Search:  

 
 
   All ForumsHot TopicsGallery






how-to block ads


 
Forums » Court Rules for Vonage in Universal Service Fund Case » a data service, not a phone service
 
Search Topic:
  Share Topic:
RSS topic:
 toggle:
flat / full
normal / watch
Post a:
Post a:
« Making the wrong point  
AuthorAll Replies


Piggie
Frying Noises in My Brain
Premium
join:2005-11-23
Orange Springs, FL
·HughesNet Satellit..
·Windstream

reply to halfband
Re: a data service, not a phone service

said by halfband See Profile :

... The USF was originally set up to provide pots in rural areas that would have been money losers to wire and service. Since this fund depends on service in one area to subsidise another ... The USF is an obsolete idea that will shortly need an overhaul to move into the current age.
So I am a rural POTS customer. Which means to me it's a surtax to support my own rural POTS. If the intention was to subsidize me from an urban area, then it should not be on my phone bill either. Or I wish! :@)
--
| Speedstream 4200 Modem - 3m/384 plan | W98-W2KSP4-XPSP2 - All AMD | Buffalo WHR G54S with Tomato 1.13 | 3 downstream switches feeding 6 total clients (no wireless) | Including the Data port on the side of my neck |

xsiddalx

join:2005-03-11
Chicago, IL
·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service

I think the overall idea of the Feds was to increase your rates and reduce the costs of LD (imo). Increasing the surcharge and tacking on the USF expense certainly is a step in the right direction...placing more costs on the infrastructure user and less on the telephone user.

The long term goal is to get all of the customers to pay their own pay...

The hope is that cellular, cable, over the top voip, long distance providers + pots, clecs all provide enough competition (again, IMO).

Voice services certainly seem competitive enough these days.
The trick is getting broadband competitive now, to enable more competition in wireless over the top voice (again, imo). USF won't go away, nor will takes. Anyone want to take a stab on why none of the communications company want to add a pass through for their federal income taxes?

said by Piggie See Profile :

said by halfband See Profile :

... The USF was originally set up to provide pots in rural areas that would have been money losers to wire and service. Since this fund depends on service in one area to subsidise another ... The USF is an obsolete idea that will shortly need an overhaul to move into the current age.
So I am a rural POTS customer. Which means to me it's a surtax to support my own rural POTS. If the intention was to subsidize me from an urban area, then it should not be on my phone bill either. Or I wish! :@)
Forums » Court Rules for Vonage in Universal Service Fund Case« Making the wrong point  

Most commented news this week
· [167] East Coast Verizon Workers Authorize Strike
· [163] Is AT&T Hinting At Usage-Based Pricing This Fall?
· [147] Time Warner Cable Using Fine Print To Foist Caps On Customers
· [124] Is Broadband A Civil Right?
· [111] The Great Landline Exodus Continues
· [94] Update Your Browser, Dummy
· [82] What's Your Favorite Newsgroup Provider?
· [73] Google's Cerf: Baby Bells Act Like Tots Having Tantrums
· [71] NY AG Will Sue Comcast If They Don't Pretend To Fight Child Porn
· [66] All Markets Will See U-Verse Dual HD Streams By Q3
Friday, 25-Jul
14:10:02
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
8th year online! © 1999-2008 dslreports.com.
page compression OFF