Not only is that not true, but other countries have broadband available to a higher percentage of their populace. In a few months (if it hasn't already been done) people in the Australian Outback will have broadband. Meanwhile, people in Bonne Terre are lucky if they can get dialup.
Right, now go to any of the top four countries on that graph and try to buy a POTS line - you'll wait six months at minimum.
This is an infrastructure issue. I bet they are using some wireless broadband technology in Australia - because I doubt they are running fiber to every sheep ranch in the Outback. Here, if you use wireless broadband - you run into so much interference from all the other wireless systems in use you might as well use a modem.
I realize I'm tossing out wildly sweeping generalizations here - but so does that graph!
The US has always invested in the latest technology. When phones came along, we invested for infrastructure. Just as we were getting all the phone infrastructure laid out - along comes cable - new infrastructure needed. Now, people want broadband. This will require even more infrastructure - who's going to pay for it?
How much of the infrastructure in Japan or even Australia is government funded? Sure - our government could fund better infrastructure - but they would have to raise taxes and create more bureaucracy to do so. No one will vote for that!
Our infrastructure increases at the rate we spend and at the rate companies compete. If a company wants more business - it will cut into its profits to build infrastructure.
My in-laws are a great example. They live not terribly far outside Portland, Maine. Maine is a fairly rural state - not much telecommunications infrastructure. They cannot get cable TV, the cable stops a mile down the road from them. It's not worth the money to the cable company to lay a mile of cable to get a few more customers. A couple years ago they got Direct TV - a company that has invested heavily in a wireless infrastructure - and they have loved their service ever since.
This graph paints a picture - but it's a misleading one. The fact that the US sits in the middle of that graph shocks me not at all.
When pollsters ask Americans whether they would favor or oppose cutting federal income taxes, Americans are quick to support that action because it will put more money in their pockets. But, when Americans are given options of cutting taxes or spending more on domestic issues such as education and Medicare, or holding down the federal budget deficit, Americans are less supportive of cutting taxes, and in many instances, would prefer to spend more money on domestic problems.
So, now all you have to do is to get the American public to elect officials that will actually listen to them or prevent potential officials from stealing elections.
Oh, dude, I'm all for public officials that listen to their public and don't spend money needlessly on unpopular, unproductive wars. I'm totally for spending money on domestic issues. I'd be for raising taxes to improve the lot of the average American - that's just the kind of communist I am!
I am holding this up to show that we are behind the rest of the world. The only thing we have left is military power and that is being squandered in Iraq.
It is time we stopped listening to the bullshit propaganda, looked at the facts and took this country back from the burgeoning oligarchy.
I view decline as going backwards - declining, do we agree there?
If indeed it's true that Brazil doesn't import power, they may be the only country on the planet that doesn't in one form or another. Saudi Arabia produces the majority of the oil on the planet - to my knowledge they produce very little electricity - they buy it from their neighbors. Most countries - to my lacking knowledge - do the same.
Most of the Ph.D.s in India come here to find work. Talent follows money and there's no money there. Is this a new thing that India does this? When I was in college, 80% of Campus Computing was from India. The one summer I worked for CC was made possible by the fact that the State Department killed a shit load of visas and sent most of the Indians back home. There were a lot of Indians (for central Missouri) getting a great education 17 years ago ...
My point here is this: are we in decline or is the rest of the world catching up on this point and that point? If you graphed out every measurable item you could think of, just like this graph, would the US always be somewhere in the middle? To me, that's not so bad.
Sure, we could do better, however, being a "C" student means you still pass the class. And I think I would rather live in a land of "C"s, than a land where they have an "A+", a "B-" and a truck load of "F"s.
We went from broadband speed to democracy? Oh boy!
Let me ask you a question before this tangent gets too insane: what would you do with 10 times the speed accessing the Internet if you had it?
Really? Do your files just not download fast enough? (Especially as compared to file downloads before broadband?) Last I checked you didn't do any online gaming - and you don't need breakneck speeds for the once a year you get online and chat with me.
So, what do you need all this speed for? Just to have it?
I'd be happy to pay 10% of what I'm paying, too. And if you are on DSL - I'm paying a ton more than you are!
But, we're back to infrastructure.
DSL runs over 2 pairs of cheap copper. But, if you want something faster, you have to install the lines to make that so. And that's just the last mile - there's a ton of infrastructure on the back end (routers, etc.) that would need to be upgraded to handle the larger data flow.
