You think "taxpayers paying for a commercial service whether they use it or not" sounds like a problem. Other people think this sounds like economic development.
In principle, the first one of those is not intrinsically bad. There are plenty of peripheral benefits to cheap high speed internet that people will reap even if they aren't using it. That's the whole idea behind subsidies.
Isn't it very normal for cities to support companies that they want to come into their city?
Whether it's a factory or some other sort of service I don't see what the problem is. If the city government thinks it is a company worth doing what they can to help out that's fine, it's up to their judgement. And if the citizens that live there disagree with the city's government then they should elect new city government when elections come around.
Comments
I fail to see how any of the things you mentioned are negative.
Taxpayers paying for a commercial service whether they use it or not sounds like one. Special privileges and fast-tracking is another.
You think "taxpayers paying for a commercial service whether they use it or not" sounds like a problem. Other people think this sounds like economic development.
In principle, the first one of those is not intrinsically bad. There are plenty of peripheral benefits to cheap high speed internet that people will reap even if they aren't using it. That's the whole idea behind subsidies.
The second part is what troubles me.
Isn't it very normal for cities to support companies that they want to come into their city?
Whether it's a factory or some other sort of service I don't see what the problem is. If the city government thinks it is a company worth doing what they can to help out that's fine, it's up to their judgement. And if the citizens that live there disagree with the city's government then they should elect new city government when elections come around.