|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
You mean like Japan before we rebuilt it ?
--- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Yuki Taga <yukitaga@xxxx> wrote:
> >> Here in Japan, population density means that almost everyone has
> >> access to reasonably priced 100 mbps glass. And since Japan
tries
> >> to balance market economics with at least some semblance of
> >> egalitarianism, we city folk pay a small premium over what the
> >> market would normally call for, in order to provide the service
to
> >> our country cousins at a price they can afford.
> >>
> >> Try getting that idea across in the States, and good luck. ^_^
> >>
> >> Yuki
>
> P> Again, only one point of view.
>
> P> During the 90's, so many US$ were poured into broadband
> P> infrastructure, only to be margainilized by the US FCC which was
> P> lobbied by other competing communications interests that competed
> P> against nationwide broadband.
>
> But "nation-wide anything" is an anathema to US economic orthodoxy,
> unless the market can do it without any regulation.
>
> P> Our major telecomunication providers were required by law (FCC
> P> Requirements) to provide competing wholesale operations with
> P> 'below cost' business rates of telecommunications for consumer
> P> pricing.
>
> P> As a result, major US telecommunication providers just withheld
> P> broadband from the market rather than give competators access to
> P> the technology at below market cost rates.
>
> So, it sounds like it was a half-measure to me. Either broadband
> access is a national goal, or it isn't. When you turn over natural
> monopolies (utilities, etc.) to the private sector, you then
> relinquish control over them. It's very difficult to have it both
> ways. Of course they are going to act in their own self interest.
> Why does this surprise?
>
> P> And so, here in the US, because of artificial governmental
regulatory
> P> policy, our major telecom providers have with-held broadband for
> P> competative reasons (and self-defensive reasons).
>
> P> Once we are able to obtain fair FCC treatment of ownership
rights,
> P> then we will see fair distribution of broadband nationwide.
>
> P> Just My Opinion.
>
> You already have "fair" distribution from a purely economic
> perspective.
>
> The question is, does "fair" imply anything else besides pure
> economics. The orthodox capitalist priests are ready with their
> answer, to be sure.
>
> Any ideology taken to its logical extreme becomes a pathetic
> absurdity. One needs a sense of balance.
>
> Yuki
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
In low income neighborhoods, 84% do not own computers.
At Network for Good, help bridge the Digital Divide!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/EpW3eD/3MnJAA/cosFAA/GHeqlB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Check AmiBroker web page at:
http://www.amibroker.com/
Check group FAQ at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
amibroker-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|