
ALEC Wants You To Pay 750 Percent More For High-Speed Internet - joelhaus
http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/12/04/20/alec-wants-you-pay-750-percent-more-high-speed-internet
======
robwgibbons
Don't get me wrong. I love cheap, fast internet as much as the next guy. But
fair is fair... Why should the government be allowed to offer a service below
its actual cost to market? No competitor can possibly hope to match, let alone
beat their prices, at least without losing money. I am not a republican, but
this is model is extremely unfair to the free market.

~~~
bpeebles
Why shouldn't a government offer such a service?

In fact, most large cities in America already do--parking! Most parking in
America is priced well below the market value. (Slightly more arguable but
still true: all non-toll (and some toll) public roadways.)

Another example are the quasi-governmental agencies that run mass transit
systems; none of them approach full revenue recovery in America that I know
of.

Perhaps an example closer to the "information" and "technology" bent of public
broadband? Public libraries function at a loss, in that the direct fees they
collect through fines and other revenue generating services come nowhere close
to their cost to operate. There are very few (almost none) direct calls for
state governments to ban local public libraries and nearly every decries
attempts by book publishers in their attempts to crowd out libraries by
restrictive, number of check out limited DRM on eBooks.

We have long accepted in America, for many arenas, that if a government
(whether local, state, or federal) chooses to provide a service at a below
market price because they think it's a net benefit to their community. Most
private companies don't even complain that much normally, since they can
compete against the government at better service or quality, of course. People
are willing to pay a premium for that. This is an especially odd place to
defend the companies attempting to restrict governments from providing
services to their residents, when Telecoms have received huge government
subsidies and government sanctioned monopolies for years that allowed them to
create a huge infrastructure and head start.

If they're really doing so poorly that they feel threatened by much maligned
(everybody remember DMV jokes?) local government, they've just been horrible
companies and it is a proper place for governments to step in and provide
better service.

