how-to block ads
|
|
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
Re: Qwest between a rock and a hard place "Competition is putting current Qwest executives in a no-win situation" and "and the executives lose their jobs. So, the only thing they can do is go slow"
So, the executives are NOT acting in the best interests of the shareholders, the executives are acting to save their own jobs! Who'd a thought!.
If that's the case, then by all definitions of capitalism, Qwest should fail then! I mean, no government subsidies, no special laws, just capitalism, pure and simple. If Quest no longer makes financial sense, then it fails. The shareholders value drops to ZERO. Oh well, they took the risk, too bad they lose all their money. The only way they can prevent this from happening according to your description would be to *gasp*.. not practice true capitalism (i.e. get the government courts involved, etc).
(Poobah throws a bucket of water on the corporate apologists) Hmm..what's a corporate apologist to do! "I'm melting.. ahh, you wicked girl.. I'm melllllllting"
--
Sure the internet has lots of porn and piracy, but I'm sure there's a downside to it. | |
Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| You have a lot of opinions, but I think your getting carried away just a little. I've read some of your past posts, and you seem to contradict yourself heavily here. Do you want pure capitalism? Then the rbocs should not have to share the network with other carriers. If so, then the other technologies like cable, wireless etc should too. You want true capitalism? Local governments should not provide broadband then, that is a community , coming from commune , ie a communist ideology and therefore very far from what you want to achieve. You want pure capitalism? Then by all means verizon and the rest of the carriers should be able to pick and choose whom gets ftth. And I'll bet it would not be YOUR neighborhood. It would be the Hampton's NY, Beverly hills CA, etc...
Not that its not happening, but they aren't as flagrant as it would be otherwise. | | |
|
 oliphantI Have 8 BoobiesPremium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA | With that logic, gov't wouldn't be providing roads either.
Even if they don't provide the content portion of a service, a neutral ground of infrastructure would certainly be of benefit. You would then have content providers competiting for customers and unlike FIOS or other deployments you don't have customers having the choice of take it or leave it.
I feel this gov't deployment should only be done by munis who have bonds passed by the locals to pay for it so those using it are the ones paying for it.
What true capitalism? Get rid of public schools and every other public service. Partial capitalism works just fine, as does muni broadband.
--
WAR HAS NEVER SOLVED ANYTHING, except ending slavery, facism, communism, Nazism.... | |
|
