Ok so 39% of rural residents don’t have access to WIRED broadband.
Wireless broadband can be pretty fast.
And how many people fit into their definition of rural?
We live in rural (by most standards) north Georgia and have LTE, uverse and Xfinity service options. While we don’t live in the deep poplar woods, very few Georgians do. They could do HughesNet if they needed to.
This stinks of the gummint raising a lot of tax money to serve a small need.
I agree with all of you. I’m in rural Tennessee and Hughes.net satellite is the only thing we can get. It’s awful but better than dial-up. I would love to have more choices for something that is reliable. Hughes has daily download limits and if you go over they shut you off or you can purchase more data. You have a free period from 2am to 7am but that means getting up in the middle of the night for large updates.
How did we get so there is phone service in rural areas? Did the government force the phone industry to lay lines to rural areas?
We live 3 miles from DSL capability. Dish is the only option, and data is very expensive. Netflix, for instance, will never be an option for us if we want to be able to eat or drive a car.
Service is patchy. For instance, I cannot download Windows 10 because the internet is never connected long enough in one shot for it to download without disconnecting. I think I’ve tried 7 or 8 times.
Sometimes the weather makes trouble, which has created some problems for my daughter who needs internet for homework.
In most cases, we don’t need the fedgov involved. What is needed is state and local governments which tell the cable and phone providers, “You want a franchise here? Then you have to connect -everyone- in our jurisdiction who wants your broadband. No exceptions.: