|reply to tshirt |
Re: holding companies accountable...
said by tshirt:Those who were either knowingly or unknowingly stealing have no bills to speak of.. they paid "UPFRONT" for the service provided. It's the legit customers who would have the problem.. the poor fall behind on bills of all kinds.. when other more greedy companies take a bigger chunk of their meager incomes than expected.. such as healthcare, or energy, or food, maybe even rents & insurance.
How about holding individuals accountable?
You owe Comcast Money.... pay it BEFORE you get a special discount on new services.
Why doesn't Philadelphia pay off their old bills, so Comcast could then provide service under the terms they ALL agreed to as part of the deal.
And why do you repeatly suggest cable theft (even when enabled by crooked contractors) is an acceptable alternetive to only using what you can afford to pay for?
If you REALLY want to stack up corporate irresponsiblity against individual irresponsibility over the past 12 years, that's a challenge corporations will lose 99.99999999% out of 100%
Those that paid upfront still had a bill it just was at the extreme promo price, instead of the normal price they were entitled too.
and this isn't about equalizing the "irresponsibility's" of individuals VS corporations
ComCast made an offer of several generous benefits mainly towards low income families as part of the merger.
As Karl's article points out the Philly schools failed to widely offer info and applications to eligible persons, and so Philadelphia "FORCES" new concessions on comcast.
Why is comcast (really all other customers) being forced to underwrite Philly's changing of the deal?
I'm actually in favor of the offering of the HSI to enhance the educational possiblities for those families...BUT aren't we teaching several bad lessons here?
A} Order whatever you want, not what you can afford
B}You don't need to pay your bills, and It won't effect your future credit.
C} Gov't can change the terms of any deal on a whim, and force companies to pay for it.
I think, if the city wanted to pay peoples bills or guaruntee the "deposit" as part of their welfare scheme, it might be reasonable, but to force comcast to do it is quite different.
does it also force loan companies to eat missing car payments so it's easier to find work or get the kids to school? Shouldn't DELL/HP/SONY be forced to give them better computers, and a big screen so they can see all the details on the internet homework? How about the electric company (PECO), should them subsidize not just basic electric service, but let them use all the want for free. The other customers won't mind, PECO rates are so low .
Weather or not the corporations have been "irresponsible" (and you and I might disagree on some definitions about that)
It does not absolve the individual from learning basic individual responsibility, personal ethics, if you will, which might make corporations act more responsibly in the future.