Do you ever get the feeling that progressives despise competition? Whether it’s in the marketplace, on the job or in schools, progressives want to be the top dogs without having to earn it. It’s a waste of time, money and talent. In other words, it’s Marxism in America. In yet another example of the Biden administration’s practice of wasteful spending to solve a problem that’s already been solved by the private sector, the U.S. has committed more than $60 billion for its “Internet for All” program, according to the Wall Street Journal. The “Internet for All” program is the latest high-dollar effort to bring high-speed internet to rural areas. To put it in perspective, take Nebraska’s Winnebago Tribe as an example. The reservation has “sluggish” internet service, and the feds plan to fix it by installing fiber-optic cable. If that sounds reasonable consider the price tag — each household and workplace will cost an average of $53,000 to get connected. That’s more than the assessed value of some of the homes scheduled for connection, according to the Journal. Fiber-optic cable is the industry standard, but there are other options. Satellite service, for example, is a lot cheaper. Satellites may not be as reliable as cable, at least for now. With people like Elon Musk and his internet satellite company Starlink, it’s a good bet satellite will continue to improve. A top Pentagon official has already observed that Starlink satellites have thwarted a Russian attack faster than the U.S. military could have. Does anyone really think the feds are going to do a better job at getting rural areas online than Elon Musk and other private-sector innovators? In another brilliant move, Congress has left it to state and federal officials to decide how much money is too much to connect hard-to-reach areas. That’s like giving the keys to the kingdom to a den of thieves. In some remote locations in Montana, laying fiber-optic cable could cost more than $300,000 per connection, said Misty Ann Giles, director of Montana’s Department of Administration, according to the Journal. Is that too much, or is it possible that some people will just have to live with satellite internet? Poor babies. The Winnebago Tribe’s historic preservation officer, Sunshine Thomas-Bear, is all for the government internet cable project. She said Starlink — which her family uses –speeds are sufficient. But there’s a downside — the required equipment can cost hundreds of dollars. “A lot of people aren’t as lucky as me to be able to afford that,” Thomas-Bear said. It would be a helluva lot cheaper for the feds to shell out a few hundred dollars to each household on the reservation than $53,000 a pop. But the Biden administration isn’t keen on spending taxpayer money on satellite service. The feds maintain that fiber networks are a better long-term investment in the ever-growing demand for bandwidth. It makes one wonder how many favors the cable companies are dolling out to progressive causes. Defenders of the broadband programs argue that rural fiber lines can be used to upgrade cell service and connect more towns. “Ultimately, there is a lot of good that will come from the infrastructure that we are building,” said Alan Davidson, an assistant secretary of commerce in charge of broadband programs, according to the Journal. High-speed internet, proponents argue, aids in economic development. This, in turn, gives young people a reason to stay on the reservation. I guess Starlink doesn’t do the same for a lot less? Can anybody tell me why? None of this makes sense. Then again, the Biden administration rarely does. In December 2022, the Federal Communications Commission approved Starlink’s move to launch up to 7,500 next-generation satellites into the company’s internet network, according to CNBC. SpaceX’s full application included the deployment of nearly 30,000 satellites, but the FCC didn’t approve that. They had “concerns about orbital debris and space safety.” What about concerns over gross government overspending on problems that have already been solved by the private sector? It’s modern-day Marxism in America. Make no mistake, the progressives aim to control all means of production and distribution. They want to control what you drive, what you eat, what you cook your meals on, and, yes, how you connect to the internet. If the recent past’s big-tech/government collusion in censorship is any indicator, they also want to control what you see and hear on the internet. They want to control it all because they fear you. As far as the progressives are concerned, resistance is futile. They’re not trying to help connect the Winnebago Tribe and rural America to the internet. They’re trying to control them. This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.