I'm on Comcast - paying a huge amount for my broadband cable. I get a faster speed, but it's not the big speeds you're talking about. Seven or 8 years ago, that service wasn't even offered - the back end infrastructure wasn't there. My high end price is paying for those upgrades to Comcast's equipment.
DSL is less expensive and competitively priced because way more infrastructure already existed to provide that service.
Verizon is offering their FiOS (Fiber Optic the the desktop) service in selected areas. For about $20 less a month then I'm currently paying, I would get a 20% upgrade in download and about 600% upgrade in upload. When it gets to my area - I will seriously consider it. I'll have to buy some new equipment - but it will be worth it!
How can FiOS beat the prices on my Cable and give me higher speed? I don't know for sure - but I bet it's because they just have to run fiber over the "last mile" - from the junction box to my house. But, if you wanted the speeds you are talking about - they would most likely have to start with new fiber from the Central Office, plus new routers, etc.
So what you are saying is, though the US has gone from the world leader in everything to being behind other countries and seemingly unable to match their accomplishments, there are no signs of decline on our part.
You have pointed at a few things where we have remained in place while others have moved ahead.
You have yet to point to anything where we see any backward movement.
I could point to things like life expectancy and average earnings where there have been strides forward. (If I must, I will actually go out and find proof of my arguments, or you can just assume for once that not everything that comes out of my mouth is BS.)
At the end of WWII, the US was the undisputed leading power in the world. Simple math, really; everyone else of consequence was bombed out. From there, they have rebuilt.
Here we are, 50+ years later. The US spent far too much on "Defense" to compete in a Cold War while other countries were spending on social issues and infrastructure. Now, we have the largest military in the world (prove that's in decline!) a warrior mindset and no one of consequence to fight.
I fully agree that we need to reduce military spending and reapply those funds to social issues. I feel the American people need to elect leaders and not politicians. We need to get rid of the "America first - or we'll kick your ass" attitude and be a better citizen of the world.
I just don't see any major decline. I want to see a major decline! I want to see a revolution and a new country rise out of the ashes of the old - but it's not going to happen.
People in this country are comfortable, decadent. This country, on average, has never been richer or more comfortable. People don't want more taxes and they don't like big changes. They will vote in the status quo until something changes the comfort level enough to get them off the couch, turn off "The Office" and get them voting or protesting. Until then, we will continue on the path we're on.
You have pointed out places where we suck, where others are moving forward. I can point to places where we excel and I can point to places where others are flopping. That isn't decline. We are not the undisputed world leader any more - this is true. We're just another country - and maybe that's the attitude we really need.
I didn't get the memo that the rules were changed that we were only allowed to blog on topics we had concrete solutions for. Or have we been taken over by the Benzites?
You both make very good points, and I have not felt inclined to inject any commentary, but the last post threw me...
Is it... A Star Trek reference? I had to go Google it to be sure. The Benzites are a humanoid race with smooth hairless skin and a thick skull protrusion with prominent nasal lobe. They require special apparatus for breathing in nitrogen-oxygen atmospheres...
The only possible sociological context I could possible find might be an obscure reference to "One Benzite regulation stating that no officer on a Benzite ship is to report any unexplained occurrence without providing a full analysis and solution" which might relate to your argument.
I cannot find any other references to Benzites online and am not a big enough Star Trek fan to know anything besides just the name of the species itself. Could you please elaborate on the correlation between the Benzite society's trajectory and the ramifications for the USA's status in the world when considering the implications of decline in average net connection speed?
You hit the nail on the head as far as my Benzite reference. It was not about my complaints about US broadboand, however. I was refering to Jericho's new desire that I only blog about issues I can personaly fix.
27 Comments:
Um... that couldn't possibly be due to there being more people on broadband in the US and slowing down the speeds, could it?
Not only is that not true, but other countries have broadband available to a higher percentage of their populace. In a few months (if it hasn't already been done) people in the Australian Outback will have broadband. Meanwhile, people in Bonne Terre are lucky if they can get dialup.
Right, now go to any of the top four countries on that graph and try to buy a POTS line - you'll wait six months at minimum.
This is an infrastructure issue. I bet they are using some wireless broadband technology in Australia - because I doubt they are running fiber to every sheep ranch in the Outback. Here, if you use wireless broadband - you run into so much interference from all the other wireless systems in use you might as well use a modem.
I realize I'm tossing out wildly sweeping generalizations here - but so does that graph!
The US has always invested in the latest technology. When phones came along, we invested for infrastructure. Just as we were getting all the phone infrastructure laid out - along comes cable - new infrastructure needed. Now, people want broadband. This will require even more infrastructure - who's going to pay for it?
