I would like to say upfront that I am all for net nuetrality. But I thought
I should respond to this previous post.

There are two things wrong with your response:
1) The expense of rolling out the fiber is far greater now, since, if I
recall correctly those tax breaks only covered what it would cost to roll it
out in downtown areas of many of the large cities. I am certain the belief
was that if they got it into the major cities, there would be enough cash
flowing to continue the expansion beyond them.

2) And i agree with Dan, you can't compare SK to the US. Expense, size of
country, population living situation (as many as possible in the cities),
etc lead to a very unfair comparison.

In my opinion to be 16th with the landmass and population displacement (?)
that we have is quite an accomplishment. The fact that I can sit an hour
outside of Tucson and be on some form of broadband makes me very happy.
Cable will come eventually, but for now I don't have to wait for them. I can
go fast now. :) Considering 10 years ago that wouldn't have even been
possible.. well.. What a wonderful world we live in. :)

On 12/18/06, jordi laforge <laforge.jordi@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From what I understand...part of it is:
> In the 90's Congress gave the telcos massive tax breaks and incentives and
> in return the telcos
> would invest in infrastructure to support the growing internet age. Telco
> fatcats took the money and ran.
> (I believe we are ranked something like 16th when it comes to internet
> infrastructure. Behind countries like South Korea that have fiber access for
> everyone.)
> Anyway... now Telcos want to setup this tierred structure to pay for the
> infrastructure that was already paid for.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change  you mail settings:
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
>