tdouglas22
join:2001-09-25
Memphis, TN | For Me....
I can only speak for myself in this situation but even though my finances are less than what they were before the economy went down, I'm still able to pay for my cable services with no problem. |
|
Chris 313
Come get some
Premium
join:2004-07-18
Houma, LA
clubs:
 ·Comcast
·Comcast
·Charter Pipeline
 ·Comcast Digital Vo..
·AT&T CallVantage
| said by tdouglas22  :I can only speak for myself in this situation but even though my finances are less than what they were before the economy went down, I'm still able to pay for my cable services with no problem. I agree with that. I've done the same. It's all about budgeting, eh? |
|
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
 ·T-Mobile US
| reply to tdouglas22
said by tdouglas22 :I can only speak for myself in this situation but even though my finances are less than what they were before the economy went down, I'm still able to pay for my cable services with no problem. It's less about people who are not able fto pay, it's more about people like me, who does not want to pay exorbitant torture fees for utter sh!t quality, compressed-as-hell forced channel packages, provided by crooked monopolies like this greedy piece of sh!t corporation called Time Warner Cable - when recession is in you will consider your spendings 2-3x more carefully and these boiling disgusts are the first things you're take care of...
--
[BQUOTE=[user=bicker]]Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them.
[/BQUOTE] |
|
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
·T-Mobile US
| reply to Chris 313
said by Chris 313 :said by tdouglas22 :I can only speak for myself in this situation but even though my finances are less than what they were before the economy went down, I'm still able to pay for my cable services with no problem. I agree with that. I've done the same. It's all about budgeting, eh? Exactly, that's why it's not about people not being able to pay but about not wanting to pay for such overpriced, worthless PoC service.
Let's face it: the average dumb American can survive without TV, even if (s)he first will feel lost (OMG, reading books! Watching DVDs, video streams! Spending more time with family!)) - I can only hope more and more people will dicth their shitty-quality cable, cut $150/mo cost and spend it on their family or just save it...
--
[BQUOTE=[user=bicker]]Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them.
[/BQUOTE] |
|
Jim Gurd
Premium
join:2000-07-08
Plymouth, MI
·Comcast
| reply to tdouglas22
This article describes cancelling service totally. As for me I downgraded to limited basic service due to the constant rate increases from Comcast. Those type of stats aren't talked about in this column.
My bill with internet is now $63 and is down from the $100 I had been paying. I found myself hardly watching television anymore so why pay for it?
--
Calling an illegal alien an undocumented worker is like calling a crack dealer an unlicensed pharmacist. |
|
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
·T-Mobile US
| said by Jim Gurd :This article describes cancelling service totally. As for me I downgraded to limited basic service due to the constant rate increases from Comcast. Those type of stats aren't talked about in this column. My bill with internet is now $63 and is down from the $100 I had been paying. I found myself hardly watching television anymore so why pay for it? Another good point, indeed.
--
[BQUOTE=[user=bicker]]Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them.
[/BQUOTE] |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
|  reply to tdouglas22
Cable TV is still cheap entertainment
said by tdouglas22 :I can only speak for myself in this situation but even though my finances are less than what they were before the economy went down, I'm still able to pay for my cable services with no problem. TV is still cheap relative to most other entertainment alternatives in a down economy. A night out at the movies or a play for 2 with dinner before or after costs as much as a month of cable TV. A couple could cut back a night or two from several nights out a month and be ahead in their monthly budget.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
weaver0
join:2004-05-05
Macungie, PA
| reply to Jim Gurd
Re: For Me....
said by Jim Gurd :This article describes cancelling service totally. As for me I downgraded to limited basic service due to the constant rate increases from Comcast. Those type of stats aren't talked about in this column. My bill with internet is now $63 and is down from the $100 I had been paying. I found myself hardly watching television anymore so why pay for it? Same thing here... I was able to shave $45/month by dropping to limited basic. Even prior to the "recession" I was contemplating this - cable TV offers less and less. |
|
rgarbin
join:2007-07-22
Jenkintown, PA
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to tdouglas22
I cut the cable in December. Bought a new antenna in January. I'm using the $80+ per month in savings on other things. Like putting some of it in the bank. Doing things with my family outside the house.
We rent videos from Netflix and watch more FREE internet content.
We're very happy with the decision. Anything that gets us to watch less is ultimately a good thing.
One other thing -- in a word: Bittorrent. |
|
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
·Comcast
| reply to Jim Gurd
I upgraded to digital + HD *AND* dropped the price - even after the 12 month promo runs out I'll be paying ~$27 less per month for my Comcast bill.
More for less, works for me!
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera |
|
bicker
join:2007-05-10
Burlington, MA
| reply to kamm
No one is forced, in any way, shape or form, to pay for cable service (beyond the strictly regulated, and therefore eminently affordable, local basic service). People don't want to pay for cable service because they would rather have more money to spend on other things -- it is as simple as that.
