Pz_
join:2001-03-31
Brownsburg, IN
clubs: | ??
I've always wondered how the airlines got to be as they are. (since I was only 4 in 78) I just can't see how they could stay in business doing things the way they do. If anyone has info on this, I'd like to read up on it. |
|
randysavage0
join:2002-04-16
Fayetteville, AR | UNCLE SAM BABY!
Bailouts  |
|
sniper 123
@bellsouth.net
| hate to say I told you so....
Deregulation is BAD BAD BAD BAD for consumers, all the way around. The only idiots that would support deregulation are the same chumps that only care about their stock portfolios, and the hell with the rest of us.
Power utilities, airlines, banking, telecommunications....all bad, horrible examples of how the gains of the 20th century for the average joe were all wiped away by ignorant greedy bastards at the top.
Examples:
1. Banking-how many hometown banks are left for you to choose? What, 4 or 5 at least...where there used to be hundreds. Big fish eat the little ones....
2. Utilties-If you live in California, I say no more. |
|
Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
 ·Site5.com
 ·AT&T Midwest
 ·Comcast
|  Deregulation - Good or Bad? Sounds like both.
After reading the article a few times, I have come to some conclusions.
First, deregulation has its ups and downs. Deregulation isn't a win-win situation for everyone. If it was, there wouldn't be such a thing. The cost of deregulation results in poor customer service, overall service, and support. Although, the prices are cheaper.
Second, who can tell how the broadband industry is going to turn out? It may end up being the exception to the rule. Then again, it could end up being on the list of some of the worst deregulation stories that are still be written for airlines, banks, and other utilites.
All I know is this. I WILL NOT pay for substandard service. My broadband connection is excellent and I would not pay for anything less. If the cost were to go up, I would even pay a little more for superb service. I really do not want to be stuck in a situation where I have to choose between crappy service, and semi-crappy service. I don't think anyone here would want that.
Is deregulation right for broadband? I can't answer that question. However, the article does a good job pointing out the negatives. I have read other articles pointing out the postives. Maybe we should just bite the bullet and deregulate, but I don't think I am ready for the shockwave effect if my broadband connection goes into the toliet just to save a few bucks.
--
Nightfall - »www.nightfall.net |
|
mechanicsc
Nothing Could Be Finer
join:2001-07-02
Townville, SC
| said by Nightfall:
Deregulation isn't a win-win situation for everyone.
True. It's a win-lose situation.
Deregulation is a "win" situation for companies.
Deregulation is a "lose" situation for consumers. |
|
mags2
Agent Provocateur
join:2001-07-19
SoCal
|  reply to Nightfall
said by Nightfall:
Maybe we should just bite the bullet and deregulate...
Biting the bullet and deregulate is what got California in dire straits with the power supplier pirates. You don't just hop into dereg w/o considering all of the implications and let it work itself out later. Can you even imagine the broadband landscape if dereg were to kick in and take a bite out of the industry a la the electricity debacle last year on the west coast?? The mind fairly boggles. In my mind at least, dereg of anything is bad for consumers.
--
The best defense against logic is ignorance. |
|
Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
·Site5.com
·AT&T Midwest
·Comcast
| said by mags2:
said by Nightfall:
Maybe we should just bite the bullet and deregulate...
Biting the bullet and deregulate is what got California in dire straits with the power supplier pirates. You don't just hop into dereg w/o considering all of the implications and let it work itself out later. Can you even imagine the broadband landscape if dereg were to kick in and take a bite out of the industry a la the electricity debacle last year on the west coast?? The mind fairly boggles. In my mind at least, dereg of anything is bad for consumers.
Mags:
I would appreciate it if you wouldn't quote me out of context. I was not saying that we should do it. Here is my exact quote in case you didn't read it correctly.
quote:
Maybe we should just bite the bullet and deregulate, but I don't think I am ready for the shockwave effect if my broadband connection goes into the toliet just to save a few bucks.
Otherwise I agree with you 100%. You have to consider all the sides before you jump in. Just as I said above.
--
Nightfall - »www.nightfall.net |
|
akristov
join:2001-01-31
Tampa, FL
clubs: | reply to Pz_
Re: ??
I believe the government subsidizes the airline's and in return the airlines are to provide additional capacity during wartime. |
|
mags2
Agent Provocateur
join:2001-07-19
SoCal
| reply to Nightfall
Re: Deregulation - Good or Bad? Sounds like both.
said by Nightfall:
I would appreciate it if you wouldn't quote me out of context.
Irrespective of whether you are prepared or not for dereg, when you preface a statement with "I think we should bite the bullet and deregulate..." well, quite frankly, that does not leave much room for interpretation. It's like saying well maybe your GF is pregnant...she either is, or she is not.
--
The best defense against logic is ignorance. |
|
richk_1957
If ..Then..Else
Premium
join:2001-04-11
Minas Tirith
| In Theory
Deregulation is supposed to bring prices down as competition between companies brings the prices down. This is also to promote inovation as cheaper ways to do things is developed & released.
The fact is, the big companies eat up the little ones and then they raise there rates because they are then [effectively] the only game in town.
And development - Ha! - they moan and groan because they have to support so many people that they don't have time and/or money |
|
its me
@bls.com
| reply to mags2
Re: Deregulation - Good or Bad? Sounds like both.
As usual, the truth lies somewhere in the middle...to deregulate or re- (or stay) regulated....
I see from anecdotal experiences in GA (natural gas, local and long distance, water services) that *in general* regulation is preferable for consumer interests when the industry is historically regulated or a utility (like power, water, etc.)
As in the case of Russia when it changed abruptly from a Communist to a Capitalist economy, the barons of previously regulated industry tend to not know when to control themselves and plunder the company coffers or drastically reduce service. They just don't know how to act in a free-market environment.
