Hacker News Reader

Comment by zzzeek | Hacker News Reader

> The municipalities own (most of) the networks and all the fiber cables, letting companies use them for a small(ish) fee. These companies later sell it to customers. This help people to get the best deals and ensure that the networks are continually upgraded.

well that would be socialism. Sorry comrade, here in the US we have this thing called FREEDOM. It Trumps your smart/efficient/reasonable solutions any day.

View on HN

Uhh, you do realize the areas most receptive to fiber have been conservative red states and cities, correct?

https://fiber.google.com/about/

By contrast, California municipalities have made building fiber difficult[1].

[1] http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/blog/morning-roundup/2...

Those cities would own all the fiber, maintain it as part of the city budget, and lease it out to Google and other telecoms. That's the context here.

I do wonder what would happen, if networks for water, waste, electricity or even streets would have to be build on a large scale in the political climate of the US today.

Implying the political climate has ever been any different.

Something something past, rose-tinted glasses.

Political climate is a function of the people in charge. People in charge, due the nature of power and its effects, are always the same. Therefore the political climate is always the same.

You're just inadvertently filtering out.

This is actually quite true. Read about the 1964 Presidential election and you'll see not much has changed.

It depends on what you mean by large scale, but there is nothing unusual about a development with hundreds of new homes, with complete utilities (maybe even a small wastewater treatment system for the development).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com