Jon Kerr wrote: >Second, there are parts of Saint Paul that effectively have no DSL option >and thus effectively no competition at the moment. It is hard to talk about >the free market meeting needs in that climate. > > Hell, ever since the market downturn in the telecom industry even many non-rich subarban areas have not had much for improvements. Qwest has finally equipped many RT's with DSL service, at least. But, facilities based clec's have not expanded and I do not expect them ever to get back to their plans of expanding. The possibility of UNE going away completely (has it yet) also is going to make this a non-starter for most enterprises serving residental customers. Plus, since UNE is near impossible from RT's I really doubt we will be seeing a CLEC in this area anytime soon. This leaves me with two options, Qwest and Comcast. Comcast can not provide me with a connection that has a legal agreement within a reasonable price range. Qwest can, but at a much lower downlink speed (1.5mbps vs. 4mbps) and a faster uplink speed (1mbps vs 384kbps.) My Qwest bill is $58/month, but could be less if I didn't have 1 static IP as $53/month. Qwest is not expanding much, they merely do not have the cash for investments at this point -- this is why we hear about FTTH in verizon and sbc land and not here. We got screwed by a dot bomb company that was lucky enough to pump their stock to buy an ILEC. MCI is trying to stop that from happening -- they are willing to take far less cash (nearly $2bil less) than stock. 256kbps Internet is not broadband. I'm fairly sure there was some false advertising lawsuits at some point on this issue. We've seen attempts at wireless services with ricochet -- which failed. There is stonebridge, but they will not service areas that they do not recieve a 'USDA/Rural Utility Services' loan for with residental service, it seems. That sure sounds like government subsidy. Is that a waste of my tax dollar? HSPDA and WiMAX both might start gate crashing the parade of unlicensed services. Many of the cell phone companies have cash laying around in wait to purchase spectrum and upgrade equipment. They will be a part of our landscape in the near (5 year?) future. At this point I think they have the best chance of addressing the monopoly, but they are not coming tomorrow, either. In any case, if you are a business owner and you feel like meddeling in local politics without actually living or providing services to the city, please find a real argument other than you have a business to run. Even if you are providing services, ask yourself why the city thinks they can get a muni running and doesn't it take a supermajority (65%) of voters to get one started? If taxpayers are *willing* to pay on their own local dollars to handle the problem, let them -- you messed up the market by not being able to satisfy the customers. I see these arguments often in the transit space, many other people want to tell Anoka county that it can't raise taxes on its own taxpayers to help pay for important transportation improvements. The residents voted these people in to make sure this improvement happens. If you don't want the county or city to make improvements with their own money from voting taxpayers who *agree*, get out of the way. If you are in the city and are against it, vote against the proposal. It's fairly simple. >Third, there are areas of our community whose needs have never been and >likely never will be met by the free market without some sort of >intervention or special effort. There really is a digital divide in many of >our communities that starts with money (any yes, there really are working >poor and those who are trying their best to find a better lifestyle to whom >even $20 month is significant) but may also include language, education, and > > I've listed some communities below. The interesting thing would be to go through and find all the broadband options for each community and the cost/speed options. Much of it has more to do with what local monopoly you are stuck with, and not how much money is there. I just don't see communications companies interested in investing right now. It is interesting to note that aside from Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Anoka that none are above 5%. Also, the relatively invisible poor in some of the ivory tower suburbs make the point harder to digest for some, I think. (ie: the GET A JOB attitude) Minneapolis: Median Income $37,974 Family Median Income $48,602 Per Capita Income $22,685 Percent in Poverty 16.9% St. Paul: Median Income $38.774 Family Median Income: $48,925 Per Capita Income: $20,216 Percent in Poverity: 15.6% Coon Rapids: Median Income: $55,550 Family Median Income: $62,260 Per Capita Income: $22,915 Percent in Poverty: 4.8% Anoka: Median Income: $42,659 Family Median Income: $55,311 Per Capita Income: $21,367 Percent in Poverty: 6.8% Dayton: Median Income: $66,875 Family Median Income: $71,356 Per Capita Income: $27,756 Percent in Poverty: 2.7% Rogers: Median Income: $73,143 Family Median Income: $76,984 Per Capita Income: $25,845 Percent in Poverty: 1.8% Maple Grove: Median Income: $76,111 Family Median Income: $81,873 Per Capita Income: $30,544 Percent in Poverty: 1.4% Edina: Median Income: $66,019 Family Median Income: $93,496 Per Capita Income: $44,195 Percent in Poverty: 3.3% Blaine: Median Income: $52,219 Family Median Income: $63,831 Per Capita Income: $22,777 Percent in Poverty: 3.0% -- Scott Dier <dieman at ringworld.org> KC0OBS http://www.ringworld.org/