Get the Ricochet app
Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.
I just read an article about a plan to make high-speed internet access available to every home and business in Tennessee. That sounds nice. I love high-speed internet access. According to the article, this program will use over $200 million in federal funds! Matching funds are coming from unnamed grantees, so I've got no idea if that grant money is from the state, from counties, from generous private companies, or someplace else. Altogether, this program will cost $402 million. All to give access to 43,000 locations that are out in the boonies. Check my math, but I come up with over $9,300 per location to install the equipment and lines. Each user will have to pay the monthly access fees.
There are advantages and disadvantages to living in a city, a town, a little outside of town, or way out away from everyone. One of the disadvantages of living on a mountain away from everyone else is that no internet provider is going to want to spend the money to run ten miles of wire for just that one house. So, I understand the problem that this program is trying to solve. But why should taxpayers have to shell out $9,300 so you can live the dream of not having a neighbor for miles around and still have internet access as if you lived in Memphis?
Just doing a quick search online, it looks like getting Starlink, the satellite-based internet provider, requires about $349 of equipment, then $50 a month. Perhaps getting internet from a satellite connection is a bit spotty in bad weather compared to a direct wire, but maybe that's the sacrifice you live with for living the remote lifestyle. Can someone make sense of this government expenditure?
Tennessee is a politically conservative state and is often regarded as one of the better states when it comes to taxing and spending. But it looks like even conservative politicians are happy to spend immense amounts of money for small benefits, especially when a portion of that money is coming from Washington, DC. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. This conservative state is also spending taxpayer money to build new stadiums for professional sports.
Discussion (63)
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Excellent post. Can I make sense of this expenditure? No. But it SOUNDS so good! So, naturally, politicians can't resist. And it's not their money anyhow. It comes from the grant fairy, don't you know?
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
We have the choice of two different fiber internet providers, the local phone coop and the local electrical coop. I’m sure this is subsidized by the Feds somehow.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Comparable arithmetic (cost per beneficiary or cost per benefit) of a lot of government programs highlights the often ridiculous costs of those programs.
MODERATOR • CHARTER MEMBER
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Exactly. Few people ask how much a program is going to cost on a per-beneficiary basis.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Starlink performance is barely affected on cloudy days. The dish has a built-in heater that melts snow. It's during heavy rainstorms that connection speed goes down substantially (about 20%-50%), but not the connection itself.
Foregoing the Starlink option in favor of whatever they're cooking up in Nashville is egregiously irresponsible, it seems to me.
You're seeing five of 63 comments. Sign in, or join for just $5 per month, to read them all and add your own.