Another interesting website. The Center For Public Integrity. I followed links from Slate.com, another good website. On the PI website I found this article about some of the battles raging to make wireless available to the masses in some municipalities. Some ISPs don't like it, say it's unfair competition.

To say it's unfair competition is to admit that a city government can offer a service to taxpayers cheaper than a private organization. They cannot really use this argument, because it conflicts with assertions from advocates of privatization that say privatizing public services is better for the taxpayer because private entities can do things with much more efficiency. If the assertion is still adhered to, that private companies can do things more efficiently (in this case Internet access), and citizens are getting the most for their money on their own, then why are they, the ISPs that are bitching, charging so much for their services? (I don't even know if the shit in that last sentence makes sense to me!)

The telecomms are saying it's unfair competition, but really the only unfair competition is NO competition, or competition between entities that use unfair tactics for an edge up. It seems to me that the trend is for businesses to demand equal access to markets only when they want to step into the market. Those with access already want to stifle competition, because it only drives down prices. But this is what capitalism is all about, why it is good for the population in general. It spawns innovation, but in reality only works if the goal of entrepreneurs is to make a decent living rather than a killing. The telecomms are bitching because the things these municipalities are doing shows they have been making a killing rather than on honest decent living.