 yockTFTCPremium
join:2000-11-21
Miamisburg, OH
kudos:3 | Conflict of interest? Maybe... So this guy doesn't exactly have a background that lends credibility to his position, but holding against him the fact that he campaigns against government regulation of commerce is far from a negative. One need not look any further than New York City Rent Control policies of mere decades ago to see the pooch-screwing that is possible when government meddles in the free market.
The notion lately that telecom companies must sign franchise agreements *REQUIRING* them to build out is simply outlandish. We all make trade-offs when we choose to settle in certain parts of the country. If I choose to live in East Jesus, USA, then I should be cognizant of the notion that I may not be able to get high-speed data access.
There's also the opportunity here for small entrepreneurs to capitalize on a moderate risk investment. If the demand truly exists in rural areas, then savvy business persons can do business in those niche markets far more efficiently than Mama Bell and her Timely sibling could ever dream of. Encourage small business to lease lines from the major carriers and resell to rural customers. If rural customers pickup the service, then excellent! If they don't, then the market has spoken.
--
Wiki Wiki
Laughter is the closest distance between two people. --Victor Borge |
|
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
2 edits | quote:
So this guy doesn't exactly have a background that lends credibility to his position, but holding against him the fact that he campaigns against government regulation of commerce is far from a negative.
It's not the campaigning against regulation that's a problem, it's doing it under the guise of consumer advocacy. Lazy press picks this stuff up as independent and objective research, when it's really political PR. |
|
yockTFTCPremium
join:2000-11-21
Miamisburg, OH
kudos:3 | said by Karl Bode: quote:
So this guy doesn't exactly have a background that lends credibility to his position, but holding against him the fact that he campaigns against government regulation of commerce is far from a negative.
It's not the campaigning against regulation that's a problem, it's the pretense that it is being done under the guise of consumer advocacy. No, you assume that it's being done under some guise. I'll grant you that you're probably right and this guy is likely just a sleazeball, but I'm not ready to assassinate his entire argument simply based on his industry affiliation.
--
Wiki Wiki
Laughter is the closest distance between two people. --Victor Borge |
|
| I don't assasinate the argument. I assasinate the pretense of consumer advocacy. And it's no assumption. I spent half of yesterday digging into the site and Pociask, and can promise you they're as much consumer advocates as you are yodeler. |
|
yockTFTCPremium
join:2000-11-21
Miamisburg, OH
kudos:3
2 edits | Oh forget it, I misread that.
--
Wiki Wiki
Laughter is the closest distance between two people. --Victor Borge |
|
 PhoenixDown-- Wants FIOSPremium
join:2003-06-08
Fresh Meadows, NY
kudos:1 | reply to yock
I believe people have attempted to bring services to these areas on thier own but have met with resistance from the dominant telco and cable operators in the area.
--
Mass Transit Sucks! |
|
| reply to Karl Bode
said by Karl Bode: quote:
So this guy doesn't exactly have a background that lends credibility to his position, but holding against him the fact that he campaigns against government regulation of commerce is far from a negative.
It's not the campaigning against regulation that's a problem, it's doing it under the guise of consumer advocacy. Lazy press picks this stuff up as independent and objective research, when it's really political PR. A business environment without onerous government regulation is GOOD for the consumer. So, in effect, it is consumer advocacy.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
My Web Page |
|
djeremy
join:2004-07-12
San Francisco, CA | reply to yock
Encourage small business to lease lines from the major carriers and resell to rural customers. If rural customers pickup the service, then excellent! If they don't, then the market has spoken. Isn't this exactly what the bells are fighting in court? The do not want to lease their lines.
»www.techweb.com/wire/ebiz/192201257 |
|
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
2 edits | reply to fAcEtIOUs
quote:
A business environment without onerous government regulation is GOOD for the consumer. So, in effect, it is consumer advocacy.
Nice try.
However warping reality to fit your financially motivated argument does not actually change reality. |
|
|
|
plat2on1
join:2002-08-21
Hopewell Junction, NY | reply to djeremy
said by djeremy:Encourage small business to lease lines from the major carriers and resell to rural customers. If rural customers pickup the service, then excellent! If they don't, then the market has spoken. Isn't this exactly what the bells are fighting in court? The do not want to lease their lines. » www.techweb.com/wire/ebiz/192201257 no..they want to not be forced to lease their lines at BELOW cost |
|
djeremy
join:2004-07-12
San Francisco, CA | you honestly believe that? at&t and verizon have done everything they can to wipe out the competition including merging and acquiring. |
|
yockTFTCPremium
join:2000-11-21
Miamisburg, OH
kudos:3 | reply to plat2on1
said by plat2on1:said by djeremy:Encourage small business to lease lines from the major carriers and resell to rural customers. If rural customers pickup the service, then excellent! If they don't, then the market has spoken. Isn't this exactly what the bells are fighting in court? The do not want to lease their lines. » www.techweb.com/wire/ebiz/192201257 no..they want to not be forced to lease their lines at BELOW cost Indeed, telecom providers should be allowed to charge a fair price for leased lines. It must be profitable for them to do it, else we're right back where we started.
