dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
27
share rss forum feed

Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY

1 edit
reply to CXM_Splicer

Re: Fight On Comcast

said by CXM_Splicer:

Comcast has a choice they can make: They are free to get out of the cable TV/Internet business and open a different type of business instead.

That's a false choice, they've invested billions of dollars into this business, their human capital understands this business, and they have contractual obligations in this business.

Besides, I don't think you read my post before you replied. My issues are two fold:

1) They should have to offer basic tiers of service to everybody, not just low income households. You work for Verizon in New York State, can you imagine if they tried to say that message rate service would henceforth only be available to households that qualify for school lunches? Everybody else has to have Verizon Freedom for $50+/mo.

2) No company, not Comcast, Verizon, or anyone else, should be compelled to offer service to people who owe it money, absent some sort of payment arrangement. Three months is reasonable, if you can commit to paying new charges on time, while repaying what you owe over three months, then you get turned on. Otherwise you go without the service. Asking them to forgive what you owe is asking too much, if you need debts forgiven you should be filing bankruptcy, not complaining about how awful the utility company is.

CXM_Splicer
Looking at the bigger picture
Premium
join:2011-08-11
NYC
kudos:2

1 edit

My issue was mostly with the 'compelled' argument which you brought up in two posts. The 'false choice' is used very often to coldly defend a corporate upper hand in situations all the time (don't like a pay cut? find a different job). It is certainly worth pointing out the false choice that business has in the face of regulations they don't like. And since Verizon is gutting its copper business as we speak it is questionable if it really is a 'false choice'.

When it comes down to it, Yes everyone should have lower tiers available to them willingly by the provider. If the provider refuses to offer a lower tier, I don't have a problem with them being required to do so for low income people as a condition of engaging in their business. If they refuse to offer it to you too, I would blame the company... not the low income mandate.

As for Verizon's low income service... they actually do have dialtone (I think it used to be free) for low income people who qualify. I will find out if they still offer it and what the details are. They are also required to allow 911 calls even if they disconnect you for non-payment (although admittedly that isn't much 'service').

Edit: It is called LifeLine service. It is not a mandate to the phone companies but a federal subsidy to help pay for the line. They also offer it for wireless.

»www22.verizon.com/cs/groups/publ···_v10.pdf