How much of the infrastructure in Japan or even Australia is government funded? Sure - our government could fund better infrastructure - but they would have to raise taxes and create more bureaucracy to do so. No one will vote for that!
Our infrastructure increases at the rate we spend and at the rate companies compete. If a company wants more business - it will cut into its profits to build infrastructure.
My in-laws are a great example. They live not terribly far outside Portland, Maine. Maine is a fairly rural state - not much telecommunications infrastructure. They cannot get cable TV, the cable stops a mile down the road from them. It's not worth the money to the cable company to lay a mile of cable to get a few more customers. A couple years ago they got Direct TV - a company that has invested heavily in a wireless infrastructure - and they have loved their service ever since.
This graph paints a picture - but it's a misleading one. The fact that the US sits in the middle of that graph shocks me not at all.
Wow.
Sweeping generalizations.
Unsubstantiated assumptions presented as fact.
You're ready to run for office, dude.
Okay - riddle me this:
How does the speed at which one accesses the Internet correlate to the decline of the US Empire?
On taxes;
When pollsters ask Americans whether they would favor or oppose cutting federal income taxes, Americans are quick to support that action because it will put more money in their pockets. But, when Americans are given options of cutting taxes or spending more on domestic issues such as education and Medicare, or holding down the federal budget deficit, Americans are less supportive of cutting taxes, and in many instances, would prefer to spend more money on domestic problems.
Courtesy of The Gallup Poll
The fact that we rely on hype and propaganda rather than accomplishments when we claim to be the "best".
So, now all you have to do is to get the American public to elect officials that will actually listen to them or prevent potential officials from stealing elections.
Simple.
Your alternative?
So - you are holding up this graph as an argument against the fact that we are "the best" not as evidence of decline?
Oh, dude, I'm all for public officials that listen to their public and don't spend money needlessly on unpopular, unproductive wars. I'm totally for spending money on domestic issues. I'd be for raising taxes to improve the lot of the average American - that's just the kind of communist I am!
I am holding this up to show that we are behind the rest of the world. The only thing we have left is military power and that is being squandered in Iraq.
It is time we stopped listening to the bullshit propaganda, looked at the facts and took this country back from the burgeoning oligarchy.
I completely agree with comment #12.
I disagree that the graph shows decline. But it's a great headline!
Brazil no longer depends on imported energy.
We are at the mercy of our enemies.
There are countries where people get 100Mb throughput for what I pay for 10Mb.
Scientific and mathmatical illiteracy is on the rise.
We graduate fewer Ph.D.'s per capita than India. And the India Institute of Technology makes MIT look like a community college.
Nope. We aren't on the decline at all.
I view decline as going backwards - declining, do we agree there?
If indeed it's true that Brazil doesn't import power, they may be the only country on the planet that doesn't in one form or another. Saudi Arabia produces the majority of the oil on the planet - to my knowledge they produce very little electricity - they buy it from their neighbors. Most countries - to my lacking knowledge - do the same.
Most of the Ph.D.s in India come here to find work. Talent follows money and there's no money there. Is this a new thing that India does this? When I was in college, 80% of Campus Computing was from India. The one summer I worked for CC was made possible by the fact that the State Department killed a shit load of visas and sent most of the Indians back home. There were a lot of Indians (for central Missouri) getting a great education 17 years ago ...
My point here is this: are we in decline or is the rest of the world catching up on this point and that point? If you graphed out every measurable item you could think of, just like this graph, would the US always be somewhere in the middle? To me, that's not so bad.
Sure, we could do better, however, being a "C" student means you still pass the class. And I think I would rather live in a land of "C"s, than a land where they have an "A+", a "B-" and a truck load of "F"s.
We have a C- democracy. Why sweat it?
We went from broadband speed to democracy? Oh boy!
Let me ask you a question before this tangent gets too insane: what would you do with 10 times the speed accessing the Internet if you had it?
Really? Do your files just not download fast enough? (Especially as compared to file downloads before broadband?) Last I checked you didn't do any online gaming - and you don't need breakneck speeds for the once a year you get online and chat with me.
So, what do you need all this speed for? Just to have it?
"Who needs 56k? All the web is just a bunch of text."
-Someone in 1995
Until it became something more.
I am more than ready to see what smart people do with a huge fucking pipe. In the meantime, I would be happy paying 10% of what I am paying now.
