafacts.org/articles/federal-farm-subsidies-what-da... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government-sponsored_enterprise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government-sponsored_enterpris...
  - missedthecue 6y ago
    I said control, not support. The argument here considered is about the government controlling broadband, not giving subsidies to broadband companies. The government does not control food or housing supply and there are very few people who would advocate that they adopt that role. That is my point.
    - bleepblorp 6y ago
      I don't see a meaningful distinction between "control" and the existence of selective subsidies. The US government directs agribusiness to produce specific crops by giving the industry more money to produce those crops congress wants. This is "control." Food safety rules are also "control" of the market. As far as housing is concerned, GSE preferences (combined with additional support like the mortgage interest tax credit) distort the housing market by supporting owner-occupied housing, which is abnormal by global standards. This is deliberate shaping of the market, or "control" by most definitions. Also with regard to housing, the market is directly controlled through zoning laws and building codes. Zoning controls housing availability to artificially inflate prices, and building codes theoretically control construction quality. Food and housing are controlled markets.

What finally convinced some of my family members of that was that internet access is required in order to apply for housing. The last two times I moved, all rental applications were online only, without a physical form as a backup. Having a roof over your head requires not only having internet access, but having secure internet connection. I wouldn't trust putting personal details in on a library computer, for example.

throwaway0a5e 6y ago
I think you're renting classier apartments than me. I've always just seen the state's sample form often without any modification.
- bovermyer 6y ago
  It's definitely changing. Even a decade ago, I was seeing home-grown leases, including some with clauses of questionable legality. Now, a lot of the rental complexes either have their own online system (if they're owned by a big management company), or they use something like Avail if they're a one-off. I pay my rent through Venmo for my current house. Times have changed.
- pnutjam 6y ago
  Woah, look at Mr. Fancypants with a state that cares about renters and provides a sample form.

seveibar 6y ago

How does the logic work? There are many necessities you pay for that aren't a public utility. The necessity of a resource doesn't seem to dictate the government should take care of it. A government monopoly is most effective when the cost of infrastructure dictates the inefficiency of a monopoly is a better alternative than a duopoly or competitive market no?

bob1029 6y ago
I think the logic works in exactly the same way as with roads, power, sewer, water, etc., Just because the mode of access is intangible does not depreciate the importance of the resource. Do you feel there is justification for our roadways being classified as a public utility? How does that logic work? I feel the analogy of calling the internet an "information superhighway" is extremely apt here.

Shivetya 6y ago

Which could have adverse results in that most every utility has metered rates. far too many assume utility means high speed and limit free connectivity where it really means you are just guaranteed access

missedthecue 6y ago

Saying something should be run by the government because it's important seems like backwards logic to me. Should the government manage the production and distribution of food as well? Should all housing be government housing projects? Basic food and shelter are far more important than internet access.

bleepblorp 6y ago
The US government pours tens of billions into food production.[0] Direct subsidies account for 15% of agribusiness ("farm") revenues and the US government both underwrites and pays 63% of the costs of crop price insurance. Every developed country subsidizes their food industry to some extent or other. In the EU, the Common Agricultural Policy is the largest item in the EU budget. Food subsidies seem to be economically essential for a stable food supply, and politically essential to ensure stability in rural areas. Shelter, for its part, is heavily subsidized through the GSE[1] system. The GSEs underwrite mortgages, lowering interest rates for homebuyers, and stabilize the mortgage system by allowing mortgage issuing banks to offload the costs of internal failures onto the public instead of locking up the mortgage lending system. Tighter government regulation of internet availability, including public or quasi-public ownership, would be far from exceptional given the degree of government involvement in other essential economic areas including food and housing. [0] https://usafacts.org/articles/federal-farm-subsidies-what-data-says/ https://usafacts.org/articles/federal-farm-subsidies-what-da... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government-sponsored_enterprise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government-sponsored_enterpris...
- missedthecue 6y ago
  I said control, not support. The argument here considered is about the government controlling broadband, not giving subsidies to broadband companies. The government does not control food or housing supply and there are very few people who would advocate that they adopt that role. That is my point.
  - bleepblorp 6y ago
    I don't see a meaningful distinction between "control" and the existence of selective subsidies. The US government directs agribusiness to produce specific crops by giving the industry more money to produce those crops congress wants. This is "control." Food safety rules are also "control" of the market. As far as housing is concerned, GSE preferences (combined with additional support like the mortgage interest tax credit) distort the housing market by supporting owner-occupied housing, which is abnormal by global standards. This is deliberate shaping of the market, or "control" by most definitions. Also with regard to housing, the market is directly controlled through zoning laws and building codes. Zoning controls housing availability to artificially inflate prices, and building codes theoretically control construction quality. Food and housing are controlled markets.