n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY
 ·Optimum Online
|  I Know!
quote:
One bill, backed by consumer groups, essentially includes a broadband bill of rights and directly holds telco's accountable for deployments and the funds they use to do so. The other, with oodles of lobbyist money on its side, provides additional incentives, lowers the bar to a degree, and mirrors in many ways the legislation passed in 1995. Care to wager which bill will be left standing at the end of the telco/consumer fist fight?
This is a trick question; the answer is neither one! A third bill that totally strips the states regulating authority will be passed or the FCC will intercede and free Verizon from all regulations.
Simple! |
|
DaSneaky1D
one wall to block them all
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
·Charter Pipeline
| What I find funny
I wonder how the wording of the deal read. Back in 1995-1996, was there even any evidence that there could be consumer level/affordable broadband access, let alone from telcos? I know DSL isn't a new technology, but for a state to expect 45Mbps symmetrical fiber service available for 20% of it's residential consumers (read cheap) by 1998 is re-duckulous. That's even a pipe dream for people living in NYC or Richardson, TX.
Funny thing is, I believe Ronald F. Weigel when he said it is available. If a resident is willing to pony up 20-30K a month, it's all theirs!
--
] ::my trivial ramblings:: [ |
|
DSLrgm
Premium,MVM
join:2002-08-22
Oak Park, MI | Work on xDSL was occuring even then. It is 54Mb (OC1). It can even go over copper if the copper is only 1000'. |
|
tmccann11
Who, Me?
Premium
join:2001-06-10
Bayonne, NJ
clubs:
| Lose Lose Situation
Given the track record of Verizon and PA, it's obvious which one of these bills are going to pass. With an almost bottomless pit of money to spend on lobbying, I wouldn't be surprised if they've already bought out 3/4 of the PUC. But then again, all of America is run by legal bribery.
Tom |
|
pkust
join:2001-08-09
Houston, TX
| reply to DaSneaky1D
Re: What I find funny
said by DaSneaky1D  :
I wonder how the wording of the deal read. Back in 1995-1996, was there even any evidence that there could be consumer level/affordable broadband access, let alone from telcos? I know DSL isn't a new technology, but for a state to expect 45Mbps symmetrical fiber service available for 20% of it's residential consumers (read cheap) by 1998 is re-duckulous. That's even a pipe dream for people living in NYC or Richardson, TX.
Wouldn't that be the reason for the financial incentives? Essentially, the State of Pennsylvania agreed to pick up a big chunk of the tab, so that the service would be available at consumer prices.
It would appear that Verizon took the money but never delivered the goods.
--
Cordially,
Peter Nayland Kust
pkust@smsysinc.com
Secure Mobile Systems, Inc.
www.smsysinc.com |
|
oliphant5
Got Identity?
Premium
join:2003-05-24
Corona, CA
| Oh, no taxpayer money funds infrastructure
So claimed the telco shills.
said by article:
It's estimated that those financial incentives over the years wound up clocking in at somewhere around $2.1 billion dollars.
Out of the 2.1 billion dollars received in the deal, $1.5 billion of it consisted of extra tax deductions.
When a specific company or industry gets tax money in this fashion when others don't get this break (like everyone does with say the mortgage interest deduction) this is taxpayers funding deployment. Plain and simple.
If telcos don't want gov't and consumers having a say or don't intend to live up to their end of the deal shouldn't be taking the billions in taxpayer money. And when they fail or refuse to deploy technology in a manner previously agreed to they shouldn't be let off the hook but rather be ordered to return the taxpayer's money.
--
Powered by Barry McKockenner Racing in association with Jack McKokkov Motorsports
[text was edited by author 2003-08-28 14:34:35] |
|
DaSneaky1D
one wall to block them all
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
·Charter Pipeline
| reply to pkust
Re: What I find funny
Then, where would the money be to buy the equipment, install the equipment, run the lines, buy right-of-way for land, pay for more employees to offer customer service, ect?
While 2.1 billion is a lot of money, when it comes to offering this service to 50% of the residents, it starts to get a little thin. I seriously doubt any of that money was supposed by Bell to be used as subsidation.
--
] ::my trivial ramblings:: [ |
|
DaSneaky1D
one wall to block them all
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
·Charter Pipeline
| reply to DSLrgm
So at 1000' for 54Mbps, it would take how much money to provide this solution for 50% of the population? How much of the pop. can be served by ADSL at 15,000 feet for 384k service?
And, how much was fiber and its related equipment back then? Then to provide this service to residents at a residentially affordable rate?
Like I said, I wonder what the wording really was...
--
] ::my trivial ramblings:: [ |
|
Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY
 ·Qwest.net
| So What's New
Heck the teleco are doing just what defense contractors have been doing for decades, acting like shake down artists
Whinning about needing ever increasing amounts of money.
--
Low Brass & Irish Terriers rule, I love for warm glow of a vacuum tube in the morning |
|
Motorhead5
join:2000-06-05
Woodside, NY
| Telcos have nerve
"...Verizon of Pennsylvania President James O'Rourke says HB 1669 "jeopardizes the capital budgets of the very companies that are building advanced telecom networks."
This article started off with the revelation that the state of Pennsylvania forgave a 2.1 billion dollar advance and this jerkoff is complaining about capital investment??!!
This country desperately needs campaign finance reform to keep industry money out of politics. Witness the recent blackout and the complete lack of intelligence, planning, accountability or intestinal fortitude to deal with upgrading the system on the part of the energy industry. |
|
footballdude
Premium
join:2002-08-13
Imperial, MO
| reply to oliphant5
Re: Oh, no taxpayer money funds infrastructure
said by oliphant5 :
So claimed the telco shills.
said by article:
It's estimated that those financial incentives over the years wound up clocking in at somewhere around $2.1 billion dollars.
