Why the US doesn't have cheap broadband

[cwtnospam]

Quote: Originally Posted by CAlvarez You're really going to stick with that assertion even though I WAS THERE? Wow. I suppose then that anything else we debate is pointless; if you're willing to either call me a liar or just say that my life experience didn't happen, nothing I say will get through.

Oh, I see what you're saying. YOU were there, by MY experience teaching is invalid. So is my mother's.

Quote: Originally Posted by CAlvarez If we take away the government's power to limit competition, then competition will benefit the consumer.

The government has no power to limit competition. If we take away the government's power to limit the criminal actions of corporations, we get voluntary regulation.

Edit: And one more thing about competition! Anyone old enough to remember the days before cable will tell you that while television back then was a waste land, it has gotten much worse since cable. Why do you think that is? Could it be because going from 3 or 4 channels to hundreds has turned them all into commodities to be produced as cheaply as possible, quality be damned? There's a writer's strike today because the studios don't want to pay them. They don't want to pay because they've been getting away with no writers in 'reality' shows. Because of that, no matter how much you dislike Reality TV, it isn't going away. Competition is a good thing, to a point. Beyond that point it leads to lots of companies selling cheap crap that no one really wants.

[CAlvarez]

Quote: . YOU were there, by MY experience teaching is invalid.

The amazing leap of logic, which I feel compelled to explain, is that you can't prove a negative. However you can prove a positive. You never saw what I describe, so you say it can't happen. I was there and lived it, so I say it can. This is where most intelligent people realize that lack of experience or failure to observe something does not prove impossibility.

Quote: The government has no power to limit competition.

Can I start up a competitive first class mail service? Can I start up a cable company without spending millions in licensing fees (which of course limit competition to only the rich corporations)? Can I even start cutting someone's hair without 1000 hours of cosmetic training and paying for a license?

[cwtnospam]

Quote: Originally Posted by CAlvarez The amazing leap of logic, which I feel compelled to explain, is that you can't prove a negative. However you can prove a positive. You never saw what I describe, so you say it can't happen. I was there and lived it, so I say it can. This is where most intelligent people realize that lack of experience or failure to observe something does not prove impossibility.

Talk about an amazing leap of logic! One anecdotal case is supposed to trump the experience of dealing with a much larger group of students? I don't say that you're case didn't happen. I say that it can't be a model for all cases, unless you're intending to impose regulations requiring parents to be concerned and actively involved in their children's educations. I have no idea how you would enforce such regulations.

Quote: Originally Posted by CAlvarez Can I start up a competitive first class mail service? Can I start up a cable company without spending millions in licensing fees (which of course limit competition to only the rich corporations)? Can I even start cutting someone's hair without 1000 hours of cosmetic training and paying for a license?

If you don't mind competing with UPS, you can. You can't start any business without taking necessary steps to establish it. Licensing became necessary because the market doesn't work well without it. It's often industry associations that request regulation because fly by night operations are harming their business. The home inspection business is one of the more recent industries to do so.

[CAlvarez]

Quote: If you don't mind competing with UPS, you can.

It is illegal to deliver first class mail in the US if you are not the post office. They've even arrested teens doing messenger service in NYC and SF because of this.

Quote: . It's often industry associations that request regulation because fly by night operations are harming their business.

So licensing prevents competition, that's what I said.

[cwtnospam]

Quote: Originally Posted by CAlvarez It is illegal to deliver first class mail in the US if you are not the post office. They've even arrested teens doing messenger service in NYC and SF because of this.

Tell it to UPS.

Quote: Originally Posted by CAlvarez So licensing prevents competition, that's what I said.

Yes, it limits competition to people and companies that are qualified to provide a service or product. Or perhaps you'd like to make it legal for anyone to sell drugs? Got kids? Want to see them on crack?

[NovaScotian]

As I understand it, UPS, FedX, etc. are forbidden by law from undercutting postal prices, do not have legal access to your letterbox or post office box, cannot sell or accept stamps. The post office is a protected monopoly on US Mail. That doesn't mean you can't send something some other way, but not on the same terms as the post office, nor with the same legal protections that US Mail has.

[ArcticStones]

Quote: Originally Posted by cwtnospam Or perhaps you'd like to make it legal for anyone to sell drugs? Got kids? Want to see them on crack?

That is uncalled for.

