Surely you jest.
"Move outside of that to regional areas (basically outside of any capital city) and fibre becomes a total waste of money. We can use LTE-a to cover a majority of citizens living outside of our capital cities and at a much lower cost."
I mean wireless is "not bad" but where I live, when everyone goes home at lunch time, and jumps on the net, the network grinds to a halt...
You can set your clock by it.
And as far as BIG data transfers go? Oh like I have to download 2+ Gig of system files? Ummmmm and how long is that going to take? Or watching movies or docco's over the net? Or I need to back up terror bites of data to the cloud?
Or business's that need to move lots of data around?????
Wireless is just fine if all your doing is checking emails and solo updates - and the kids are at school or asleep, the humidity isn't too high and the moisture in the buildings isn't soaking up the radio waves, or it's not raining, and the weather is OK etc.....
Or some HUGE issue is going on and everyone in the district is on their mobile phone........
Or you are more than X Km from the transceiver....... riding the cube root of appallingness.
For convenience, and mobility, I like wireless very much, but for pure speed and reliability, I'd rather have fibre.
While wireless is good, it really is.... but within fairly tight constraints and limitations.
We need national and indeed global fibre connectivity.