Is high speed internet a right?

[tigerbob]

Should the access to the internet be dependent on your ability to pay?

That's a slightly different question to the thread title.

 

[RodISHI]

I can't imagine farmland ever becoming cheap but I see the similarities. You need to help Care and GC with the grassroots movement for rural America.

I've been working on a news blog

uh oh---I knew it

I can let you know when its all put together.

 

[dilloduck]

I've been working on a news blog

uh oh---I knew it

I can let you know when its all put together.

I have guns if that will help

 

[Ame®icano]

Well thank you Mr. Dillo. There may come a day rural folks don't give a damn about whether they have those food products that are grown in the rural areas. Who knows justice has a way of working out.

Don't get this in a wrong way, but you are getting paid when you deliver, right?

Don't take this wrong but I will probably be the worst enemy that every money grubbing SOB out there has. We won't be delivering anything grown from this place into the hands of those who have abused and mistreated the middle class and poor, ever if I can help it. It would all rot in place first.

Money grubbing SOB's are in Washington.

Now, are you willing to stop delivering even if it means losing subsidies?

 

[Xenophon]

No, but I do feel it's pathetic that millions of people (and businesses) in rural areas can't get reliable broadband access no matter how much they're willing to pay. Some things should be done not because they are a "right", but because they are the right thing to do. Rural access is one of those things.

Traditionally in such a situation, some enterprising person would start a company that would figure out a way to get these people the internet, would make millions and be hailed as the American way.

These days however, the answer always appears to be the government must spend more money.

What's wrong with this picture.

 

[dilloduck]

No, but I do feel it's pathetic that millions of people (and businesses) in rural areas can't get reliable broadband access no matter how much they're willing to pay. Some things should be done not because they are a "right", but because they are the right thing to do. Rural access is one of those things.

Traditionally in such a situation, some enterprising person would start a company that would figure out a way to get these people the internet, would make millions and be hailed as the American way.

These days however, the answer always appears to be the government must spend more money.

What's wrong with this picture.

Monopolies ?

 

[RodISHI]

uh oh---I knew it

I can let you know when its all put together.

I have guns if that will help

I wouldn't hold owning your own gun against you. Where would we be today if the countries founders had not had a means to protect and defend against tyranny?

The statement below holds true for being well informed also to my notion. Armed with knowledge and truth is also good means of self defense.

"A well armed populace is the best defense against tyranny."

 

[Againsheila]

Should we all own a Ferrari?

I want a Lamborghini. I decided a long time ago that if anyone ever offered to buy me whatever car I wanted, I'd pick the Lamborghini. Why? Because it's the most expensive car in the world and I can sell it and buy what I want and do a whole bunch of stuff with the rest of the money.

You kinda missed my point.

By the way, most expensive car is Bugatti Veyron @ $1.7M, and Lamborghini Reventon is second most expensive @ $1.6M.

No problem, I now want a Bugatti Veyron....... <just hope I can remember that when the time comes>

 

[Againsheila]

They put in fiber optic lines here last summer. No hookups yet. This is a fairly rural area. I have heard that the project was paid for with a grant. We do not have a land line phone here because it is expensive and does not include long distance. Previously even calling twenty miles away here from the land line meant a long distance charge.

Is it a right to have high speed Internet? Probably not but I'm with Goldcatt, I think it is the right thing to do. Wealth in every way you can think of has been stripped from rural communities for years and years in favor of corporate globalization. Would everyone now deny the people in rural America a service that cities that were built largely with the help of taxpayer dollars enjoy?

That's a good point. Is it a right? I don't know, but in the richest country in the world you would think we could provide high speed internet service to everyone that wants it. Of course I also believe in a living wage for the lowest paid workers in our society. Guess I'm a bit of a socialist.

 

[boedicca]

Traditionally in such a situation, some enterprising person would start a company that would figure out a way to get these people the internet, would make millions and be hailed as the American way.

These days however, the answer always appears to be the government must spend more money.

What's wrong with this picture.

*raises hand*

What's wrong is that as a society, we've given up our traditional values in favor of the moral relativism that infantilizes the population and softens them up for a Big Government takeover.

 

[Againsheila]

They put in fiber optic lines here last summer. No hookups yet. This is a fairly rural area. I have heard that the project was paid for with a grant. We do not have a land line phone here because it is expensive and does not include long distance. Previously even calling twenty miles away here from the land line meant a long distance charge.

