On Thu, 08 Jan 2009 10:41:34 +0000, Peter Scott wrote:

This is one of the consequences of choosing to live in a rural area

Doesn't have to be

I suppose that you would also want the same level of mobile phone coverage,
bus services, and shopping facilities, as urban areas do

Certainly not. But I would not expect to be riding in a slow open cart
and still pay the same fare as on a fast heated bus!

Would you give up the lack of congestion, lower crime rates, lower car
insurance premiums, cleaner air and the other benefits of a rural
environment to get your higher broadband speed

I'm not complaining about the benefits of living the country, expensive
though it is. My point is that I pay the same for a poor service, that
it is technically possible to provide a higher speed service to rural
areas, but that there is no commercial pressure to do so.

The ISPs and infrastructure providers are commercial companies, with a certain,
limited amount of money available for hardware and cabling.
You seem to be suggesting that they spend it on upgrades in your sparsely
populated region - which would benefit a small number of people, rather than
spending it in a highly populated area, where it would benefit a larger number.

I would suspect that what you pay for your speeds are still considerably less
than what *everyone* paid for that speed when it was considered cutting-edge.

I would like to be able to view your situation sympathetically, but I can't
think of a single factor that gives me cause to think you're being hard done by.