An open community 
of Macintosh users,
for Macintosh users.

FineTunedMac Dashboard widget now available! Download Here

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Why is the US so backward?
#12967 11/27/10 10:12 PM
Joined: Aug 2009
Likes: 7
jchuzi Offline OP
OP Offline

Joined: Aug 2009
Likes: 7
As we all know, broadband internet connections are far from universal in the US. It's not only due to cost; broadband is not available in many areas. My sister-in-law is stuck on dialup and would love to have broadband but she can't get it in her semi-rural location. By contrast, look at Broadband in Europe Speeding Up. The US is the richest country in the world. Why can't it do these things for its citizens?


Jon

macOS 11.7.10, iMac Retina 5K 27-inch, late 2014, 3.5 GHz Intel Core i5, 1 TB fusion drive, 16 GB RAM, Epson SureColor P600, Photoshop CC, Lightroom CC, MS Office 365
Re: Why is the US so backward?
jchuzi #12968 11/27/10 10:53 PM
Joined: Aug 2009
Likes: 1
Moderator
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Aug 2009
Likes: 1
As with many other things, the US could but chooses not to. Various European countries (including the two you mentioned) subsidize broadband development and make it affordable for all citizens, in part by limiting prices. The US subsidizes other things and by and large doesn't restrict broadband pricing. Given the political landscape, I don't think that's going to change any time soon.


alternaut moderator
Re: Why is the US so backward?
jchuzi #12973 11/28/10 12:31 AM
Joined: Aug 2009
Likes: 1
Offline

Joined: Aug 2009
Likes: 1
The US used to be the richest country in the world. At the moment, if I recall correctly, it's the largest debtor nation in the world. If you look at the size of the various nations' GDP without looking at debt, we're still the richest; if you look at the GDP minus debt, I believe that honor belongs to China.

To answer the question, though, the US clings to a very privileged mindset, inherited from our Puritan ancestors. We believe in lawless markets (which their proponents refer to as "free" markets); to us, things should only be subsidized by the government if the subsidies benefit the very wealthiest parts of society. Since broadband subsidies would benefit the rural poor, we don't like them; we prefer instead to give subsidies to millionaires like Libertarian idol Rand Paul, who campaigns on a lawless-market, small-government platform while bringing in a bit over $280,000 a year--more than many folks make in a decade--in corporate welfare for his cotton farm.


Photo gallery, all about me, and more: www.xeromag.com/franklin.html
Re: Why is the US so backward?
jchuzi #12975 11/28/10 12:35 AM
Joined: Aug 2009
Likes: 16
Moderator
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Aug 2009
Likes: 16
Jon unless your sister lives deep in a "holler" in the mountains with no view of the southern sky, there is virtually no place in the United States that does not have access to Satellite Broadband. It is not the cheapest service nor is it the fastest, but it is available until the bandwidth runs out.

Comparing coverage in western Europe to coverage in the United States is like comparing grapes to grapefruit. The difference in population densities between the U.S. and Western Europe makes an enormous difference in the cost per person or per household to provide universal broadband coverage. While the average population density of the United States is 86.79 persons per square mile the population density of Spain is 209 per square mile and Germany is 609 persons per square mile. That is further exacerbated by the fact the vast majority of people living in the U.S. live within fifty miles of either the Atlantic or Pacific oceans which means there are entire states with population densities of less than 10 persons per square mile. Given the cost of cable is relatively equal the relative cost per person in Europe is a miniscule fraction of what it would be in the U.S.

Is universal coverage desirable? You're darn tootin' it is! Is it going to happen any time soon, probably for those living along the Eastern and Western seaboards probably sooner rather than later but it will be sponsored by the cities and states. For those living in the deep South, Southwest, Midwest, Mountain states and live in a major city or metropolitan area you probably already have it. If you live in small towns and rural areas of those regions it will not happen any time soon unless you get satellite coverage and the bandwidth there is going to become very precious and very expensive.

I live in the seventeenth largest city in the United States and the fourth largest metropolitan area and there are still significant areas of town that have to use satellite if they want broadband because the telco cable plant is too antiquated to support broadband and the telco is unlikely to replace it anytime soon.


If we knew what it was we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would it?

— Albert Einstein
Re: Why is the US so backward?
joemikeb #12986 11/28/10 11:27 AM
Joined: Aug 2009
Likes: 7
jchuzi Offline OP
OP Offline

Joined: Aug 2009
Likes: 7
Good points, joe. About three years ago, a workman from Verizon was doing a survey of my street and I stopped to talk with him. He told me that Verizon was looking into providing FIOS within a year. I'm still waiting.


Jon

macOS 11.7.10, iMac Retina 5K 27-inch, late 2014, 3.5 GHz Intel Core i5, 1 TB fusion drive, 16 GB RAM, Epson SureColor P600, Photoshop CC, Lightroom CC, MS Office 365
Re: Why is the US so backward?
jchuzi #13011 11/29/10 02:03 AM
Joined: Aug 2009
Likes: 16
Moderator
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Aug 2009
Likes: 16
Yeah, well Verizon is subject to the same market and financial pressures as the rest of us and they are going to have to have a very good reason for rushing any new cable plant projects in the current economic climate.


If we knew what it was we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would it?

— Albert Einstein
Re: Why is the US so backward?
joemikeb #13013 11/29/10 02:09 AM
Joined: Aug 2009
Likes: 1
Offline

Joined: Aug 2009
Likes: 1
Originally Posted By: joemikeb
Yeah, well Verizon is subject to the same market and financial pressures as the rest of us and they are going to have to have a very good reason for rushing any new cable plant projects in the current economic climate.


The economic climate is largely a confidence game. We're still in a bad economy because businesses say "We're still in a bad economy, so we better not start any new projects." So they don't start any new projects, so there's no development, so there's no hiring, so unemployment remains high, so businesses say "We're still in a bad economy, so we better not start any new projects."

It's the same sort of fear that causes people to do the exact opposite of what they ought to do when they play the stock market. You get rich in the stock market by buying low and selling high. People buy high because they think "Wow, everyone else is buying this stock, so I should buy it too!" They sell low because they think "Wow, everyone is getting rid of this stock, I should get rid of it too!"

Often, the most successful businesses are the ones that start ambitious projects in a down economy, just like the people who do the best in the stock market are the ones who buy when everyone else is selling and sell when everyone else is buying.


Photo gallery, all about me, and more: www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

Moderated by  alternaut, cyn 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.4
(Release build 20200307)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.4.33 Page Time: 0.023s Queries: 28 (0.017s) Memory: 0.6050 MB (Peak: 0.6785 MB) Data Comp: Zlib Server Time: 2024-03-29 11:19:40 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS