[gigatexal]

Governments would pay for this via taxes. At least that's one way. So in the end all of us would be paying for internet, and I guess if there were a way to get internet at 1gig up/1 gig down with no data caps that was very reliable for under 100 bucks a month I would do it. But the build-out costs a lot as you've stated so the capital would have to come from somewhere and perhaps that'd come from infrastructure spending.

[rayiner]

We can't convince voters to raise taxes/utility rates enough to fix crumbling dams, lead water pipes, and overflowing sewers.

[jlgaddis]

That's very true. Unfortunately, if you threatened to take away their Facebook I think they'd suddenly reconsider.

[snowwrestler]

Depends on the locality; my city just raised taxes to address infrastructure needs in schools and storm sewers. It's probably not a coincidence that they are also looking at municipal fiber.

[gigatexal]

Unfortunately I happen to agree. Until a disaster happens that the public can be convinced is linked directly to a lack of infrastructure spending I think nothing will happen.

[gech]

Neo-con media has framed this very effectively, and the populace now operates within that frame

[rayiner]

It's not neo-cons. It's liberals too. God forbid we raise water rates so the water utility can replace aging lead pipes--"what will happen to grandma if water rates go up???!"