France leads the world in the number of subscribers to Internet TV; the United States isn't even in

July 23, 2007

July 23, 2007

Op-Ed Columnist

The French Connections

By PAUL KRUGMAN

There was a time when everyone thought that the Europeans and the Japanese

were better at business than we were. In the early 1990s airport bookstores

were full of volumes with samurai warriors on their covers, promising to

teach you the secrets of Japanese business success. Lester Thurow's 1992

book, "Head to Head: The Coming Economic Battle Among Japan, Europe and

America," which spent more than six months on the Times best-seller list,

predicted that Europe would win.

Then it all changed, and American despondency turned into triumphalism.

Partly this was because the Clinton boom contrasted so sharply with Europe's

slow growth and Japan's decade-long slump. Above all, however, our new

confidence reflected the rise of the Internet. Jacques Chirac complained

that the Internet was an "Anglo-Saxon network," and he had a point - France,

like most of Europe except Scandinavia, lagged far behind the U.S. when it

came to getting online.

What most Americans probably don't know is that over the last few years the

situation has totally reversed. As the Internet has evolved - in particular,

as dial-up has given way to broadband connections using DSL, cable and other

high-speed links - it's the United States that has fallen behind.

The numbers are startling. As recently as 2001, the percentage of the

population with high-speed access in Japan and Germany was only half that in

the United States. In France it was less than a quarter. By the end of 2006,

however, all three countries had more broadband subscribers per 100 people

than we did.

Even more striking is the fact that our "high speed" connections are

painfully slow by other countries' standards. According to the Information

Technology and Innovation Foundation, French broadband connections are, on

average, more than three times as fast as ours. Japanese connections are a

dozen times faster. Oh, and access is much cheaper in both countries than it

is here.

As a result, we're lagging in new applications of the Internet that depend

on high speed. France leads the world in the number of subscribers to

Internet TV; the United States isn't even in the top 10.

What happened to America's Internet lead? Bad policy. Specifically, the

United States made the same mistake in Internet policy that California made

in energy policy: it forgot - or was persuaded by special interests to

ignore - the reality that sometimes you can't have effective market

competition without effective regulation.

You see, the world may look flat once you're in cyberspace - but to get

there you need to go through a narrow passageway, down your phone line or

down your TV cable. And if the companies controlling these passageways can

behave like the robber barons of yore, levying whatever tolls they like on

those who pass by, commerce suffers.

America's Internet flourished in the dial-up era because federal regulators

didn't let that happen - they forced local phone companies to act as common

carriers, allowing competing service providers to use their lines. Clinton

administration officials, including Al Gore and Reed Hundt, the chairman of

the Federal Communications Commission, tried to ensure that this open

competition would continue - but the telecommunications giants sabotaged

their efforts, while The Wall Street Journal's editorial page ridiculed them

as people with the minds of French bureaucrats.

And when the Bush administration put Michael Powell in charge of the F.C.C.,

the digital robber barons were basically set free to do whatever they liked.

As a result, there's little competition in U.S. broadband - if you're lucky,

you have a choice between the services offered by the local cable monopoly

and the local phone monopoly. The price is high and the service is poor, but

there's nowhere else to go.

Meanwhile, as a recent article in Business Week explains, the real French

bureaucrats used judicious regulation to promote competition. As a result,

French consumers get to choose from a variety of service providers who offer

reasonably priced Internet access that's much faster than anything I can

get, and comes with free voice calls, TV and Wi-Fi.

It's too early to say how much harm the broadband lag will do to the U.S.

economy as a whole. But it's interesting to learn that health care isn't the

only area in which the French, who can take a pragmatic approach because

they aren't prisoners of free-market ideology, simply do things better.

July 23, 2007

"Sid9" <sid9@bellsouth.net> wrote in

news:Dw0pi.2614$MW6.1784@bignews3.bellsouth.net:

> July 23, 2007

> Op-Ed Columnist

> The French Connections

> By PAUL KRUGMAN

> There was a time when everyone thought that the Europeans and the

> Japanese were better at business than we were. In the early 1990s

> airport bookstores were full of volumes with samurai warriors on their

> covers, promising to teach you the secrets of Japanese business

> success. Lester Thurow's 1992 book, "Head to Head: The Coming Economic

> Battle Among Japan, Europe and America," which spent more than six

> months on the Times best-seller list, predicted that Europe would win.

