$103M to expand broadband Internet in rural U.S.
Posted on August 22, 2011 by Cowboy Byte
Telecommunications companies in 16 states will share more than $103 million in federal funding to help expand broadband Internet access to those areas of rural America that haven?t been reached by the high-speed service or are underserved, the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced Monday.
Policymakers, public interest groups and telecom companies are seeking to bridge the digital divide by reaching even the most remote pockets of the U.S. with broadband internet, hoping to improve economic and educational opportunities there.
?There?s a big gap that remains between rural and urban areas because it?s just hard to make a business case in rural areas,? said Jonathan Adelstein, the agriculture department?s rural utilities service administrator, in a conference call with reporters. ?Rural areas? future depends upon access to broadband and we?re not where we need to be today
Does this mean they get free while we pay for ours? Oh, well spread the wealth only a bit over $42 million of it is borrowed.
Does this mean they get free while we pay for ours? Oh, well spread the wealth only a bit over $42 million of it is borrowed.
No, it does not mean they get it free. They will pay the same, or higher rates than the rest of us, and receive the same, or inferior service.
The problem with wired rural broadband service is that a lot more wire/fiber has to be strung. Homes in the city are typically on 30 to 50 foot wide lots. Running 10000 feet of wire/fiber offers coverage to 200 to 300 households. In the suburbs, lots are 50 to 150 foot wide. 10000 feet of cable covers 60 to 200 households. In rural areas, 10000 feet of cable might offer coverage to 1 household.
The problem with wireless rural broadband service is similar - a cell tower in the city might cover 50,000 people; in a deep rural area, it might cover 100.
It's the same problem with electric, water, sewer, and natural gas supply. Same problem with roads. Same problem with mobile and landline phones.
__________________
__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
No, it does not mean they get it free. They will pay the same, or higher rates than the rest of us, and receive the same, or inferior service.
The problem with wired rural broadband service is that a lot more wire/fiber has to be strung. Homes in the city are typically on 30 to 50 foot wide lots. Running 10000 feet of wire/fiber offers coverage to 200 to 300 households. In the suburbs, lots are 50 to 150 foot wide. 10000 feet of cable covers 60 to 200 households. In rural areas, 10000 feet of cable might offer coverage to 1 household.
The problem with wireless rural broadband service is similar - a cell tower in the city might cover 50,000 people; in a deep rural area, it might cover 100.
It's the same problem with electric, water, sewer, and natural gas supply. Same problem with roads. Same problem with mobile and landline phones.
We may have some agreement on this one. he New York Times reported that in some cases, the fund pays more than $20,000 to subsidize a single household. In other cases, more than four carriers compete to provide service to the same area?a sign that the area could do well without the fund?s help in the first place?and massive corporations like AT&T and Verizon often benefit as much as the smaller providers the fund is supposed to support.
I for one don't thick that broadband is the same as water and electricity. There are some on here who think that having the Internet is a necessity.... Well it's not.
I for one don't thick that broadband is the same as water and electricity. There are some on here who think that having the Internet is a necessity.... Well it's not.
There are various levels of "need". "Shelter" isn't on the same level as "Food"; "Food" isn't on the same level as "Water"; "Water" isn't on the same level as "Oxygen". If you're referring to a "necessity" as "something a person needs to survive through the end of the day", then no, an internet connection is not a necessity. Neither is "food", "water", "shelter", "intact femur", "lack of gunshot wound to the gut", etc.
If a "necessity" is something that the average person needs to survive indefinitely on their own efforts, strictly speaking, an internet connection may not be absolutely essential, but it is the most efficient solution for that average person.
__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
There are various levels of "need". "Shelter" isn't on the same level as "Food"; "Food" isn't on the same level as "Water"; "Water" isn't on the same level as "Oxygen". If you're referring to a "necessity" as "something a person needs to survive through the end of the day", then no, an internet connection is not a necessity. Neither is "food", "water", "shelter", "intact femur", "lack of gunshot wound to the gut", etc.
If a "necessity" is something that the average person needs to survive indefinitely on their own efforts, strictly speaking, an internet connection may not be absolutely essential, but it is the most efficient solution for that average person.
All I know is that I do not have Internet at home, So I do not see it as essential enough for my/our tax dollars to subsidize it, support it, or give "assistance" to those who use their money to pay for it. About all I use it for it for this type of stuff here. NOT ESSENTIAL STUFF. I do not do anything important on the Internet. That tells me, that the people it is essential for have made it that way. It doesn't have to be. You don't have to bank on the Internet. You don't have to be on Facebook or Twitter. Those who make it essential are setting themselves up for dependance on something they have little control of. Those are the things I try to avoid.
Does this mean they get free while we pay for ours? Oh, well spread the wealth only a bit over $42 million of it is borrowed.
poor little Eddie always worried about the other kids getting a larger slice of cake.i'll bet you're still whining about rural Electrification.
Quote:
I do not do anything important on the Internet. That tells me, that the people it is essential for have made it that way.
Hopefully you'll discover how to use it properly some day. I donate to causes, pay utility bills and do most banking online. You could read news sources globally and develop a picture of more than teabuggery and worrying about what others have. Stamps are nearing a half dollar each.
__________________
I'll believe corporations are persons when Texas executes one.: LBJ's Ghost
I for one don't thick that broadband is the same as water and electricity. There are some on here who think that having the Internet is a necessity.... Well it's not.
Again, in your OPINION it is not but I doubt you know how to do more than browse.
__________________
I'll believe corporations are persons when Texas executes one.: LBJ's Ghost
All I know is that I do not have Internet at home, So I do not see it as essential enough for my/our tax dollars to subsidize it, support it, or give "assistance" to those who use their money to pay for it. About all I use it for it for this type of stuff here. NOT ESSENTIAL STUFF. I do not do anything important on the Internet. That tells me, that the people it is essential for have made it that way. It doesn't have to be. You don't have to bank on the Internet. You don't have to be on Facebook or Twitter. Those who make it essential are setting themselves up for dependance on something they have little control of. Those are the things I try to avoid.
That you don't use the internet for job applications, education, communicating with service providers, banks, friends, family... and instead utilize alternative means such as driving to pick up employment applications, calling people on the phone or spending money on stamps for communication, deposit checks in person instead of scanning them into your bank, mail bill payments instead of using online banking... That you would rather waste your money on a variety of more expensive services rather than the internet has no bearing in the issue. For the average employable person, a low-end broadband internet connection is a more efficient means of discovering and obtaining these important services than the variety of alternatives that would be required to replace it.
And go ahead and tell me that they can get it at the library. For the majority of people, the transportation expenses exceed the cost of the service.
__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
For those of you who think that I mail all my bills....I find that direct deposit is easiest. Also, I don't want to be running around wringing my hands because I don't know how to do anything offline...... You know, I have been to businesses to make transactions or just do business and they are pretty much closed because their computers were down.... That's just sad, and the Internet isn't much different. You speak of alternative means, but they are the ways it was done before.You folks would probably be in a real mess if you couldn't depend on e grocery stores and auto mechanics....Sad.
Also, I couldn't care less what others have UNLESS MY TAXES PAY FOR IT. Sounds to me like you are the same ones worried about who has jets and yachts (ironically, paid for by themselves!)
Linear Mode
