Re: lost commerce in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r16933888 en Sun, 29 Nov 2009 17:37:16 EDT Sun, 29 Nov 2009 17:37:16 EDT Re: lost commerce http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16949729 batterup :
said by Skippy25 See Profile :

Well unless any of us were present when they presented this then we can only "assume" it was a big lie.

Do you think someone would have written up a contract setting exactly what was to be done by all involved? Yes they made a law, the law is public record, the original law has been amended, it also is public record. Ask Teletruth to give you a link to the law, it is fascinating reading, I could not put it down.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16949729 Thu, 21 Sep 2006 20:25:19 EDT Re: lost commerce http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16942920 Skippy25 : Well unless any of us were present when they presented this then we can only "assume" it was a big lie.

I guess with that mind set they never screwed over anyone and have always provided just as they have promised.

That is honestly the best you can come up with? Contact some of your phone buddies. They can surely provide you with better than that. PM TK, I am sure there is a school or something he can send you to.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16942920 Wed, 20 Sep 2006 20:12:31 EDT Re: lost commerce http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16942399 batterup : You got that right, you don't know if it was federal, state or local. Surprise, surprise, Verizon did not exist when the agreement was entered into with Pennsylvania; most of the state was GTE. I know what the agreement was and even though the agreement has been modified Verizon can and will honor the original agreement.

Bellatlantic did two broadband trials in New Jersey; before the projects were finished the technology was obsolete. Remember when a PC doubled in power and dropped in price every 18 months. The same happened with broadband equipment. Bellatlantic canceled the third trial. A PC no longer doubles in power and drop in price in 18 months and FIOS will be able to do the job until I die.

Ask Teletruth for foot notes and their source. I ass/u/me they are talking about a Bellatlantic/Pennsylvania agreement but they don’t/can’t give a reference. The agreement is NOTHING even remotely what they shovel. No one is going to go bankrupt to run tubes so Microsoft can make Bill another $44 billion.

America wanted companies to compete for communication business, competing means doing what ever is necessary to make money for the stock holders or the stock holders will sell and bankrupt the company.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16942399 Wed, 20 Sep 2006 18:58:09 EDT Re: lost commerce http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16941535 footballdude :
said by Tsume See Profile :

I believe an agreement was made between the govt and the telcos- I don't think the telcos simply said 'give us money so we can make this' - after all it is the government who makes the laws for adding taxes.
I can remember something like that happening in Pennsylvania with Verizon but I don't remember any sweeping federal legislation.
--
What's certain about Darwinism is that it would take less time for (1) a single-celled organism to evolve into a human being through mutation and natural selection than for (2) Darwinists to admit they have no proof of (1) - Ann Coulter]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16941535 Wed, 20 Sep 2006 16:34:26 EDT Re: lost commerce http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16940990 Tsume : I believe an agreement was made between the govt and the telcos- I don't think the telcos simply said 'give us money so we can make this' - after all it is the government who makes the laws for adding taxes.
--
"True warriors do not follow paths, they make them. It is not just their desire, it is their nature." (Battletech)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16940990 Wed, 20 Sep 2006 15:17:48 EDT Re: lost commerce http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16939671 batterup :
said by Skippy25 See Profile :

Tsume is correct and you are speaking on something you obviously have not researched or kept up with.

They received a couple hundred billion dollars at their request and promise to deliver symetrical 20mb broadband. Not this crap we have now.

Do you have any idea how much "profit" these guys have reported in that last quarter alone? So why are they being subsidized at all?
Post a link that does not lead to Teletruth as Teletruth does not list where it pulled the information from. Post the agreement between who and what. You don't even know who or what do you?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16939671 Wed, 20 Sep 2006 11:46:30 EDT Re: lost commerce http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16939643 batterup :
said by Skippy25 See Profile :

Really? So the American people haven't given these greedy bastards over $200 billion dollars in "government incentives" over the last 20 years alone to provide broadband on their promises?

No, that is a lie spread by people that can't back it up. That number was pulled from a place where the moon doesn't shine.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16939643 Wed, 20 Sep 2006 11:43:18 EDT Re: lost commerce http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16938952 footballdude :
said by Tsume See Profile :

The money people were (forced) to pay in tax dollars in order to subsidize the telco deployment was quite obviously spent mainly on increasing profit instead of what it was intended to be spent on (current state of broadband affairs proves this quite nicely).
At what point did the telcos say 'give us money so we can build a broadband network'? Any money paid in the past was to build the current copper network, which works very nicely and is available everywhere.
--
What's certain about Darwinism is that it would take less time for (1) a single-celled organism to evolve into a human being through mutation and natural selection than for (2) Darwinists to admit they have no proof of (1) - Ann Coulter]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16938952 Wed, 20 Sep 2006 09:40:20 EDT Re: lost commerce http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16937767 Skippy25 : Tsume is correct and you are speaking on something you obviously have not researched or kept up with.

They received a couple hundred billion dollars at their request and promise to deliver symetrical 20mb broadband. Not this crap we have now.

Do you have any idea how much "profit" these guys have reported in that last quarter alone? So why are they being subsidized at all?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16937767 Wed, 20 Sep 2006 01:36:31 EDT Re: lost commerce http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16937729 Skippy25 : Really? So the American people haven't given these greedy bastards over $200 billion dollars in "government incentives" over the last 20 years alone to provide broadband on their promises?