>

> Then it all changed, and American despondency turned into

> triumphalism. Partly this was because the Clinton boom contrasted so

> sharply with Europe's slow growth and Japan's decade-long slump. Above

> all, however, our new confidence reflected the rise of the Internet.

> Jacques Chirac complained that the Internet was an "Anglo-Saxon

> network," and he had a point - France, like most of Europe except

> Scandinavia, lagged far behind the U.S. when it came to getting

> online.

>

> What most Americans probably don't know is that over the last few

> years the situation has totally reversed. As the Internet has evolved

> - in particular, as dial-up has given way to broadband connections

> using DSL, cable and other high-speed links - it's the United States

> that has fallen behind.

>

> The numbers are startling. As recently as 2001, the percentage of the

> population with high-speed access in Japan and Germany was only half

> that in the United States. In France it was less than a quarter. By

> the end of 2006, however, all three countries had more broadband

> subscribers per 100 people than we did.

>

> Even more striking is the fact that our "high speed" connections are

> painfully slow by other countries' standards. According to the

> Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, French broadband

> connections are, on average, more than three times as fast as ours.

> Japanese connections are a dozen times faster. Oh, and access is much

> cheaper in both countries than it is here.

>

> As a result, we're lagging in new applications of the Internet that

> depend on high speed. France leads the world in the number of

> subscribers to Internet TV; the United States isn't even in the top

> 10.

>

> What happened to America's Internet lead? Bad policy. Specifically,

> the United States made the same mistake in Internet policy that

> California made in energy policy: it forgot - or was persuaded by

> special interests to ignore - the reality that sometimes you can't

> have effective market competition without effective regulation.

>

> You see, the world may look flat once you're in cyberspace - but to

> get there you need to go through a narrow passageway, down your phone

> line or down your TV cable. And if the companies controlling these

> passageways can behave like the robber barons of yore, levying

> whatever tolls they like on those who pass by, commerce suffers.

>

> America's Internet flourished in the dial-up era because federal

> regulators didn't let that happen - they forced local phone companies

> to act as common carriers, allowing competing service providers to use

> their lines. Clinton administration officials, including Al Gore and

> Reed Hundt, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission,

> tried to ensure that this open competition would continue - but the

> telecommunications giants sabotaged their efforts, while The Wall

> Street Journal's editorial page ridiculed them as people with the

> minds of French bureaucrats.

>

> And when the Bush administration put Michael Powell in charge of the

> F.C.C., the digital robber barons were basically set free to do

> whatever they liked. As a result, there's little competition in U.S.

> broadband - if you're lucky, you have a choice between the services

> offered by the local cable monopoly and the local phone monopoly. The

> price is high and the service is poor, but there's nowhere else to go.

>

> Meanwhile, as a recent article in Business Week explains, the real

> French bureaucrats used judicious regulation to promote competition.

> As a result, French consumers get to choose from a variety of service

> providers who offer reasonably priced Internet access that's much

> faster than anything I can get, and comes with free voice calls, TV

> and Wi-Fi.

>

> It's too early to say how much harm the broadband lag will do to the

> U.S. economy as a whole. But it's interesting to learn that health

> care isn't the only area in which the French, who can take a pragmatic

> approach because they aren't prisoners of free-market ideology, simply

> do things better.

>

Obviously, another case of market failure. Nothing is as sure as

capitalists' willingness to put their own interests above those of the

American People.

July 23, 2007

"Sid9" <sid9@bellsouth.net> wrote in message

news:Dw0pi.2614$MW6.1784@bignews3.bellsouth.net...

> July 23, 2007

> Op-Ed Columnist

> The French Connections

> By PAUL KRUGMAN

> There was a time when everyone thought that the Europeans and the Japanese

> were better at business than we were. In the early 1990s airport

> bookstores were full of volumes with samurai warriors on their covers,

> promising to teach you the secrets of Japanese business success. Lester

> Thurow's 1992 book, "Head to Head: The Coming Economic Battle Among Japan,

> Europe and America," which spent more than six months on the Times

> best-seller list, predicted that Europe would win.

>

> Then it all changed, and American despondency turned into triumphalism.

