Regardless of where you sit on the political spectrum in the US, there is one thing that most people cannot deny ... some states have done much better than others, financially, over the past 30 years. Now, each side will have their own arguments as to why and how to fix it, perhaps even with a bit of merit, but there is one wide discrepancy between have and have-not states that most agree needs to be fixed:
High-Speed Internet access is vital in 2019 (and beyond) for a community to grow and providing it to a community can often be a key to their achieving success. It is sad that 24 million Americans do not have access in 2019.
Now, a lot of questions come up, even if everyone were to agree ... who pays for it? Which communities would get it first? Is it government-run or Industry run? I don’t know the best answers to those, but I do have one answer ... A combination of 4G/5G infrastructure is likely the best technology to get it done, regardless of who may pay for it.
Most cities in the poorer states have a relatively strong infrastructure to support a 5G deployment, and based on a business case, the cellular carriers would likely have put in the upgrade anyways. I am talking about cities like Louisville, Jackson and Charleston. Where government and other funding may be needed is in the areas around these cities, where 5G may not have been planned. Upgrading these areas to 5G would allow businesses to be set up, ranging from factories to E-commerce based businesses. A small tax break or incentive by the government may be enough to convince the Verizon’s and AT&T’s to upgrade.
In the more extremely remote areas, even with government assistance, it may be tough to justify a 5G installation. However, an uncongested 4G network is quite quick, with speeds that are more than fast enough for real-time applications that a business would need. It would also improve healthcare, education and more for all communities. It would offer one of the best returns on investments, even if it was all subsidized ... which it would not have to be.
One has to think that there are a lot of other companies, since they may benefit, who would be interested in possible subsidies/grants. Take a company like Google, who would now see a new area of growth for YouTube, as an example.
One can hope that with all of the fighting going on in Washington, this would be something that all agree is a project worth spending money on, as it is such a glaring need ...