> There are underserved populations that can't get better internet, even if they want it. Isn't fixing that a reasonable policy goal?

Sure. Yet, looking at problems as if they are single-variable cause-effect issues is to reduce complex multivariate issues (they all are) to ridiculous fantasy models.

The government should not force businesses to make unprofitable decisions or contort their decisions into bullshit racism implications.

The solution is very simple: If the FCC thinks these communities are not served well enough, they are free to trench the streets, install fiber to every home and provide them with amazing government run service at low cost or zero cost.

And yet, that would be a terrible solution. We need to pull back from the micro level and look at it from a broader perspective.

The federal government is burning $1.7 billion PER YEAR maintaining empty buildings for decades:

"The 132-year-old brick structure is sitting on prime real estate six blocks from the White House. It was once a school, but it's been vacant for almost three decades."

https://www.npr.org/2014/03/12/287349831/governments-empty-b...

That money is being burned...every year.

What would happen if they just got rid of those properties and shifted just one third of that budget to subsidize such things as internet access to various underserved areas? That's over $500 billion PER YEAR.

Charter Communications, one of the largest companies in the sector, has a gross annual revenue of approximately $50 billion per year. Give them $50 billion of the money being wasted and stipulate that money has to go towards delivering outstanding internet connectivity in designated areas. Heck, with $50 billion of free money they could probably get 1 Gigabit fiber to every single one of our homes, including less profitable areas.

Do that with nine other companies. The result would be unbelievable. And here's the best part: It's a one-time cost. We would be saving $1.7 billion per year and spending $500 billion one time. Even if the actual cost is double that, it's still a deal.

The point is that it is easy to get lost in the feelings and outrage of our sad victim society while ignoring the absolute fact that we could be doing a lot better for everyone if we demanded better results from our government.

Here we are, discussing the financially-microscopic problem of relatively few underserved communities while not making the connection with government waste and incompetence --in the trillions-- that could do magical things for every single person in this nation if brought under control.

A trillion dollars is a massive amount of money. If put to good use most of the problems in this country would evaporate, from housing to healthcare and internet access so everyone can be on Tik Tok all day.

Perspective is important.

We have already done enough damage to our industrial and commercial business sectors. Before we achieve total internal destruction, we might just want to consider that getting our government under financial control (at all levels) would have the effect of injecting trillions of dollars into the economy, which would be nothing less than magical.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/18/heres-how-the-federal-govern...