With industries that are non-essential, like cars, clothes, electronics, etc, market pressure seems to drive choice. If Calvin Klein is too expensive, just buy Nautica, for example. The barons of these industries know from experience the value of a customer, and also have a greater tendency toward customer service.
The big question, is of course, "Is broadband a utility or a consumer service?" |
|
Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
·Site5.com
·AT&T Midwest
·Comcast
| reply to mags2
quote:
Irrespective of whether you are prepared or not for dereg, when you preface a statement with "I think we should bite the bullet and deregulate..." well, quite frankly, that does not leave much room for interpretation. It's like saying well maybe your GF is pregnant...she either is, or she is not.
In this case, I don't have enough information to make a solid yes or no answer. Which is why I didn't say we should or shouldn't.
I can tell you I did NOT say "I think we should bite the bullet and deregulate..." You changed my quotation again. I would appreciate it if you would learn to read.
--
Nightfall - »www.nightfall.net |
|
mags2
Agent Provocateur
join:2001-07-19
SoCal
| said by Nightfall:
You changed my quotation again. I would appreciate it if you would learn to read.
Don't get your panties in a bunch, nightfall, I was just kidding around.
--
The best defense against logic is ignorance. |
|
micl
Visit Lovely Downtown Port Starboard
Premium
join:2001-10-25
Silver Spring, MD
| Good for the lawyers
I don't think all deregulation is bad, but like many have said here, it depends on the industry.
I can tell you that in the case of telecom, deregulation, and then re-regulation with the Telecom Act of 1996 has been very good for the lawyers.
[begin rant]
Too many of the incumbent companies have spent a lot of money on lawyers to figure out how they can interpret the law so that they comply with the bare minimum and perpetuate their monopolies and oligopolies and keep their markets closed... after all, if you are making lots of money, its far easier to pay to keep it that way.
The FCC and many state commissions then simply bury their head in the sand instead of making a real decision in the face of such adversity.
[end rant]
But with some CLECs trying to get a foothold in the market, deregulation would make things far too easy for the RBOCs to perpetuate their monopoly and inhibit any innovation.
--
If I don't see you in the future, I'll see you in the pasture |
|
russotto
join:2000-10-05
Collegeville, PA
| Without deregulation, no DSL.
If it weren't for deregulation, there'd be no DSL; we'd still be using leased phones from our local phone company, which would also be our long distance provider.
CR hates deregulation, but back before deregulation, if you wanted to travel by airplane, you had to pay through the nose. Sure, you'd travel like a king, but you'd need a kingly budget as well.
Power company "deregulation" in California was another thing entirely... deregulating the cost TO power companies while holding fixed the prices charged BY power companies was a recipe for disaster, obvious to anyone who has so much as heard of supply and demand.
And of course what the ILECs call "deregulation" is really restoration of their ability to leverage their locally and regionally granted monopolies (that is, REGULATION) into other areas of businesses. |
|
2farfromCO7
join:2000-10-14
Farmington, MI
| Cable deregulation is the biggest failure
At least in the other industries deregulation has improved competiton somewhat. However, in cable TV, it's been a complete failure. THE ONLY PURPOSE OF DEREGULATION SHOULD BE TO CREATE CHOICE AND COMPETITION. Cable deregulation has produced almost no competition. 95% of people only have 1 monopoly cable provider. At least with the others competition was created, except maybe the airline, but with telecom and energy(you can now choose from a number of power suppliers, that you power company buys from) it has created some choice where none before existed. |
|
pupowski
Premium
join:2002-03-22
Vancouver, WA
 ·Cricket Broadband
·Clearwire Wireless
·Comcast Formerly ..
| De-regulation is a fraud
Republicans use de-regulation like criminals use a shortage of police. The legacy of the radical right "conservatives" is declining standards, lack of competition, business fraud, and widespread political corruption. Right-wing ideologues use denial, double-talk and secrecy to evade responsibility and retain political power. These so-called "Christian conservatives" are neither in their actions.
--
Mozilla is a winner |
|
tower29
Premium
join:2002-02-12
Loveland, CO
|  reply to 2farfromCO7
Re: Cable deregulation is the biggest failure
95% of people only have 1 monopoly cable provider.----(quote from above)
What is funny about his is he is exactly right. However, in Melbourne Florida at area code 32940 you can choose from 4 different cable internet providers. Remember the law that was passed that forced cable companies to at least share their copper? They have to pay the man a little that owns the lines but they can still pump their juices through them.
The sad fact that 65% of people that can get "high speed" cable access don't. Actually, the figure is higher. So until those cable companies like att in Colorado decide to invest in the freaking future isdn will be my only choice....My house is worth 180,000 with houses around in the 500,000 range and we are treated like extras!!!!! They don't want my money I guess.............tower |
|
greatjohn
join:2000-10-27
Schenectady, NY | reply to 2farfromCO7
It is time for our govt.(us) to make the choices we want through the democratic process, not the big corp's with all the money. We should vote on every issue. Its our god given right. Talk is cheap, lets get to work! |
|
alanhdsl
Premium
join:1999-10-09
Phoenix, AZ
·Qwest.net
| reply to russotto
Re: Without deregulation, no DSL.
said by russotto:
Power company "deregulation" in California was another thing entirely... deregulating the cost TO power companies while holding fixed the prices charged BY power companies was a recipe for disaster, obvious to anyone who has so much as heard of supply and demand.
Perhaps so, but deregulation was sold to the public as a way to lower their costs. The fixed cost provision was made to enforce that promise. If they promised to triple the customer's power bill, that would have been more honest. On the other hand, they probably would have had trouble getting it passed. |
|