Remember back in the late 80's they were begging for this so they can deliver 20mb to a vast majority of the country. This was their asking, it wasn't us begging for it like we are now. Where is that 20mb (not very common)? Where has all that money they begged for and received gone? Where is the accountability for those promises and failed deliveries?

Nothing has changed and it never will until they reimburse the American people the billions (if not trillions) of dollars we "gave them" for the networks. WE built the original network based on incentives and monopolies. No matter how many times they change it that fact will never change or transfer ownership. Especially when they continue lobbying and getting OUR money through "incentives" (not just monopoly/duopoly profits). ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16937729 Wed, 20 Sep 2006 01:28:40 EDT Re: lost commerce http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16936376 Tsume : Sadly the book is no longer available for download, but this and many more questions were answered inside the 200bn dollar broadband scandal book that there was a news article here about.
--
"True warriors do not follow paths, they make them. It is not just their desire, it is their nature." (Battletech)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16936376 Tue, 19 Sep 2006 21:49:05 EDT Re: lost commerce http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16936075 dispatcher21 : "Spent mainly on increasing profit instead of what it was intended to be spent on" What was it intended to be spent on? From my understanding the tax untax we were forced to pay on our phone bills had nothing to do with broadband, it is for the phone portion of the telco business and it was not intended to be put into an upgrade fund, it was intended to help the phone companies maintain the network at hand and allow more people access to it. Again, you only have to be serviced with a dial tone and they have met the inteded purpose of the "tax not really a tax" fee since it has nothing to do with broadband but with dial tone. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16936075 Tue, 19 Sep 2006 21:09:15 EDT Re: lost commerce http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16935700 Tsume : Right- except the money the people payed for bullets got spent mostly on bullets.

The money people were (forced) to pay in tax dollars in order to subsidize the telco deployment was quite obviously spent mainly on increasing profit instead of what it was intended to be spent on (current state of broadband affairs proves this quite nicely).
--
"True warriors do not follow paths, they make them. It is not just their desire, it is their nature." (Battletech)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16935700 Tue, 19 Sep 2006 20:12:06 EDT Re: lost commerce http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16934902 dispatcher21 : Consumers havent paid for any upgrades. In your monthly bill, you pay for your current services and to make sure your company makes a profit each quarter and if the company so deems it, puts away some for future upgrades. They dont have to save for future upgrades but most smart companies do but the majority of the monthly bill is to show a profit to make shareholders happy(remember, they are a FOR PROFIT company). Telco companies in almost all states are only required to service you with a dial tone so if you get dsl be happy about it. Cable is unregulated so no one can tell them what to do since local governments cant tell them what to do in negotioations anymore. No, consumers havent paid for anything but what you currently have. Again, its not the telco or cable companies job or responsiblity to make sure other companies make money. Remember, broadband is not required to live, its a total luxury, the excuse of..oh you need it for school and to do reseach and blah blah...that can all be done on dial up or at your local library where they have free computers with internet. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16934902 Tue, 19 Sep 2006 18:06:48 EDT Re: lost commerce http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16934699 Skippy25 : No it's not. Come up with another stupid analogy will you.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16934699 Tue, 19 Sep 2006 17:29:25 EDT Re: lost commerce http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16934658 footballdude :
said by Tsume See Profile :

Consumers have already payed for it... more than once.
That's like saying there shouldn't be a defense budget because we bought a lot of bullets back in 1942.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16934658 Tue, 19 Sep 2006 17:21:34 EDT Re: lost commerce http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16933888 shoan : and everytime they toss out numbers that say well it cost a few thousand dollars to pass a house. I know this is just a divided number of the total cost. But I would gladly pay the money to get hooked up never said otherwise. I know they made their copper network pay off for them over time same would happen with fiber. They get enough money from the government to "help with operating costs" in various forms and fashions that they can deploy more broadband to the people. And in turn having mre people online faster will have us using those sites more which raises the content providers bandwidth requirements which in turn raises their bill for bandwidth which is the increased profit. Then we have to upgrade to higher speeds to access all those goodies out there and then in turn pay more for higher bandwidth packages and increasing their profits on the consumer end again. So increased operations will pay for the network itself. Which is exactly what your asking for the users to help pay for the network.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16933888 Tue, 19 Sep 2006 15:32:28 EDT Re: lost commerce http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16933744 Tsume : Consumers have already payed for it... more than once.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16933744 Tue, 19 Sep 2006 15:12:43 EDT Re: lost commerce http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16933673 dispatcher21 : Why arent those companies losing revenue helping out the telcos and cable companies by contributing to thier build out fund? Its not the telco or cable companies job to build out infastructure so that other companies can make money off of it, it is thier job to build it out so that they can make money off of it since they own it. You state that a lot of commerce is lost due to the hold back of deploying technology in the broadband market yet you dont say who should be paying to deploy it. Again, if those companies losing revenue dont want to lose revenue, they are free to build out thier own techology and network to recoup that lost revenue, it is not up to the telco or cable companies to make sure other companies make money.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16933673 Tue, 19 Sep 2006 15:00:51 EDT lost commerce http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16933407 shoan : regardless of who is pushing for fiber I still believe that the Telco's and Cable companies are holding back alot of revenue for other companies by limiting a huge chunk of the country from a reasonable speed of access to the people who are begging for it and wanting to give money to have the speeds. We don't all want a free ride never said that. There is just alot of commerce lost in this country due to the hold back of deploying technology in the broadband market.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16933407 Tue, 19 Sep 2006 14:16:37 EDT