how-to block ads
|
|
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
 XBL2009------
join:2001-01-03
Chicago, IL
 ·EarthLink
·AT&T Midwest
| reply to Tzale
Re: Lousy said by Tzale:Sorry.. But we live in a capitalist free country... If you can't get a service, move to where you can get it, or hope that Verizon speeds up it's deployment to your area, or purchases the telco in your area. The thing is that this country is doing just fine when it comes to broadband... I don't want to live in a country where private companies are told to deploy 30mbit broadband to rural areas with one or two customers per square mile.. If those people want broadband, they'll have to either foot the bill themselves (unlikely) or move to where it is available.. As for suburban areas? Eventually they will be upgraded too.. It's all about competition. Here in Northern New Jersey, Optimum Online and Verizon FIOS are competing with each other. We're one of the first areas in the country to receive upgrades to the services because of the heavy competition.. OOL used to have a "monopoly" here, since their 10mbps/1mbps was far better than VZ DSL. When FIOS starting coming around, they upgraded everyone to 15/2 for free, then 30/2 and finally 30/5 was added as a tier. FIOS offers higher bandwidth packages here because of competition. Capitalism treats consumers good when they make wise decisions and vote with their wallet. If you are stuck with companies that don't compete, then you got a problem.  -Tzale So many points to make:
1. 99 percent of Americans can't get 30/5 speed.
2. It's still to expensive.
3. There is no competition in most areas, either DSL or cable and sometimes neither.
4. In 1994 the bells sign a deal to wire up everyone with fiber and then renege on the deal but still took the money.
5. Government was involved in getting everyone phone service otherwise most people still would not have it because telcom companies are only interested in profits.
6. People don't have to move to buy other products or services, most are available wherever you live in the usa. The same should be so for broadband services as well.
7. Stop making excuses for large corporations who have no interest in doing anything except making Billions in profit and complaining that it's still not enough.
8. The Bells should stop suing small towns and areas that want to build muni-wireless services for themselves when they know they aren't going to supply the service themselves.
--
Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.
Benjamin Franklin
| |
stevephl
join:2000-11-27
Colorado Springs, CO | Your assertion that the government had to step in to ensure everyone had phone service otherwise most folks would not have service because the phone companies are only interested in profits (I hope so we are investors after all) is ludicrous, profits come from people buying the service, if no one, or very few have service no profits get it? The government stepped in to set standards so that people in Iowa would be able to talk to people in New York for instance. A free market economy would bring phone service to all eventually. It is when the government intrudes on the free market, setting unfair laws, unfair taxation that competition is denied and we have poorer service. | |
 TzaleProud Libertarian ConservativePremium
join:2004-01-06
NYC Metro | reply to XBL2009
said by XBL2009:said by Tzale:Sorry.. But we live in a capitalist free country... If you can't get a service, move to where you can get it, or hope that Verizon speeds up it's deployment to your area, or purchases the telco in your area. The thing is that this country is doing just fine when it comes to broadband... I don't want to live in a country where private companies are told to deploy 30mbit broadband to rural areas with one or two customers per square mile.. If those people want broadband, they'll have to either foot the bill themselves (unlikely) or move to where it is available.. As for suburban areas? Eventually they will be upgraded too.. It's all about competition. Here in Northern New Jersey, Optimum Online and Verizon FIOS are competing with each other. We're one of the first areas in the country to receive upgrades to the services because of the heavy competition.. OOL used to have a "monopoly" here, since their 10mbps/1mbps was far better than VZ DSL. When FIOS starting coming around, they upgraded everyone to 15/2 for free, then 30/2 and finally 30/5 was added as a tier. FIOS offers higher bandwidth packages here because of competition. Capitalism treats consumers good when they make wise decisions and vote with their wallet. If you are stuck with companies that don't compete, then you got a problem. -Tzale So many points to make: 1. 99 percent of Americans can't get 30/5 speed. 2. It's still to expensive. 3. There is no competition in most areas, either DSL or cable and sometimes neither. 4. In 1994 the bells sign a deal to wire up everyone with fiber and then renege on the deal but still took the money. 5. Government was involved in getting everyone phone service otherwise most people still would not have it because telcom companies are only interested in profits. 6. People don't have to move to buy other products or services, most are available wherever you live in the usa. The same should be so for broadband services as well. 7. Stop making excuses for large corporations who have no interest in doing anything except making Billions in profit and complaining that it's still not enough. 8. The Bells should stop suing small towns and areas that want to build muni-wireless services for themselves when they know they aren't going to supply the service themselves. OK, I'll run down your list...
1. I think that number is much lower... Verizon and other companies are rolling out faster service as fast as possible... A lot of areas have 10mbps or more service nowadays, which isn't bad.
2. How is it expensive? People pay $5 for a coffee at Starbucks, they pay $100/month for Cable, $100/month for phone service, but $30-50/month or so for a broadband connection is too much? It's an amazing deal considering how much usage / entertainment you get out of it..
3. DSL and Cable is good competition.. You can go with many different companies over DSL.. Problem with DSL is that it's an old technology... It's being replaced by FIOS and other technologies...
4. If that is true, (I know in PA that VZ did something along those lines), it is wrong. The Government shouldn't be giving handouts to private companies IMHO.
5. I don't think that is true... The Federal Government should stick to what it does best, or what it is SUPPOSED to do best... Securing our borders, maintaining a strong military, defending the Constitution and overall just protecting the American people.
6. Why shouldn't they move? It's a free country. If you live in the middle of no where, don't expect to get broadband... There are plenty of rural areas with no cable TV... A lot of areas only have power and telephone service or just power.. A lot of areas don't have public city sewers.
7. I'm not making excuses... I'm simply saying that private companies have a right to make whatever money they want. And as far as I can tell, they're all reasonable. Broadband is not a right, it's a service. If the people didn't like it, they wouldn't be paying for a service.
8. I agree 100%. They have a right to sue, as they are going to support their corporate interests... I think it's wrong.. Definitely when there is nothing in an agreement between the town/city and the company providing service to the town/city that would limit a municipal network.
I don't support corporations... I simply take a neutral view.. I'm actually rather anti-corporation... But they have a right to make money too.... In the end, I think a free market without government intervention would be best for the people of this country. But you must also realize that we aren't going to be seeing fiber to the boondocks anytime soon.
-Tzale
--
Neoconservatives (G.W.B) are not real conservatives. A conservative believes in defending the Constitution. First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. - RON PAUL 2008 »www.usconstitution.net/const.html
| |
| as far as handouts to companies, there should be strings attached to the money. like the companies have to make real progress then the government gives some of the money out. give out a 'loan' that doesn't need to be repaid (with interest) provided milestones are reached on time. i think it (giving money to companies) can be done safely, but it has to be done in such a way that the chance the government can't be burnt, but also is fair to the companies recieving the money (as in realistic goals/expectations). | |
|
