As opposed to private companies that manage the money well? You mean: Washington Mutual, Countrywide, Citibank, Merrill Lynch, AIG, Ford, GM, Chrysler, Bank of America, who else am I leaving out? Oh yeah, overseas, the Royal Bank of Scotland, Fortis, Satyam, all of the banks of Iceland . . . all of which are private companies.

By the way, can you explain to us why France, Germany, the UK, Sweden, the Netherlands and so many other countries have more competition in the market for broadband? Why is it that a resident of Paris can get 100 Mbps symmetrical broadband service for 50 EUR per month but his counterpart in NYC cannot?

Not because the French government has given the city of Paris money to “blow” but because the French government — for all its so-called socialist leanings — has actually imposed rules that ensure there is competition. Amazing, isn’t it, those bloody European socialists actually seriously enforcing rules to ensure that residents enjoy the benefits of an open market.

The French government, like many European governments, have imposed and enforced regulations that require their telecom incumbents to share their copper lines. Better yet, they forced the incumbents to share the fiber ducts going into buildings and to share fiber optic networks. In some instances, the governments have funded the deployment of FTTH (e.g. Amsterdam).

The result is that these rules and investments have allowed other companies — yes, other private enterprises — to enter the ISP market and make money. Unlike the US, which does not enforce its antitrust laws, European governments actually believe in some kind of free, open market where a lot of private companies compete for your money.

Another thing: what I have discussed here is for for local governments and states to build and own the underlying infrastructure, the fiber, and to open it up to all kinds of ISPs, not just the cable guy or the DSL incumbent, but other ISPs. In reality, most municipalities do not act as ISPs unless there is really no ISP in their community who will run the service. They get a local ISP to run the service.

So what must happen is the separation of the infrastructure layer from the service layer, allowing different service providers to compete for your business. Isn’t that what the free market is all about?

Big companies throw service at the consumer cheap just to add another customer to their end of year financial report.

- Terminating the internet account when a vague usage line has been crossed (Concast fixed that just this year from our pushing this issue to the public just this October)

- Poor quality competition. Besides Concast and their 6/8/12 meg lines, the ONLY other option in my area is 1.5 Meg DSL. that’s it for competition unless you want SLOWER internet and go wireless.

- One or two solutions in any area. This is competition? It’s like saying there is a variety of soda’s to choose from. You can drink coke or pepsi cola. But nothing else is available. This is choice?

My family and friends who are tired of poor service and options are writing letters to President Elect Obama about this. We’re tired of being abused by the incumbent and want real change.