Out of the 2.1 billion dollars received in the deal, $1.5 billion of it consisted of extra tax deductions.
When a specific company or industry gets tax money in this fashion when others don't get this break (like everyone does with say the mortgage interest deduction) this is taxpayers funding deployment. Plain and simple.
Wow, do I have to disagree with that! A tax break equals taxpayer funding? That sounds like you believe all money belongs to the government and they let us take back only our 'fair portion'. |
|
oliphant5
Got Identity?
Premium
join:2003-05-24
Corona, CA
| No, a tax break to a single company or industry is taxpayer funding. If EVERYONE were to be able to get the "break" as I said clearly before (with the mortgage interest example) then I would agree with you. But when it's gov't negotiating with a particular company, bartering tax money in exchange for something, then it's taxpayer funded...especially when the gov't isn't owning what it's paying for.
--
Powered by Barry McKockenner Racing in association with Jack McKokkov Motorsports
[text was edited by author 2003-08-28 15:32:56] |
|
grunteled
Puffy And Prickly
Premium
join:2001-06-13
Kansas City, MO
clubs:
| reply to DaSneaky1D
Re: What I find funny
said by DaSneaky1D :
While 2.1 billion is a lot of money, when it comes to offering this service to 50% of the residents, it starts to get a little thin. I seriously doubt any of that money was supposed by Bell to be used as subsidation.
I'm sorry, but who cares if it turned out to be enough money or not? They are the ones who made the damn deal. They promised to do something in exchange for an assload of public money. They did not do it. It sounds to me like the agreement said they would have it deployed, not that they could drag a line if somebody coughed up 10K to do it. How would they need public money to do that. Every teleco that wants to do business MUST be able to that. Can they with a straight face tell us that a deal was made for them to just continue doing business, and Penn would pay them 2.1B just to do that.
When I make deals with the promise to do something in exchange for money and I don't do do it, they seem to call it "breach of contract". Nobody seems to care when I give excuses about it costing to much to follow through, not having enough time, or whatever else I want to blather on about. I made the deal, I agreed to the terms, I'm liable to return the money if I can't fulfill. No matter what drug I was smoking when I thought I could do it.
Why should they be any different? |
|
footballdude
Premium
join:2002-08-13
Imperial, MO
| reply to oliphant5
Re: Oh, no taxpayer money funds infrastructure
said by oliphant5 :
No, a tax break to a single company or industry is taxpayer funding. If EVERYONE were to be able to get the "break" as I said clearly before (with the mortgage interest example) then I would agree with you. But when it's gov't negotiating with a particular company, bartering tax money in exchange for something, then it's taxpayer funded...especially when the gov't isn't owning what it's paying for.
Sorry, I still can't go there with you. If only one company was getting some kind of break then the argument solidifies a little but when an entire industry is qualifying, it's just another tax break. Since there's a couple of million lines of tax code it blends in. Even then, when the government neglects to collect taxes, that just doesn't equal a government payout. |
|
EnzonE
join:2000-03-23
Indiana, PA | reply to DaSneaky1D
Re: What I find funny
Yeah it figures out of all the states I had to live in this one. We'll see how this all plays out, probably not in my favor either.
--
Verizon 768k/128k @ 16,200 feet from CO.Activated June 13 2001 |
|
DaSneaky1D
one wall to block them all
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
·Charter Pipeline
| reply to grunteled
Your right and I completely agree with you. But going from my first post about this, I wander what the wording of the contract is/was. If they built a fiber network with customer deliverable loops available to 50% of the residential population by 1998, though it would cost the resident $20,000 a month to lease a line for it, then they fulfilled their contract.
If the wording in the contract said that, "and everyday working, residential customers must be able to purchase this service for under $100 bucks a month", then they did breach their contract. But according to the wording of that Verizon Rep, he obviously made his comment out of a loop-hole in the contract. Seems to me like they did deliver.
--
] ::my trivial ramblings:: [ |
|
systems2000
What? You Say It's Fixed. Hah
join:2001-11-29
Cyberspace | reply to DaSneaky1D
I think you'll find answers in this thread I started last November, and Verizon was crying about it back then.
»PA - Speak Out About Your Broadband Service! |
|
waynemr
join:2002-01-28
Madison, WI
| Pennsylvania is over a barrel
This is kind of like sending the criminal father to prison, who was the only one making enough money to feed and clothe his eight kids. Put him in prison, and the State ends up paying more.
Unfortunately, with the economy in da schitz, Pennsylvania is over the barrel. If they whack the teleco, the teleco responds by cutting jobs in that state...
What they should do, is push for a long-term, structured settlement - push the terms out, so that when the economy is good, they can demand some kind of a refund from the teleco later on.
It sucks, but what else can they do. Well, I guess they could seize all of the assets of Verizon until they pay, lol! Call out the Pennsylvania National Guard!!! |
|
DaSneaky1D
one wall to block them all
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
·Charter Pipeline
| reply to systems2000
Re: What I find funny
I actually found the answer with that link. So they were suppose to offer it at reasonable residential rates. That's all I wanted to know. Thanks for looking it up!
--
] ::my trivial ramblings:: [ |
|
Frank
is chilling
Premium
join:2000-11-03
somewhere
 ·Verizon FIOS
| reply to waynemr
Re: Pennsylvania is over a barrel
said by waynemr :
It sucks, but what else can they do. Well, I guess they could seize all of the assets of Verizon until they pay, lol! Call out the Pennsylvania National Guard!!!
i would love to see that happen........ 
--
Stop using P2P!, buy pirated cd's instead  |
|
