[Cialug] Iowa Municipal Telecom Legisation

[Dave J. Hala Jr.]

Ok, all good points. I won't argue them.

I just got millions from Venture capitalists. Now I'm going to lobby in
the Senate so that Non-profits that receive federal funding have to give
first choice to existing web applications that are already in use or go
through a lengthly feasibility study. Why should they reinvent the
wheel?

Maybe the Telco's should focus on telecommunications law reform rather
than trying to change the laws to stifle competition. Which I believe
was my original point. 




On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 19:13, Michael Osten wrote:
> On Feb 22, 2005, at 5:55 PM, Dave J. Hala Jr. wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 17:05, Michael Osten wrote:
> >> On Feb 22, 2005, at 4:43 PM, Dave J. Hala Jr. wrote:
> >>
> >>> I don't agree that a having a municipal service would limit choice.
> >>
> >> If a municipal service can operate at a loss subsidize by tax dollars
> >> (which most of them do) how could you possibly expect competition?
> >
> > Some break even. Some lose money. Some have competitors. I compete
> > against companies that work for free. I'm making a living. Cost is not
> > always the controlling factor.
> >
> 
> When the government comes in and says that you need to give half of 
> your earnings to the government but your competition doesn't you would 
> be able to make that analogy.
> 
> What you are not understanding that no matter what the competition is 
> at a disadvantage because of regulation.  This is not simple.  This is 
> not a situation where the government is breaking up a monopoly.  It is 
> simply not fair for government to force telcos to build infrastructure 
> based on a utility service regardless of profit potential, regulate and 
> tax said service and then open the market to a unfair competitor 
> offering the same product with no such encumbrances.  Remember that 
> even right now the line between internet and telephone is blurred, and 
> in a few years, it will be one in the same.
> 
> If there really is such a need for infrastructure, why are the 
> governments taking it over and not deregulating and opting for free 
> market competition?  Simple, because no one sees a profit potential 
> with what is involved.
> 
> > I agree that a telco and a muni ISP would operate under different sets
> > of rules. However, change is the nature of the beast. Don't take this
> > the wrong way, but have you seen a telco do anything truly innovative 
> > in
> > the last five years?  Competition is a good thing no matter where it
> > comes from.
> 
> I agree that telco's play technology safe.  But what do you expect?  
> Throw away billions of dollars of copper in the ground?  Would you like 
> them to run (insert buzz tech carrier medium) every five years to keep 
> up with technology?  You don't, because quit simply, no one wants a 
> $10000 monthly phone bill.  The infrastructure was laid out for phone 
> service with the expectation by both private business and government 
> that it would take *a long time* to pay for it's self.  Without this 
> promise, you probably wouldn't have phone service right now, we'd still 
> be communicating via a telegram office instead of email.
> 
> 
> --
> Michael Osten
> http://www.bleepyou.com/~mosten/pgp.txt
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Cialug mailing list
> Cialug@cialug.org
> http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
-- 

Open Source Information Systems (OSIS)
Dave J. Hala Jr. <dave@osis.us>
641.485.1606