I'd be happy to pay 10% of what I'm paying, too. And if you are on DSL - I'm paying a ton more than you are!
But, we're back to infrastructure.
DSL runs over 2 pairs of cheap copper. But, if you want something faster, you have to install the lines to make that so. And that's just the last mile - there's a ton of infrastructure on the back end (routers, etc.) that would need to be upgraded to handle the larger data flow.
I'm on Comcast - paying a huge amount for my broadband cable. I get a faster speed, but it's not the big speeds you're talking about. Seven or 8 years ago, that service wasn't even offered - the back end infrastructure wasn't there. My high end price is paying for those upgrades to Comcast's equipment.
DSL is less expensive and competitively priced because way more infrastructure already existed to provide that service.
Verizon is offering their FiOS (Fiber Optic the the desktop) service in selected areas. For about $20 less a month then I'm currently paying, I would get a 20% upgrade in download and about 600% upgrade in upload. When it gets to my area - I will seriously consider it. I'll have to buy some new equipment - but it will be worth it!
How can FiOS beat the prices on my Cable and give me higher speed? I don't know for sure - but I bet it's because they just have to run fiber over the "last mile" - from the junction box to my house. But, if you wanted the speeds you are talking about - they would most likely have to start with new fiber from the Central Office, plus new routers, etc.
Who would pay for all of that? We would!
So what you are saying is, though the US has gone from the world leader in everything to being behind other countries and seemingly unable to match their accomplishments, there are no signs of decline on our part.
You have pointed at a few things where we have remained in place while others have moved ahead.
You have yet to point to anything where we see any backward movement.
I could point to things like life expectancy and average earnings where there have been strides forward. (If I must, I will actually go out and find proof of my arguments, or you can just assume for once that not everything that comes out of my mouth is BS.)
At the end of WWII, the US was the undisputed leading power in the world. Simple math, really; everyone else of consequence was bombed out. From there, they have rebuilt.
Here we are, 50+ years later. The US spent far too much on "Defense" to compete in a Cold War while other countries were spending on social issues and infrastructure. Now, we have the largest military in the world (prove that's in decline!) a warrior mindset and no one of consequence to fight.
I fully agree that we need to reduce military spending and reapply those funds to social issues. I feel the American people need to elect leaders and not politicians. We need to get rid of the "America first - or we'll kick your ass" attitude and be a better citizen of the world.
I just don't see any major decline. I want to see a major decline! I want to see a revolution and a new country rise out of the ashes of the old - but it's not going to happen.
People in this country are comfortable, decadent. This country, on average, has never been richer or more comfortable. People don't want more taxes and they don't like big changes. They will vote in the status quo until something changes the comfort level enough to get them off the couch, turn off "The Office" and get them voting or protesting. Until then, we will continue on the path we're on.
You have pointed out places where we suck, where others are moving forward. I can point to places where we excel and I can point to places where others are flopping. That isn't decline. We are not the undisputed world leader any more - this is true. We're just another country - and maybe that's the attitude we really need.
You've convinced me. No more will I point out the flaws I see in the US. I will just accept that we are mediocre and just can't be bothered to change.
That way, no one gets bothered and the people getting rich and powerful at our expense will be able to continue on their merry way.
Well, unless you have a solution to our woes - what good are you doing pointing this crap out?
Do you have a solution?
Can you and our three or four readers implement it?
I didn't get the memo that the rules were changed that we were only allowed to blog on topics we had concrete solutions for. Or have we been taken over by the Benzites?
You both make very good points, and I have not felt inclined to inject any commentary, but the last post threw me...
Is it... A Star Trek reference? I had to go Google it to be sure. The Benzites are a humanoid race with smooth hairless skin and a thick skull protrusion with prominent nasal lobe. They require special apparatus for breathing in nitrogen-oxygen atmospheres...
The only possible sociological context I could possible find might be an obscure reference to "One Benzite regulation stating that no officer on a Benzite ship is to report any unexplained occurrence without providing a full analysis and solution" which might relate to your argument.
I cannot find any other references to Benzites online and am not a big enough Star Trek fan to know anything besides just the name of the species itself. Could you please elaborate on the correlation between the Benzite society's trajectory and the ramifications for the USA's status in the world when considering the implications of decline in average net connection speed?
You hit the nail on the head as far as my Benzite reference. It was not about my complaints about US broadboand, however. I was refering to Jericho's new desire that I only blog about issues I can personaly fix.
Hence my radio silence.
What's the frequency, Kenneth???
Post a Comment
<< Home