3 ms·

> Because unlike companies, governments¹ can function long-term even if they don't balance budgets. Except that shouldn't matter if the private company can com

by cbd1984 12y ago

> Because unlike companies, governments¹ can function long-term even if they don't balance budgets. Except that shouldn't matter if the private company can compete on technology and service. If your opponent has unlimited funds but the customer service policies of the DMV and the technological acumen of, uh, some very-non-technical government office of your choice, shouldn't you win?

deciplex 12y ago
The hidden assumption is that by favoring, or at least not opposing, municipal broadband, you are supporting the total ban of competing networks, subsidizing network infrastructure with property taxes, five-year plans, gulags, etc etc.
- cbd1984 12y ago
  Hence my constant needling of the Free Market Fundamentalists.
MaysonL 12y ago
I've had recent experience with the DMV, Charter, and my doctor: of the three, I was treated most professionally and with least wasted time, at the DMV.
- hobs 12y ago
  I have to agree, each time I go to the DMV, even if it is packed, I am treated with respect and very VERY efficiently get out the door.
cpitman 12y ago
The local government has plenty of other advantages. For one, they have a vested interest in not imposing costly requirements on themselves, while they continue to do so to private ISPs. In other words, they set the rules that everyone has to play by (ie you must cover this entire area, event the parts where no one can afford your service) while preferentially setting better rules for themselves. In the same way, I wouldn't be surprised if they can get permits and other government imposed roadblocks out of the way faster.
- cbd1984 12y ago
  ISPs can vote just like everyone else. Even more so, in fact, because they can influence others to vote their way by buying ads. Governments are constrained by those votes. ISPs therefore have leverage over the way in which governments have leverage over them; they just need to convince their potential customers to vote their way, much like they need to convince their potential customers to become actual customers.

by cbd1984 12y ago

deciplex 12y ago

The hidden assumption is that by favoring, or at least not opposing, municipal broadband, you are supporting the total ban of competing networks, subsidizing network infrastructure with property taxes, five-year plans, gulags, etc etc.

cbd1984 12y ago
Hence my constant needling of the Free Market Fundamentalists.

MaysonL 12y ago

I've had recent experience with the DMV, Charter, and my doctor: of the three, I was treated most professionally and with least wasted time, at the DMV.

hobs 12y ago
I have to agree, each time I go to the DMV, even if it is packed, I am treated with respect and very VERY efficiently get out the door.

cpitman 12y ago

The local government has plenty of other advantages. For one, they have a vested interest in not imposing costly requirements on themselves, while they continue to do so to private ISPs. In other words, they set the rules that everyone has to play by (ie you must cover this entire area, event the parts where no one can afford your service) while preferentially setting better rules for themselves. In the same way, I wouldn't be surprised if they can get permits and other government imposed roadblocks out of the way faster.

cbd1984 12y ago
ISPs can vote just like everyone else. Even more so, in fact, because they can influence others to vote their way by buying ads. Governments are constrained by those votes. ISPs therefore have leverage over the way in which governments have leverage over them; they just need to convince their potential customers to vote their way, much like they need to convince their potential customers to become actual customers.