This topic is interesting and worthwhile,
but I have grave reservations about discussion threads becoming a duel ground between two posters. It has happened all to often -- and in many instances with disregard for the original poster’s choice of topic.

Perhaps we should have a maximum number of posts / portion of posts - per thread? In the meantime a bit of self-limitation would be a good thing.

-- ArcticStones
.

[cwtnospam]

No it's not!

The topic is deregulation. Broadband is just a metaphor, and the logical conclusion of complete deregulation in broadband is the same kind of chaos that would result with the complete deregulation of the pharmaceutical industry.

[ArcticStones]

.
CWT, do you realize that 32 of the 88 posts in this thread are yours?!
.

[fazstp]

Quote: Originally Posted by CAlvarez Two more: Fuses and hose clamps. There was a story recently about a near-fire when their fuses failed, and then a week later they did a recall on them. I just had a hose clamp leak coolant all over my keg fridge when it invisibly failed.

A hose clamp failure on the fuel line in my old Torana resulted in a fire under my hood that burnt out all the wiring. Nothing to do with broadband but yeah the moral is no cheap hose clamps .

[CAlvarez]

Quote: Tell it to UPS.

Why? They don't deliver mail. It would be illegal for them to do so.

Quote: As I understand it, UPS, FedX, etc. are forbidden by law from undercutting postal prices,

Not just undercutting, they are not permitted to deliver for less than $1.

And I do support the removal of all drug laws. Just as in prohibition, the laws do much more harm than the drugs themselves.

[J Christopher]

Quote: Originally Posted by CAlvarez Why? They don't deliver mail. It would be illegal for them to do so.

It would also be illegal for a USPS employee to deliver packages from the big brown trademark looking UPS trucks.

The mailboxes and stamps are how USPS prefers to do its transactions. UPS prefers their customers to schedule pickups or deliver to various locations. There is nothing to keep UPS from buying for their customers (or requiring their customers to buy, as with USPS) boxes to install on or near their home or business, and they could check it daily. They could even print and sell UPS stamps. I don't think they want to though. Their current system seems to work pretty well; I don't think their drivers will start delivering packages through their truck' window any time soon.

Quote: Not just undercutting, they are not permitted to deliver for less than $1.

USPS cannot offer the same services as UPS for under a dollar. Also, UPS doesn't seem to be offering any services for just over a dollar, either, so such a law doesn't appear to affect much.

Quote: And I do support the removal of all drug laws. Just as in prohibition, the laws do much more harm than the drugs themselves.

I agree 100 percent.

[cwtnospam]

Wow.

Remove all drug laws and anyone can produce and sell anything, of any quality, to anyone.

So you needed diabetes medicine, but the store you bought it from sold you a 1/4 strength version of your medicine. Now you've lost your sight, a leg, and your heart is failing. Is the pharmacist punished? No, it's legal! Can you sue? Theoretically yes, assuming we haven't removed those regulations, but you've lost your health and along with it, most of your wealth. You don't have the strength to even begin such a battle. Of course, your supplier knew that, so he knew he could cut costs and give you a sugar pill.

Of course, without any regulation, it would be easier and more profitable for a dealer to wait outside the schoolyard with a table full of brightly colored pills.

Caveat emptor, kids!

[tlarkin]

I don't think anyone is calling for complete deregulation of rules or government agencies, just some. I live in MO, which is very very bureaucratic by nature. You have to have a permit for everything. On the plus side, you can get a permit for just about anything you can think of.

I think they should decriminalize a bunch of drugs (all of them actually) but keep some sort of regulation on them, and still have the FDA approve the drug. It scares me that we have a pill for everything these days. If people want to get high I think that is there business and we waste too many time and resources trying to regulate it legally and it is nothing but one huge failure. I think time/money can be spent somewhere else and be more productive. There are plenty of countries too that have already done this and have a fraction of the problems we do in our country.

Also, I have sent letters via DHL and UPS before. So I am not sure where you have to send something through the USPS.

I agree with Carlos and with Cwtnospam on the subject. Deregulation is very much needed in some areas but also at the same time, there needs to be regulation to keep the corporate powers in check. Otherwise they will do whatever it takes to make a buck. Destroy the environment, exploit their work force, break anti trust laws, so on and so forth. If there is not any regulation who will stop them? Other private companies? Also, competition of the consumer market will not balance out or regulate these corporations. The ones with the most money will win, because they can just buy out all competition or slash prices and drive others out of business. There is no way that we live in a society or a world for that matter where human beings will place fair and nice with other human beings.