--
Wiki Wiki
Laughter is the closest distance between two people. --Victor Borge |
|
disc
join:2005-12-31
Raleigh, NC | reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:A business environment without onerous government regulation is GOOD for the consumer. So, in effect, it is consumer advocacy. [Sarcasm]
And who better to advocate for consumers than businesses, no?
Of course, the real risk is that companies will overdo it and forget about their poor stock holders. What a difficult balance they must strike.
[/Sarcasm] |
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:A business environment without onerous government regulation is GOOD for the consumer. So, in effect, it is consumer advocacy. doesn't seem to be working too good for broadband. |
|
| You have to wait for the trickle down effect I guess?
I don't know.
The plan:
Step 1: Give corporations everything they want.
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Consumer's win!
Sounds utterly fool proof to me. |
|
yockTFTCPremium
join:2000-11-21
Miamisburg, OH
kudos:3 | said by Karl Bode:You have to wait for the trickle down effect I guess? I don't know. The plan: Step 1: Give corporations everything they want. Step 2: ??? Step 3: Consumer's win! Sounds utterly fool proof to me. You have this notion that de-regulating an industry is in some way "giving" corporations something. In fact, you're simply removing roadblocks to profitability. Sure, they'll do business precisely where they want, at what price they want, and that's it...
Doesn't that make perfect sense?
Corporations aren't purveyors of goodwill, they aren't charitable, and they sure as hell aren't looking out for anyone but themselves. Why should they? It's business.
If consumers would work harder to be better informed, and actually act on the disgust they find in the actions of corporate America, then corporate America would feel the penalties for their actions where it matters: their bottom line.
Uncle Sam has no business dictating where I, you, or Verizon does business.
--
Wiki Wiki
Laughter is the closest distance between two people. --Victor Borge |
|
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| said by yock:You have this notion that de-regulating an industry is in some way "giving" corporations something. In fact, you're simply removing roadblocks to profitability. Sure, they'll do business precisely where they want, at what price they want, and that's it... Doesn't that make perfect sense? Corporations aren't purveyors of goodwill, they aren't charitable, and they sure as hell aren't looking out for anyone but themselves. Why should they? It's business. If consumers would work harder to be better informed, and actually act on the disgust they find in the actions of corporate America, then corporate America would feel the penalties for their actions where it matters: their bottom line. Uncle Sam has no business dictating where I, you, or Verizon does business. that's the most incredible thing I've ever seen anybody post on this site. You apparently have no knowledge of the history of the ILECs and legislation that has affected the telecom business.
The incumbent telcos and cablecos were government granted monopolies. The 1996 telecom bill wasn't enforced very well (at all? half-heartedly?) and competition couldn't surmount the obstacles the ILECs put in their way. The telecom industry is back to monopoly/duopoly status. In my case, monopoly status - my only choice for broadband is comcast; no dsl, no fiber.
The current environment of deregulation has allowed the incumbents to once again dictate the price of broadband and the pace of progress. Now ranked 13th? or is it 16th? I forget, but it's not very high. That's what our policies of the last 10yrs have gotten us - from #1 in broadband in the world to 13th (or 16th). |
|
yockTFTCPremium
join:2000-11-21
Miamisburg, OH
kudos:3 | We've never experienced de-regulated telecom, so I don't know where you're coming from. In fact, you've demonstrated why it is so perilous for government to regulate commerce in this country. Had government-sanctioned monopolies not occurred in telecom then perhaps we would see a more diverse collection of CLECs and a more stable oligopoly of ILECs than what we have now.
--
Wiki Wiki
Laughter is the closest distance between two people. --Victor Borge |
|
bmn? ? ?Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus | reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:A business environment without onerous government regulation is GOOD for the consumer. So, in effect, it is consumer advocacy. Too bad the concept of "onerous government regulation" can't objectively be drawn in the sand. There is no way to factually establish when such a point is reached.
As for opposing "onerous government regulation" being "consumer advocacy," the problem is that people who typically oppose "onerous government regulation" present ideas and solutions that leave business holding all the power and consumers out in the cold. In other words, screwing one pooch to help another.
--
"Extremes to the right and left of any political dispute are always wrong."
—Dwight Eisenhower |
|
yockTFTCPremium
join:2000-11-21
Miamisburg, OH
kudos:3 | Consumers are only powerless when they have no choices and no alternatives. Show your "power" by not buying their products, and if necessary just go without a particular good or service.
If you can't live without internet access, then the market is charging what it will bear.
--
Wiki Wiki
Laughter is the closest distance between two people. --Victor Borge |
|
