- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
June 26 (Reuters) - U.S. President Joe Biden on Monday plans to lay out how a $42 billion investment in expanding internet access will be divvied up among the nation’s 50 states, in an effort to give all Americans access to high-speed broadband by 2030.
The move will kick off the second leg of Biden’s tour highlighting how legislation passed by Congress during the first half of his term will affect average Americans, as his reelection bid gears up.
"We have an historic opportunity here to make a real difference in people’s lives and making sure that we deliver on that potential is what we’re about every day and to make sure that people feel that at their kitchen table, in their communities, in their backyards,” White House chief of staff Jeff Zients said.
Zients compared the broadband effort to President Franklin Roosevelt’s efforts in 1936 to bring electricity to rural America. The administration estimates there are some 8.5 million locations in the U.S. that lack access to broadband connections.
You must log in or register to comment.
Meaningless, unless we nationalize it.
The last time we invested in high speed Internet, ISPs just pocketed it
My thoughts exactly. If sufficient protections aren’t in place for this, it’s a bad spend just like those early 90’s telecommunications bills. Good reading on the subject.
I work for a small ISP and regularly talk to other small ISPs. We fight hard for this grant money, and what we do get goes into expanding fiber coverage. The gov’t is getting wiser to the big boys pocketing the money and while it still happens, there is less of it going on now.
But all that said, we would overall be better served if internet service was nationalized.
Do you mean nationalize internet or nationalize the construction? For construction, I think it’d be fine if the states ran their own projects.
I agree it should not be given to the ISPs after last time.
No, I mean nationalize the ISPs themselves. It should be treated like a utility (which means municipalities would manage their own improvement projects)
I agree that it should be treated like a utility, but I don’t think utilities themselves are are nationalized. Or am I misunderstanding something?
No, that’s mostly right (in the US). But I happen to also think we should nationalize telecommunication and energy (to name just a couple).
Treating ISPs as a utility and regulating them under Public Utility Commissions are a good first step, but In those cases you can still end up in situations like in Texas where the commission fails to adequately regulate the utility and there’s a failure. Private utilities make so much money that they can be effectively unregulated.
Is also point out that nationalization doesn’t always mean the government outright owns an industry or service. In some cases, the government may nationalize an industry by taking a controlling interest, setting prices, or otherwise exerting control without outright ownership.
Moving ISPs into the same category as utilities and regulating them as such makes sense but I don’t know if there’s the political will right now to nationalize like that. An easier step would probably be an overhaul of the FCC and do something about the incestual relationship between regulators and corporate lobbies (on all fronts, really)
I don’t think what we ought to do should be dictated by what there is political will for.
Or… and hear me out here… or, he could enforce existing laws concerning monopolies. Much of the country is Comcast only, where they charge more than they do in places where competition exists, and offer poorer service in exchange. Soaking the poor is literally their primary business model.