[ArcticStones]

Quote: Originally Posted by cwtnospam Wow. Remove all drug laws and anyone can produce and sell anything, of any quality, to anyone.

Well, I’d settle for enough deregulation that the Canadians would be allowed to sell over-the-border drugs.

[cwtnospam]

Quote: Originally Posted by tlarkin I don't think anyone is calling for complete deregulation of rules or government agencies, just some.

I think you're right, there will always be some regulations that should be removed, and some that need to be better enforced. Unfortunately, I don't think that's what has been suggested here.

[tlarkin]

Its funny the state I live in just changed a lot of state gun laws. You no longer need any license to own or buy a gun, only to conceal and carry. Also, you can now shoot first and ask questions later if someone breaks into your house. However, you must make sure they are actually in your house. Where as in Texas they can just be on your property and you need to give them three warnings.

On the other hand, you need a liquor card to work in a bar. This is a one time yearly fee to be able to work in any place that sells liquor. You also need a food handlers license to work in a kitchen or handle food in any way. You take very simple very shorts tests and get a card, and renewing it you don't need to take the test. If you go down to city hall and buy a liquor permit for the day you can bring liquor with you onto public property, like a park. Even though a lot of this isn't regulated very closely, you can and will get fined if you don't have your proper permit. If liquor control or health inspectors come by and ask for everyone's proper cards and you don't have yours, your business you work at gets fined. It is kind of ridiculous but it is also not a very huge deal in my mind.

When it comes to broadband there are many things to consider. Can our current infrastructure handle an increase? How much more power will this consume? Is it really needed? I think there should be some sort of guide lines to follow because of the resources it takes to run these things. However, at the same time I don't think it should be too limited to some narrow scope. Also, with the problem is not always regulation it is also how our economy works. I mean look at how bad comcast is, they are horrid and no one regulates them on bandwidth gouging, monitoring bandwidth and limiting customers downloads even though they are paying for that premium service, and all sorts of other nasty little things they do. Even though they sell a service at a certain rate for certain broadband they limit you and throttle your traffic.

[CAlvarez]

Quote: The mailboxes and stamps are how USPS prefers to do its transactions. UPS prefers their customers to schedule pickups or deliver to various locations. There is nothing to keep UPS from buying for their customers (or requiring their customers to buy, as with USPS) boxes to install on or near their home or business, and they could check it daily.

USPS is aided by cities in mailbox installations. For example, in my city, the mailboxes are centralized per block and are installed when the subdivision is built. UPS does NOT have that special help, and does not have the right to use up sidewalk space to install their boxes. The law is preventing them from competing with UPS. They don't deliver for $1 or near it because there's no market for $1 mail delivery. People will either pay for cheaper standard delivery or more for special fast delivery.

Quote: Remove all drug laws and anyone can produce and sell anything, of any quality, to anyone.

Pretty much like what we have today. Since illegal drugs are illegal, they are produced by outlaws instead of professionals, and they are often deadly. The legal drugs are better, but we still have had a lot of bad prescription drugs hit the market.

Look at electrical products and UL. I look for the UL label because I know that THEY CARE about the reputation of their label, and they will make sure the products are good. Government has nobody to answer to, no reason to keep our faith. I'd happily look for the label on my drugs (UL, Consumer Reports, whatever) rather than rely on an inefficient and self-serving bureaucracy.

Quote: I think you're right, there will always be some regulations that should be removed, and some that need to be better enforced. Unfortunately, I don't think that's what has been suggested here.

I suggest that we remove all specific laws that control competition and enforce the fraud laws better. You can sell me broadband however you want without a government license, but you have to live up to your contractual obligations. If not, there are criminal and civil penalties enforced. I propose that CEOs be held personally responsible for gross negligence.

[cwtnospam]

You're suggesting that we all enter into the same kinds of agreements (contractual agreements drawn up solely by the corporation) that recording artists enter into with record labels! That's an unregulated business, and look how well that's turned out. Contracts always work in favor of the corporation.

I do like the idea of holding upper management personally responsible.

[tlarkin]

Doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of liability when making your company incorporated, LLC, or sub chapter S?

I am totally for accountability, not only in the corporate world but in the government as well. I would like to see politicians be held accountable for any laws they break, scandals they are involved in, or anything else that would be considered illegal.