As a libertarian I think that government should not do commercial projects like this fiber optical network. But then I raise a question - why private companies do not make such fiber networks? And it is obvious that it is not about cost. Google has plenty of money to invest (is YouTube already profitable or still burning 1 million USD a day?), but still they struggle with their fiber network.
I have a live example I live in Lithuania. Until 1998 Lithuania had one monopolist telecommunication company owned by government. But in 1998 our government sold this monopole company (about 95% of shares) to Swedish company Telia, but at the same time they passed the laws to liberalize telecommunication market. Theoretically Telecom was obligated to allow usage part of their communication infrastructure to other competitors, but as monopoly they set such high prices, that for other companies it was cheaper to build their own networks. And laws allowed to build network for everyone. And that's where libertarian dream came true - even monopoly could not limit expansion of private networks when there laws allowed that. Soon there appeared many amateur networks that used simple UTP cables or wi-fi to connect to each other, some of them joined forces together and become companies who sold internet connection to neighborhood homes. That's how suddenly there appeared lots of small ISP's. Soon they understood that they cannot rely on UTP cables or wi-fi, so they started building fiber cable networks in largest cities. And keep in mind, that in 1998 - 2000 when those companies have appeared, the Lithuania was quite poor country who has just escaped USSR. It had a GDP only of 11 billion USD; average salary was about 150 USD/month, so you can imagine that average customer could not pay for internet a lot. That small fiber optical ISPs didn't had big investors behind their back, tons of money to invest, but still they managed to buy equipment on word prices and expand their networks. And now here in Lithuania we have plenty of ISP's who offers 100 - 300 mbps fiber connection to almost every home that needs it.
So I think real problem in USA is not about the money, it's about the laws that limit competition. And building government network would not solve this issue - building municipal networks is just the fight against the consequences, not the causes.
P.S. Lithuanian capital Vilnius has population of 650 000, so it is quite similar to the case described in this article.
"why private companies do not make such fiber networks?"
It's a bad investment. There is a large front loaded capital cost and a long, slow payback over decades. Build-outs are plagued by difficult problems involving multiple levels of government and incumbent roadblocks. Private investors simply can't entertain things with such long time horizons, particularly if it involves legal and political entanglements, unless the eventual payoff is enormous. There are better, faster opportunities.
In the early days of electric and telephone service in the US we had a different model. The goal was universal service and it was supported by subsidies, special status for incumbents and legal force that precluded most of the roadblocks. Had this not been the case both telephone and electric service would be what broadband is today; a spotty hodgepodge of cherry picked areas servicing mostly well-to-do urbanites.
In some cases it's not laws but simple entrenched ownership. If Google wants to run fiber on existing poles, they run into blockades by the pole owners or lawsuits by competitors who don't even own the poles but who can find a technicality about getting permission from the pole owner. The old 'possession is 9/10ths' factor.
When I read your story, something jumped out to me: willingness to take on risk. Whoever was building all those lines was willing to take on a lot of financial and other risk to themselves, right? Why they were willing to do so, I'm not sure, but in the US we are facing the problem of having fewer and fewer people like that. There was a report recently that entrepreneurship has been falling for some time here, and I think it's due to risk.
Where I live, there is a single Internet provider (besides dial up of course!), and I have dreamed of starting up an alternative (funny as my grandfather was Lithuanian :). The risk involved though makes it not worth it, my desk job is too comfortable.
> And now here in Lithuania we have plenty of ISP's who offers 100 - 300 mbps fiber connection to almost every home that needs it.
How do these ISP:s access your home? Do all these competing ISP:s have cables running through your lawn? If not; is the government involved? It seems like a success.
I have a live example I live in Lithuania. Until 1998 Lithuania had one monopolist telecommunication company owned by government. But in 1998 our government sold this monopole company (about 95% of shares) to Swedish company Telia, but at the same time they passed the laws to liberalize telecommunication market. Theoretically Telecom was obligated to allow usage part of their communication infrastructure to other competitors, but as monopoly they set such high prices, that for other companies it was cheaper to build their own networks. And laws allowed to build network for everyone. And that's where libertarian dream came true - even monopoly could not limit expansion of private networks when there laws allowed that. Soon there appeared many amateur networks that used simple UTP cables or wi-fi to connect to each other, some of them joined forces together and become companies who sold internet connection to neighborhood homes. That's how suddenly there appeared lots of small ISP's. Soon they understood that they cannot rely on UTP cables or wi-fi, so they started building fiber cable networks in largest cities. And keep in mind, that in 1998 - 2000 when those companies have appeared, the Lithuania was quite poor country who has just escaped USSR. It had a GDP only of 11 billion USD; average salary was about 150 USD/month, so you can imagine that average customer could not pay for internet a lot. That small fiber optical ISPs didn't had big investors behind their back, tons of money to invest, but still they managed to buy equipment on word prices and expand their networks. And now here in Lithuania we have plenty of ISP's who offers 100 - 300 mbps fiber connection to almost every home that needs it.
So I think real problem in USA is not about the money, it's about the laws that limit competition. And building government network would not solve this issue - building municipal networks is just the fight against the consequences, not the causes.
P.S. Lithuanian capital Vilnius has population of 650 000, so it is quite similar to the case described in this article.