> Partly this was because the Clinton boom contrasted so sharply with

> Europe's slow growth and Japan's decade-long slump. Above all, however,

> our new confidence reflected the rise of the Internet. Jacques Chirac

> complained that the Internet was an "Anglo-Saxon network," and he had a

> point - France, like most of Europe except Scandinavia, lagged far behind

> the U.S. when it came to getting online.

>

> What most Americans probably don't know is that over the last few years

> the situation has totally reversed. As the Internet has evolved - in

> particular, as dial-up has given way to broadband connections using DSL,

> cable and other high-speed links - it's the United States that has fallen

> behind.

>

> The numbers are startling. As recently as 2001, the percentage of the

> population with high-speed access in Japan and Germany was only half that

> in the United States. In France it was less than a quarter. By the end of

> 2006, however, all three countries had more broadband subscribers per 100

> people than we did.

>

> Even more striking is the fact that our "high speed" connections are

> painfully slow by other countries' standards. According to the Information

> Technology and Innovation Foundation, French broadband connections are, on

> average, more than three times as fast as ours. Japanese connections are a

> dozen times faster. Oh, and access is much cheaper in both countries than

> it is here.

>

> As a result, we're lagging in new applications of the Internet that depend

> on high speed. France leads the world in the number of subscribers to

> Internet TV; the United States isn't even in the top 10.

>

> What happened to America's Internet lead? Bad policy. Specifically, the

> United States made the same mistake in Internet policy that California

> made in energy policy: it forgot - or was persuaded by special interests

> to ignore - the reality that sometimes you can't have effective market

> competition without effective regulation.

>

> You see, the world may look flat once you're in cyberspace - but to get

> there you need to go through a narrow passageway, down your phone line or

> down your TV cable. And if the companies controlling these passageways can

> behave like the robber barons of yore, levying whatever tolls they like on

> those who pass by, commerce suffers.

>

> America's Internet flourished in the dial-up era because federal

> regulators didn't let that happen - they forced local phone companies to

> act as common carriers, allowing competing service providers to use their

> lines. Clinton administration officials, including Al Gore and Reed Hundt,

> the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, tried to ensure

> that this open competition would continue - but the telecommunications

> giants sabotaged their efforts, while The Wall Street Journal's editorial

> page ridiculed them as people with the minds of French bureaucrats.

>

> And when the Bush administration put Michael Powell in charge of the

> F.C.C., the digital robber barons were basically set free to do whatever

> they liked. As a result, there's little competition in U.S. broadband - if

> you're lucky, you have a choice between the services offered by the local

> cable monopoly and the local phone monopoly. The price is high and the

> service is poor, but there's nowhere else to go.

>

> Meanwhile, as a recent article in Business Week explains, the real French

> bureaucrats used judicious regulation to promote competition. As a result,

> French consumers get to choose from a variety of service providers who

> offer reasonably priced Internet access that's much faster than anything I

> can get, and comes with free voice calls, TV and Wi-Fi.

>

> It's too early to say how much harm the broadband lag will do to the U.S.

> economy as a whole. But it's interesting to learn that health care isn't

> the only area in which the French, who can take a pragmatic approach

> because they aren't prisoners of free-market ideology, simply do things

> better.

>

>Blame everything on the Repulcians and Bush. This is another example of how

>desperet the left is getting and next they will blame rain on Bush.

>

July 23, 2007

Jack Granade wrote:

> "Sid9" <sid9@bellsouth.net> wrote in message

> news:Dw0pi.2614$MW6.1784@bignews3.bellsouth.net...

>> July 23, 2007

>> Op-Ed Columnist

>> The French Connections

>> By PAUL KRUGMAN

>> There was a time when everyone thought that the Europeans and the

>> Japanese were better at business than we were. In the early 1990s

>> airport bookstores were full of volumes with samurai warriors on

>> their covers, promising to teach you the secrets of Japanese

>> business success. Lester Thurow's 1992 book, "Head to Head: The

>> Coming Economic Battle Among Japan, Europe and America," which spent

>> more than six months on the Times best-seller list, predicted that

>> Europe would win. Then it all changed, and American despondency turned

>> into

>> triumphalism. Partly this was because the Clinton boom contrasted so

>> sharply with Europe's slow growth and Japan's decade-long slump.

