| Burstein says but gives no proof This was his whole post on the subject:
Quietly, Verizon and AT&T are making a big push to raid the Universal Service Fund, which is designed to help small rural carriers, not immensely profitable giants. They are burying the request in fine print and obscure phrases, using some of the usual fronts, and hoping to get billions in corporate welfare. Where's the beef? He has stated an opinion but shows no proof to back it up.
--
--
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| You're usually so good with Google when trying to throttle the evil socialists, TCH! Very disappointing.
Verizon's Tom Tauke has been pushing the idea of a national broadband strategy as the company takes aim at funds within the RUS:
»Verizon Wants National Broadband Strategy
And the USF:
quote:
The telecom giant also called on the U.S. Congress to make changes the Universal Service Fund program, a $4 billion program that subsidizes telephone access in rural and poor areas. Instead of providing USF funds to multiple carriers, the U.S. government should cap USF at its current funding levels, and require carriers to bid to provide service in areas where subsidies are needed, Tauke said.
»www.infoworld.com/archives/email···s_1.html |
|
1 edit | Did Burstein provide any proof?
I didn't see it.
You looked something up which doesn't say that Verizon is RAIDING the USF. Just that they think changes are needed.
P.S> what does your new avatar signify? Some kind of socialist workers flag?
--
--
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
| quote:
You looked something up which doesn't say that Verizon is RAIDING the USF. Just that they think changes are needed.
You say Tomato.... |
|
| Hey Karl! You coming over tonight? We're gonna practice "The Internationale" in four-part harmony while wearing berets and Che' t-shirts and then burn Jack Welsh in effigy. After that the Speed Barricade Team is gonna practice for the upcoming World Championships in Albania.
Good times. Good times. |
|
 Farley3Holyshnikes
join:2002-01-23
Croswell, MI | reply to fAcEtIOUs
Didn't you get the Memo.. If its a Link on DSLreports, its automatically true. |
|
approval from:
fAcEtIOUs 
| reply to Karl Bode
AT&T and Verizon are motivated by profit. The USF is a slush fund. The USF slush fund mostly consists of taking money from Verizon and AT&T and giving it to rural telcos. Some amount of the money taken from Verizon and AT&T, they pass on to their consumers in higher costs. Some amount of the money given to rural telcos, they pass on to their consumers in the form of lower costs. People argue about the fraction of the funds that go to higher and lower costs for consumers, respectively, and how much hit the bottom line of Verizon and AT&T for bad and the rural telcos for good, respectively.
From these absolutely true statements, we conclude:
Verizon and AT&T are almost surely calling for a reduction in the subsidies that they pay the rural telcos. Even the newsletter itself says that. The other link you quote calls for a cap on the USF fund; that is, keeping the overall size of the slush fund down. They also appear to want to the right to bid for performing rural telco service cheaper than the local incumbents.
Considering that the entire USF fund is paid into by the telcos themselves, it seems ridiculous to argue that somehow Verizon and AT&T paying less into the fund and subsidizing the rural telcos less would be a form of corporate welfare for them. Might be bad for rural telcos and rural consumers, of course.
I can only conclude that either Karl supports a higher USF slush fund and corporate welfare to the rural telcos, or else he's just too blindly suspicious to actually read the articles he links. |
|
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
2 edits | quote:
Verizon and AT&T are almost surely calling for a reduction in the subsidies that they pay the rural telcos.
Yes, almost surely! 
Or they're hungry to get their hands on RUS and USF monies that are poorly managed and doled out to rural providers, frequently for doing very little.
I see no evidence that the telco interest here is to improve the functionality or efficiency of the USF. Telco lobbyists do nothing that does not in some way improve their finances. Lobbyist philanthropy simply does not exist, and I feel stupid even typing that sentence.
quote:
The USF slush fund mostly consists of taking money from Verizon and AT&T and giving it to rural telcos.
Don't you mean taking money from Verizon and AT&T customers? Verizon and AT&T get a lot of that money back, too. Also, VoIP customers now contribute to the USF, and incumbent DSL lines are no longer included in contributions. The largest contributors to the USF are now wireless phone customers. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| reply to John T
said by John T :
The USF is a slush fund. The USF slush fund mostly consists of taking money from Verizon and AT&T and giving it to rural telcos. ...
You are absolutely right that the USF is a slush fund (at least used as a slush fund).
but you start out with step 2 above; step 1 is "take the entire USF charge and pass it on to consumers", THEN they give it away to rural telcos. There is no reason at all for the incumbents to care how much the slush fund, I mean USF, charge is or how it is spent. Other than perhaps a desire to keep that money in their own pockets. |
|
|
|
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| reply to TScheisskopf
Re: Burstein says but gives no proof quote:
Hey Karl! You coming over tonight? We're gonna practice "The Internationale" in four-part harmony while wearing berets and Che' t-shirts and then burn Jack Welsh in effigy.
I'm game. Only if we can talk about really subversive shit, like oh....the belief that we shouldn't go around killing everyone for profit, or the belief that people should have decent medicine! |
|
| GASP!!!
You 5th columnists are all alike. Next thing you know, you'll be defending the rise in the minimum wage. |
|
| reply to Karl Bode
Re: AT&T and Verizon are motivated by profit. Isn't it too early in the season for astroturf to be in bloom? Why do I keep smelling it? |
|
| reply to Karl Bode
Re: Burstein says but gives no proof Well actually..not sure what Dave was specifically referring to but T is finally jumping into the game.
»www.fcc.gov/wcb/tapd/universal_s···ost.html
Feel free to browse.
T and VZ (on the cellular side) have stayed out of the USF but T seems to be dipping their toes in and VZ will certainly follow. Both have been foolishly shorting $ to their stockholders (IMO). In all cases, all costs of funding have been line itemed to the customer (and not in a manner similar to a tax) since the LD companies began it. Heck, maybe we should all bend over and start paying the pass through fees that companies pay for local real estate taxes, local market employment rate differentials..etc....
In the end, maybe we can get a 5 dollar all you can eat bill with line items for all opex and capex costs, better yet, by opex and capex items and even better, by local market (of course the cost of the CEO won't be included, but will be buried in the monthly fee).
Can't wait for the day that we go to our local quickie mart and pay pass through fees for local/state and federal taxes
in addition to our sales taxes that are based on the aforementioned. Lack of competition in telecom/cable?
said by Karl Bode:You're usually so good with Google when trying to throttle the evil socialists, TCH! Very disappointing. Verizon's Tom Tauke has been pushing the idea of a national broadband strategy as the company takes aim at funds within the RUS: » Verizon Wants National Broadband StrategyAnd the USF: quote:
The telecom giant also called on the U.S. Congress to make changes the Universal Service Fund program, a $4 billion program that subsidizes telephone access in rural and poor areas. Instead of providing USF funds to multiple carriers, the U.S. government should cap USF at its current funding levels, and require carriers to bid to provide service in areas where subsidies are needed, Tauke said.
» www.infoworld.com/archives/email···s_1.html |
|
