Let’s just keep things real here – in terms of technological advancement, America has fallen into stagnation when compared to some parts of Europe and East Asia.
Where once we dominated, we now either lag, or are forced to shell out ridiculous amounts of shekels to upgrade to levels needed for 21st Century communications and networking.
With a bit of thought and understanding, it becomes obvious that one of the only true fixes would be a direct and complete nationalization of the entire network/telecommunications industry.
Seriously, think about it for a moment – minus miles of regulations, could you think of a better way to stifle the poor service, insane fees, and monopoly creation that is so much an integral part of “muh free market?”
A Trump administration trial balloon on creating a nationalized 5G wireless network landed with a resounding thud in Washington on Monday as Republicans and Democrats as well as the country’s telecom giants rushed to condemn it as unworkable.
Reports emerged Sunday night that the administration is weighing a plan to have the government build and run the country’s next-generation 5G network, rather than leaving the job to wireless companies, due to fears of Chinese cyberespionage. Axios, which first reported the proposal, said it came from a National Security Council official who said the government could advance 5G just as it built a national highway system in the 1950s.
But the concept ran into immediate opposition from Republicans alarmed about the talk of government elbowing aside business. President Donald Trump’s own FCC chairman, Ajit Pai, who has spent his tenure rolling back regulation of the telecom industry, called the idea of a nationalized 5G network “a costly and counterproductive distraction.” Fellow FCC Republican Mike O’Rielly called it “nonsensical” while another GOP Commissioner Brendan Carr said the idea is a “nonstarter.”
GOP lawmakers were just as brutal, with Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.), chairman of the House Energy & Commerce Committee, saying, “We’re not Venezuela, we don’t need to have the government run everything as the only choice.”
This is the same argument cuckservatives use whenever programs come about that could possibly benefit Whites in poor areas of Flyover Country.
But yet the Colorfuls manage to pull off entire lifetimes with social benefits and gibs – one example would be the GOP railing venomously against socialized single-payer healthcare, while non-Whites already essentially enjoy this exact benefit.
The public rift over the future of the U.S. wireless infrastructure marks another example of the roiling tensions in the Republican Party, between those who want the private sector to operate without government interference and others focused on the national security and economic threats posed by China.
Amid the blowback, the White House on Monday sought to downplay the possibility of nationalization, with press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders saying discussions on the future of 5G are preliminary.
“There are a lot of things on the table,” Sanders told reporters. “Again, these are the very earliest stages of the discussion period, and there’s been absolutely no decision made other than … the need for a secure network.”
Very little if any tenacity or strength in the face of resistance – this seems to be the model for the Trump Administration in its second year.
Now we even see him walking back his tweets and pet projects once a little push-back occurs – this is how the populist nationalist movement dies.
But unlike traditional wireless networks, which rely on large towers that carry signals over long distances, 5G service requires a dense network of smaller cellular infrastructure, because the airwaves don’t travel as far. The wireless industry expects to invest billions in the buildout, and has been pushing for policies to ease local rules on permitting and constructing in cities.
These companies invest billions, and will then subsequently jack up contract plans to where $1000 a month for a family plan may not be all that out of the ordinary.
U.S. officials have long been concerned about the potential for Chinese spying on U.S. networks, particularly by Chinese telecom giant Huawei, a supplier of network equipment. Huawei’s “threat to the supply chain constitutes a rising national security concern of the highest priority,” the House Intelligence Committee warned in October 2012. The proposal floated by the NSC official envisions a U.S. government-operated wireless network as more difficult for foreign intelligence services to access.
Now I’m not claiming to be anything remotely resembling an expert on this subject material, but I suppose my greatest fear with any sort of Nationalized communications network in this country would be the censorship danger.
Would this program grant ZOG the ability to shut off access to our content in a way that circumvents ordinary channels like domains?
I would think such a plan would require an intranet-style system like North Korea to be totally foolproof, but the last thing we need in this day and age are more complications on top of everything else.
Still, I suppose this proposal is grounds for some interesting and stimulating discussion – note that if I were in charge, this would be a key component of my infrastructure agenda.