>> Above all, however, our new confidence reflected the rise of the

>> Internet. Jacques Chirac complained that the Internet was an

>> "Anglo-Saxon network," and he had a point - France, like most of

>> Europe except Scandinavia, lagged far behind the U.S. when it came

>> to getting online. What most Americans probably don't know is that over

>> the last few

>> years the situation has totally reversed. As the Internet has

>> evolved - in particular, as dial-up has given way to broadband

>> connections using DSL, cable and other high-speed links - it's the

>> United States that has fallen behind.

>>

>> The numbers are startling. As recently as 2001, the percentage of the

>> population with high-speed access in Japan and Germany was only half

>> that in the United States. In France it was less than a quarter. By

>> the end of 2006, however, all three countries had more broadband

>> subscribers per 100 people than we did.

>>

>> Even more striking is the fact that our "high speed" connections are

>> painfully slow by other countries' standards. According to the

>> Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, French broadband

>> connections are, on average, more than three times as fast as ours.

>> Japanese connections are a dozen times faster. Oh, and access is

>> much cheaper in both countries than it is here.

>>

>> As a result, we're lagging in new applications of the Internet that

>> depend on high speed. France leads the world in the number of

>> subscribers to Internet TV; the United States isn't even in the top

>> 10. What happened to America's Internet lead? Bad policy. Specifically,

>> the United States made the same mistake in Internet policy that

>> California made in energy policy: it forgot - or was persuaded by

>> special interests to ignore - the reality that sometimes you can't

>> have effective market competition without effective regulation.

>>

>> You see, the world may look flat once you're in cyberspace - but to

>> get there you need to go through a narrow passageway, down your

>> phone line or down your TV cable. And if the companies controlling

>> these passageways can behave like the robber barons of yore, levying

>> whatever tolls they like on those who pass by, commerce suffers.

>>

>> America's Internet flourished in the dial-up era because federal

>> regulators didn't let that happen - they forced local phone

>> companies to act as common carriers, allowing competing service

>> providers to use their lines. Clinton administration officials,

>> including Al Gore and Reed Hundt, the chairman of the Federal

>> Communications Commission, tried to ensure that this open

>> competition would continue - but the telecommunications giants

>> sabotaged their efforts, while The Wall Street Journal's editorial

>> page ridiculed them as people with the minds of French bureaucrats. And

>> when the Bush administration put Michael Powell in charge of the

>> F.C.C., the digital robber barons were basically set free to do

>> whatever they liked. As a result, there's little competition in U.S.

>> broadband - if you're lucky, you have a choice between the services

>> offered by the local cable monopoly and the local phone monopoly.

>> The price is high and the service is poor, but there's nowhere else

>> to go. Meanwhile, as a recent article in Business Week explains, the real

>> French bureaucrats used judicious regulation to promote competition.

>> As a result, French consumers get to choose from a variety of

>> service providers who offer reasonably priced Internet access that's

>> much faster than anything I can get, and comes with free voice

>> calls, TV and Wi-Fi. It's too early to say how much harm the broadband

>> lag will do to the

>> U.S. economy as a whole. But it's interesting to learn that health

>> care isn't the only area in which the French, who can take a

>> pragmatic approach because they aren't prisoners of free-market

>> ideology, simply do things better.

>>

>> Blame everything on the Repulcians and Bush. This is another example

>> of how desperet the left is getting and next they will blame rain on

>> Bush.

Republicans, Reagan, and two Bushs....screwed America!

July 23, 2007

"Jack Granade" <jgranade@pioneernet.net> wrote in message

news:13a9gttets61o50@corp.supernews.com...

>

> "Sid9" <sid9@bellsouth.net> wrote in message

> news:Dw0pi.2614$MW6.1784@bignews3.bellsouth.net...

>>Blame everything on the Repulcians and Bush. This is another example of

>>how desperet the left is getting and next they will blame rain on Bush.

hey billy boy,

that's your second attempt with "desperet", and you still got it wrong,

now listen gomer, hows we all spoded to listen ta yer

gomer ass ifn yall cain't even spells a simpl werd raht,

yall beat everythin yall know that, yall and that ther bush runt

of the litter

ma get mah castratin knife

July 23, 2007

On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 07:43:31 -0400, "Sid9" <sid9@bellsouth.net> wrote:

>July 23, 2007

>Op-Ed Columnist

>The French Connections

>By PAUL KRUGMAN

>There was a time when everyone thought that the Europeans and the Japanese

>were better at business than we were. In the early 1990s airport bookstores

>were full of volumes with samurai warriors on their covers, promising to

>teach you the secrets of Japanese business success. Lester Thurow's 1992

>book, "Head to Head: The Coming Economic Battle Among Japan, Europe and

>America," which spent more than six months on the Times best-seller list,

>predicted that Europe would win.

