Re:“Dig once” bill could bring fiber Internet to much of the US
by jmcdiesel on Thursday March 23, 2017 @01:37PM
(#13942023)
$3B is pretty small on the large scale. Especially when you consider the cost of adding them later (while it may not be paid for up front by the government, costs of doing construction, like closures, do add to gov't costs)
Re:“Dig once” bill could bring fiber Internet to much of the US
by late2part on Thursday March 23, 2017 @01:39PM
(#13942045)
According to some sensationalist stories I've read, it's only ~10X what we're spending to protect/transport President Trump on his weekend vacations.
Re:“Dig once” bill could bring fiber Internet to much of the US
by indolering on Thursday March 23, 2017 @04:30PM
(#13943962)
What does this contribute to the conversation?
Re:“Dig once” bill could bring fiber Internet to much of the US
by Godel_unicode on Friday March 24, 2017 @12:18AM
(#13946569)
Context. Reasoning about government budget-size numbers is difficult for most people.
Re:“Dig once” bill could bring fiber Internet to much of the US
by late2part on Thursday March 23, 2017 @08:32PM
(#13945612)
Someone said it's not a lot of money. Someone else said it was. I provided a relative reference. Not the most monumental - but my intention was to add perspective.
Re:“Dig once” bill could bring fiber Internet to much of the US
by oh_sigh on Thursday March 23, 2017 @01:43PM
(#13942087)
In normal human terms, yes, but 3B is only .08% of the federal budget.
Also, there is some economic gain from this activity...paying construction workers to install it, and whatever the end users decide to do with it. Is that gain > 3B? I don't know.
Maybe it's me, but $3 billion is not a small amount of money:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13941757