RURAL PREDJUDICE

I'm not a big governmenter, by any means, but I admit to becoming more and more vexed with the disparity to internet access between rural and urban sectors.

Our county in the last couple of years has spent some $100 million on new schools, but most of the county struggles with internet access.  Many of these students come home to either dial up or half-way internet access.  It's slow.

We see it every minute of every day on our farm where we're trying to handle customers' credit cards or use Skype or any other form of high tech tele-communication media.  We have a wi-fi arrangement, supposedly the best available, that costs us about $4,000 a year, but it's a Model T in a Corvette world.

It seems to me like the powers that be, if they want to invest in the future, would first invest in good high speed internet so county businesses could prosper.  That would create the tax base to fund the schools.  Funding the schools is getting the cart before the horse.  It would be like in 1900 building a school without an access road.

Taking care of your people, these days, includes making sure they can access the internet to transact business, network with their city customers, and not have a highly prejudicial and discriminatory on-line access.  Economic segregation is just as debilitating as racial segregation.

You would think that a country that can finance star wars and space trips to Mars could figure out how those of us who live in the country could get some decent internet access so we can handle the folks who venture outside the city in search of authenticity and connectedness.  If we can spend billions on a "no child left behind" boondoggle, how about spending some on "no country business left behind?"  Fair is fair.  Tomorrow, I'll do a post on corporate subsidies.  Our government officials don't mind spending money; they just spend it on pet projects.  The rest of us can go take a hike.

How would you like to spend $4,000 a year on 1/15th the speed of most urban service?