>

>Then it all changed, and American despondency turned into triumphalism.

>Partly this was because the Clinton boom contrasted so sharply with Europe's

>slow growth and Japan's decade-long slump. Above all, however, our new

>confidence reflected the rise of the Internet. Jacques Chirac complained

>that the Internet was an "Anglo-Saxon network," and he had a point - France,

>like most of Europe except Scandinavia, lagged far behind the U.S. when it

>came to getting online.

>

>What most Americans probably don't know is that over the last few years the

>situation has totally reversed. As the Internet has evolved - in particular,

>as dial-up has given way to broadband connections using DSL, cable and other

>high-speed links - it's the United States that has fallen behind.

>

>The numbers are startling. As recently as 2001, the percentage of the

>population with high-speed access in Japan and Germany was only half that in

>the United States. In France it was less than a quarter. By the end of 2006,

>however, all three countries had more broadband subscribers per 100 people

>than we did.

>

>Even more striking is the fact that our "high speed" connections are

>painfully slow by other countries' standards. According to the Information

>Technology and Innovation Foundation, French broadband connections are, on

>average, more than three times as fast as ours. Japanese connections are a

>dozen times faster. Oh, and access is much cheaper in both countries than it

>is here.

>

>As a result, we're lagging in new applications of the Internet that depend

>on high speed. France leads the world in the number of subscribers to

>Internet TV; the United States isn't even in the top 10.

>

Internet TV? Doesn't this clown realize that Internet TV really sucks?

>What happened to America's Internet lead? Bad policy. Specifically, the

>United States made the same mistake in Internet policy that California made

>in energy policy: it forgot - or was persuaded by special interests to

>ignore - the reality that sometimes you can't have effective market

>competition without effective regulation.

>

>You see, the world may look flat once you're in cyberspace - but to get

>there you need to go through a narrow passageway, down your phone line or

>down your TV cable. And if the companies controlling these passageways can

>behave like the robber barons of yore, levying whatever tolls they like on

>those who pass by, commerce suffers.

>

>America's Internet flourished in the dial-up era because federal regulators

>didn't let that happen - they forced local phone companies to act as common

>carriers, allowing competing service providers to use their lines. Clinton

>administration officials, including Al Gore and Reed Hundt, the chairman of

>the Federal Communications Commission, tried to ensure that this open

>competition would continue - but the telecommunications giants sabotaged

>their efforts, while The Wall Street Journal's editorial page ridiculed them

>as people with the minds of French bureaucrats.

>

>And when the Bush administration put Michael Powell in charge of the F.C.C.,

>the digital robber barons were basically set free to do whatever they liked.

>As a result, there's little competition in U.S. broadband - if you're lucky,

>you have a choice between the services offered by the local cable monopoly

>and the local phone monopoly. The price is high and the service is poor, but

>there's nowhere else to go.

>

>Meanwhile, as a recent article in Business Week explains, the real French

>bureaucrats used judicious regulation to promote competition. As a result,

>French consumers get to choose from a variety of service providers who offer

>reasonably priced Internet access that's much faster than anything I can

>get, and comes with free voice calls, TV and Wi-Fi.

>

>It's too early to say how much harm the broadband lag will do to the U.S.

>economy as a whole. But it's interesting to learn that health care isn't the

>only area in which the French, who can take a pragmatic approach because

>they aren't prisoners of free-market ideology, simply do things better.

>

This guy is a clown. I live in he boonies and I have my choice of

Cable, DSL and Wi-Fi up to 10 GB. The reason that the Euros have

Internet TV is because their regular TV sucks.

--

There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling

the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their

cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.

Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not

on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away

with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone

are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices

me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS

Joseph R. Darancette

daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net

July 23, 2007

Captain Compassion wrote:

> On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 07:43:31 -0400, "Sid9" <sid9@bellsouth.net> wrote:

>