Practically no one who doesn't "want" to pay for cable service because they actually, honestly, consider it "overpriced" or "worthless", actually does pay for cable service, as you assert. Rather, they pay for cable service because they actually, honestly, consider it worth it despite their (and perhaps, your) excited protestations to the contrary. |
|
bicker
join:2007-05-10
Burlington, MA | reply to kamm
I have to give you props, though, for recognizing how often your comments are without merit, and for paying tribute to me in your signature. I'm flattered. |
|
bicker
join:2007-05-10
Burlington, MA
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Cable TV is still cheap entertainment
said by TKJunkMail :TV is still cheap relative to most other entertainment alternatives in a down economy. Good point. As a matter of fact, we actually won't see much downward pressure with regard to cable television rates, because as much as some folks will be reducing their service level to account for the bad economy, others will be switching their entertainment choices away from other, more costly entertainment options, as you alluded to, towards more affordable diversions, such as cable television. |
|
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
·T-Mobile US
| reply to bicker
Re: Cable TV is still cheap entertainment
said by bicker :said by TKJunkMail :TV is still cheap relative to most other entertainment alternatives in a down economy. Good point. As a matter of fact, we actually won't see much downward pressure with regard to cable television rates, because as much as some folks will be reducing their service level to account for the bad economy, others will be switching their entertainment choices away from other, more costly entertainment options, as you alluded to, towards more affordable diversions, such as cable television. Nonsense. People more and more recognizing what a WASTE their TV fees are, especially when compared to Netflix and similar services.
Don't buy into Junk's lame arguments - he's just trying to sell his corporations here, that's all. 
--
[BQUOTE=[user=bicker]]Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them.
[/BQUOTE] |
|
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
·T-Mobile US
2 edits | reply to bicker
Re: For Me....
said by bicker :No one is forced, in any way, shape or form, to pay for cable service (beyond the strictly regulated, and therefore eminently affordable, local basic service). People don't want to pay for cable service because they would rather have more money to spend on other things -- it is as simple as that.
Except that you seem to ignore the huge drop in cable TV quality with a constant price gouging every year.These two immediately render your argument false, sorry. Practically no one who doesn't "want" to pay for cable service because they actually, honestly, consider it "overpriced" or "worthless", actually does pay for cable service, as you assert.
Ehh? And you know it exactly how...? Pal, you're pulling sh!t out of thin air, let's face it. Rather, they pay for cable service because they actually, honestly, consider it worth it despite their (and perhaps, your) excited protestations to the contrary.
BS - they are doing it becuase of habits. Ask anyone and nobody will tell you it's a well-priced, decent service - instead they will all whine about being more and more expensive etc but they won't do shit because they are addicted to this crap. --
said by bicker :Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them. |
|
bicker
join:2007-05-10
Burlington, MA
| As I said, no one is forced, in any way, shape or form, to pay for cable service. No one. You seem to be ignoring that. You also seem to be saying that everyone else is an idiot and you're the only intelligent person, when the reality is that other people don't share your beliefs and values. Indeed, there are so many more of those "other" people that what you think is practically without merit. You're frustrated about that, that's clear. However, that is your problem, not theirs. They're getting what they want. You're not. They win. You lose. And getting frustrated about it doesn't actually improve your situation.
You choose to say that there has been a decrease in quality, ignoring excellent shows like Breaking Bad, Mad Men, In Plain Sight, etc. You refuse to acknowledge the reality that cable networks actually offer more, and better, service than they ever have before.
And your puerile vulgarity doesn't support your perspective either; it just makes it clearer that all we're reading is the rantings of a juvenile, or someone choosing to present themselves as such because they have no desire to engage in a mature discussion. |
|
Titus Pullo
I came, I saw, I slept
join:2004-06-26
·Embarq
| reply to kamm
I bumped into the guy I bought my house from 'not too long ago'. When I first met him to talk about the place I mentioned there was no cable or roof antenna, and this is rural area with maybe four OTA channels of low quality.
He said he wouldn't let his kids (three) watch TV. They had a dialup connection and could use that from time to time.
FF to 'not too long ago'. All three of his kids received scholarships to college - one of them a cream of the crop school. All THREE. I found it illuminating to say the least.
Of course, you can't blame it all on TV; a great deal of credit goes to the parents (and the kids), but I distinctly remember him saying the kids read books from the library rather than watch TV. You can't deny the connection.
-- |
|
bicker
join:2007-05-10
Burlington, MA
| reply to Anon
Socialism isn't the answer
You're not calling for anything. You're ranting. You claim the prices are over-priced, but then we point out how many millions of people are paying those prices, so you make up some other fiction to try to rationalize why they do so... accusing "them" of being "addicted". It reminds me a little of John Lovitz. "Yeah, that's the ticket."
You're anti-capitalism. Okay. That does put a lot of your ranting in context. However, this is a capitalist country. Just about half of our country supports a distinctly pro-business perspective. They don't buy into your socialistic, alarmist attempts to foster class warfare in our society, by demonizing the affluent.
However, this is not a political forum, so your self-centered distortions are not appropriate here. |
|
bicker
join:2007-05-10
Burlington, MA | reply to kamm
Re: Cable TV is still cheap entertainment
No more so than you're just trying to sell your un-American business, socialistic bill-of-goods. |
|
