• shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    2 days ago

    Yeah, probably not. If your country is the size of a postage stamp, it doesn’t take a whole lot of capital investment to run fiber through the entire thing. Whereas if your country is the size of the United States, it takes a fuck ton of capital investment to cover even a decent portion of it by laying lines like that.

    • Anarch157a@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      My country is as big as the US and we can get 500 Mbs fibre for $23, less than half what AT&T charges.

      Is not the size of the country that make fibre costs to be so high in US, it’s unchecked, exploitative capitalism allowed by a corrupt plutocratic government.

    • scott@lemmy.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 days ago

      Bullshit excuses. They were given bank ass roll to build that shit out proper and just pocketed it.

      • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I said absolutely nothing about government subsidies, and in another comment, further down the thread, I even said that if a company gets government subsidies to do so, and does not do so, they should be made to pay the money back with interest.

        • scott@lemmy.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          2 days ago

          I’m just talking about the reality of what happened in the US, not some hypothetical

    • Alphane Moon@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Less to do with absolute size and more to do with urban density and population concentration.