The stated reasns were environmental ones.
The objection at the time was that the plan was REALLY being invoked becasue so centralized, the populations would be easier to control, for two reasons; sheer location, for one thing... the other being a bit more subtle...

That being that people living in the country, in relative isoaltion, tend to be more independance minded, whereas living in close proximity to one another tends to lean people toward the left politically, and they would be more inclined toward world government, thereby....thus reinforcing the authority of such orgs as the UN.

Hmmmm... I wonder.

("Caves of Steel" and sequels for the illiterate)

New technologies will appear that will give POTS users broadbandish ability soon enough.

I'm going to have a blog launch party, dammit, and when it's over sure-as-hell nobody's going to be talking about broadband.....

The farm economy is a disaster. If it were any other business, it would have corkscrewed itself into the ground a long time ago. Technological advances, along with a dwindling supply of farmland (thanks to everybody's desire to have a bigger house in a safer neighborhood, even if it does mean they have to leave for work at 4 AM) have raised operating costs to the point that there's scarcely any money left to be made. (The Amish, I understand, remain quite profitable.)

This could all be solved with the formation of farming corporations, which could lower production costs, hire farmers who would get pensions and health-care benefits, etc., etc. Unfortunately, this option was made illegal in many Midwestern states during the 80s and 90s.

Do you guys from the big cities think we're all just a bunch of backward rubes? Give me a break.

We don't need better access to broadband internet, we need to light a fire under the agriculture industry's collective butts so they'll develop some of that entrepreneurial spirit instead of depending on taxpayers for subsidies.

---