Is it a right to have high speed Internet? Probably not but I'm with Goldcatt, I think it is the right thing to do. Wealth in every way you can think of has been stripped from rural communities for years and years in favor of corporate globalization. Would everyone now deny the people in rural America a service that cities that were built largely with the help of taxpayer dollars enjoy?

Not me but without political clout they don't give a shit about your internet.

Well thank you Mr. Dillo. There may come a day rural folks don't give a damn about whether they have those food products that are grown in the rural areas. Who knows justice has a way of working out.

Thank the lord I have a friend with a farm......of course getting the food from Minnesota to here may be a problem but my friend also has two trucks.

 

[Againsheila]

Well thank you Mr. Dillo. There may come a day rural folks don't give a damn about whether they have those food products that are grown in the rural areas. Who knows justice has a way of working out.

Don't get this in a wrong way, but you are getting paid when you deliver, right?

Don't take this wrong but I will probably be the worst enemy that every money grubbing SOB out there has. We won't be delivering anything grown from this place into the hands of those who have abused and mistreated the middle class and poor, ever if I can help it. It would all rot in place first.

Um, hold U-picks...that's what farmers around here used to do...we could go pick our own berries and pay a lot less than the price in the stores. Same for corn. Of course, now those farms are gone.....our country is real messed up.

 

[Againsheila]

Nothing produced by somebody else is a right.

so clean water to drink isn't a right?

 

[Againsheila]

Don't get this in a wrong way, but you are getting paid when you deliver, right?

Don't take this wrong but I will probably be the worst enemy that every money grubbing SOB out there has. We won't be delivering anything grown from this place into the hands of those who have abused and mistreated the middle class and poor, ever if I can help it. It would all rot in place first.

Money grubbing SOB's are in Washington.

Now, are you willing to stop delivering even if it means losing subsidies?

my guess, those subsidies are going to the big corporations, not the little farmers.

 

[goldcatt]

Don't take this wrong but I will probably be the worst enemy that every money grubbing SOB out there has. We won't be delivering anything grown from this place into the hands of those who have abused and mistreated the middle class and poor, ever if I can help it. It would all rot in place first.

Money grubbing SOB's are in Washington.

Now, are you willing to stop delivering even if it means losing subsidies?

my guess, those subsidies are going to the big corporations, not the little farmers.

Most of them, yes. Small farmers are becoming an endangered species, but where I am they're still needed. Dairy is almost dead, and that's a shame. But the cities depend heavily on the family truck farmers and orchards in this area, and the plots are too small and disbursed for the big corporations to take over easily - yet. Too many are falling prey to the developers, but cutting down century-old orchards to put up cardboard McMansions nobody can afford to buy can only last so long.

 

[boedicca]

Nothing produced by somebody else is a right.

so clean water to drink isn't a right?

No, it isn't. It takes resource to process and transport drinking water.

If someone else has to work and/or to expend capital to provide a product or service, they deserve fair compensation for it. In the case of water, the supplier does owe the consumer a clean product (i.e., contaminants below a safe level) as the consumer's reasonable expectation is that the water is safe to drink.

 

[The T]

It's a commodity, a product presented for those that can afford it. It's also a business. If you can't? Try working harder. It's that simple.

NO ONE has the 'Right' to it.

 

[The T]

Nothing produced by somebody else is a right.

so clean water to drink isn't a right?

Nope. it's an expectation. HUGE Difference.

 

[RodISHI]

Nothing produced by somebody else is a right.

so clean water to drink isn't a right?

No, it isn't. It takes resource to process and transport drinking water.

If someone else has to work and/or to expend capital to provide a product or service, they deserve fair compensation for it. In the case of water, the supplier does owe the consumer a clean product (i.e., contaminants below a safe level) as the consumer's reasonable expectation is that the water is safe to drink.

God gives water freely. Man may have a right to charge to deliver it but man also has an obligation to insure those who have pollutes the waters pay for the cleanup of those waterways.

 

[boedicca]

God gives water freely. Man may have a right to charge to deliver it but man also has an obligation to insure those who have pollutes the waters pay for the cleanup of those waterways.

An individual is perfectly free to dig his own well or collect rainwater.

The best way to ensure cleanliness of the water ways and tributaries that are shared is to enforce property rights along the way. If the upstream folks send pollution downstream, the latter have a cause of action.