 NOCManMacChatterPremium
join:2004-09-30
Colorado Springs, CO | reply to RadioDoc
Re: a data service, not a phone service They apply to DSL lines for the telephone side. Not many people can get a "DRY" loop.
The laws need to be adjusted to include cable and/or any voip provider who is providing service across a not traditional telephone line.
They also need to ensure the money is being spent to provide service to Rural areas rather than padding corporate profits. |
|
RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | Anyone in ATT land can get a 'dry loop'. The USF on POTS is irrelevant and certainly does not apply to this discussion.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. |
|
|
|
stevephl
join:2000-11-27
Colorado Springs, CO | reply to NOCMan
Better yet eliminate the USF all together, not needed any longer, all subsidizes should be eliminated as well. |
|
| reply to NOCMan
said by NOCMan:They apply to DSL lines for the telephone side. Not many people can get a "DRY" loop. The laws need to be adjusted to include cable and/or any voip provider who is providing service across a not traditional telephone line. They also need to ensure the money is being spent to provide service to Rural areas rather than padding corporate profits. AMEN.
The current fund certainly is about funding small telephone companies. Sort of doesn't make sense to subsidize a small (250,000 - random number) telephone company than the subsidy the feds caused by killing off the independent ISP industry (same rationale short of who built infrastructure first).
I'm not so sure the USF doesn't "pad corporate profits" even with the smallest companies..isn't profit profit? |
|
