Is the economy really improving?

[cm husker]

Let's assume the cost, conservatively, of bringing high speed internet to holdrege is $10,000,000.

 

Why should people in Omaha pay for that cost, and the cost of bringing internet to 50+ other "Holdreges"?

 

Why shouldn't they spend that $500,000,000 in Omaha?

 

What is your evidence that taxpayers will get an ROI by spending $10,000,000 to bring higher internet to a town of 5,000?

[knapplc]

Because people in Holdrege make the food that people in Omaha eat. People in Holdrege buy the products that people in Omaha sell.

[cm husker]

Because people in Holdrege make the food that people in Omaha eat. People in Holdrege buy the products that people in Omaha sell.

Do they need high speed internet to make the food?

 

I'm kidding. But seriously, that logic/justification doesn't hold up anymore than if you said that justified everyone in holdege receiving a Ferrari to drive on gold plated roads.

[BigRedBuster]

This entire conversation is so idiotic I'm surprised it's being had.

[knapplc]

Why should we pay to pave Interstate 80 through Nebraska? Wouldn't a gravel road work the same?

 

 

This entire conversation is so idiotic I'm surprised it's being had.

No, you're not surprised. You see who's asking these questions. You know what you're going to get.

 

Maybe you're surprised I'm taking the time to respond. I guess I am, too. I don't know why I bother.

[cm husker]

This entire conversation is so idiotic I'm surprised it's being had.

Actually, it's pretty fundamental to how gov should run, what it should pay for and why.

[cm husker]

Why should we pay to pave Interstate 80 through Nebraska? Wouldn't a gravel road work the same?

 

 

No, a gravel road wouldn't work the same. And I80 is a great example of why public investment isn't always required. The people who move their products from east to west should and would bear the cost of adequate roads because they can make profitable use of them even after paying that cost.

 

Instead, they (and some of us as consumers) get a free ride on it, so to speak.

 

By the way, private industry is already working out ways to bring high speed internet to rural areas.

[knapplc]

Just as a gravel road wouldn't work the same, nor would (does) low-speed internet work the same. And Americans suffer because of it, and that's at the hand of private industry.

 

Private industry is not some panacea that will fix society's ills, it's just trade-off of some ills for others. The free market isn't free, and doesn't self-regulate.

[cm husker]

Just as a gravel road wouldn't work the same, nor would (does) low-speed internet work the same. And Americans suffer because of it, and that's at the hand of private industry. That's atrociously wrong headed and unfair.

 

Private industry is not some panacea that will fix society's ills, it's just trade-off of some ills for others. The free market isn't free, and doesn't self-regulate.

First and foremost, private industry isn't causing people to suffer at their hand.

 

This reminds me of the Louis ck bit about wifi being down on a plane and people freaking out about something they didn't even knew existed before.

 

There are so many problems with your argument, not the least of which you haven't defined "suffering" and how much money society should spend to relieve that suffering.

 

My argument isn't that private enterprise is a panacea. My argument is that asking one citizen to pay for the choices of other citizens is ineffective and unfair (and actually often it's not even the choices of another citizen but rather it's often the payoff to a special interest to satisfy a supposed choice of a citizen).

 

People suffer all of the time for all sorts of reasons (many much worse than low speed wifi). should government be used to allieve all of that suffering? What if it's self inflicted?

 

Where does it stop? Who gets to draw those lines? I don't trust special interests to do it and that's exactly what your proposals would require.

[cm husker]

It's also worth noting that the population of Holdrege has declined since 1960, even as the US population has grown.

 

Why invest in the build out of a system that will be of diminishing use over time?

 

That's metaphorically a bridge to nowhere. It's simply another pet project among thousands that later generations will be asked to pay for.

[knapplc]

First and foremost, private industry isn't causing people to suffer at their hand.

 

 

You're not sober.

[cm husker]

Do you believe private industry is withholding wifi from rural citizens? Is that your contention?

[knapplc]

I believe engaging in conversation with you involves multiple goalpost moves, irrational contentions, unsupported and largely comical opinions and in general is a waste of time. I apologize to anyone who's read this. I know better.

[cm husker]

I believe engaging in conversation with you involves multiple goalpost moves, irrational contentions, unsupported and largely comical opinions and in general is a waste of time. I apologize to anyone who's read this. I know better.

Your engagement has been to consistently repeat a conclusion: we should pay for rural people to have wifi and then throw in some personal attacks. You have no explanation for why we should pay for wifi for rural people other than "they deserve it because they make food." You have no explanation for how such a system of handouts would be checked or should apply to other pet projects.

 

Where have I moved the goal posts? What has been my irrational contention? My opinions in this are supported - happy to send you links. They also aren't comical - if they were, you'd be able to refute them on the merits instead of resorting to personal attacks.

[cm husker]

This stuff is actually philosophically important to people getting out of the way of other people so that productivity can improve.

 

That's how we'll see actual improvement in the economy.

 

Unfortunately too many people want to use the government to advance their own interests instead of keeping the government out of everyone's interests.