Cable Opens Up > Cable has NO EXSCUSE TO CRY!!!

reply to Phoenix2088

Re: Cable has NO EXSCUSE TO CRY!!!

said by Phoenix2088:

---

said by vic102482:

---

said by pnh102:

---

said by vic102482:

---

its only fitting that CABLE should have to pay more, and lose to line sharers just like the telecom industry.

---

If you want to pay more per month for cable that's fine. I'd prefer not to, and I certainly think a USF charge for cable is outrageous... this is for glorified TV service, why should people be getting that as a freebie?!

As for the ruling, I am not worried at all, this is the 9th Circus Court of Appeals after all... so the ruling will be overturned in due course.

---

So why shouldnt cable internet suscribers have to pay the same fees as DSL suscribers? Thats like not having to pay a certain tax for roads beacuse you ride a motorcycle.

Both have right of way, and both tear up city streets and both connect to the internet.

---

Cable is more like a McLaren F1 and DSL is like a Chevy Cavalier, lol.

---

what gets me is that cable seems to be more expensive now ( i pay $45pr mo) then dsl ( going rate is $35) and cable is exempt from certain taxes.. Well i have cable and dont want the price to go up anymore, im sure cable will pass it along to the user, but fair is fair.... both services provide www access just different forms both should pay same tax.Cars and trucks both use highway to get around and both pay same gasoline tax.

Also didnt realize that the USF charge is for developing telepone on poor areas... nice to see i can help out others in life. I wonder if thats where my x-wife gets money from when they shut off her phone and suddenly she gets it back on...

quote:

---

just different forms

---

reply to jimraelee

said by jimraelee:

---

what gets me is that cable seems to be more expensive now ( i pay $45pr mo) then dsl ( going rate is $35)

---

cable goes up without the cable tv service... and in our area modems are included for like $5 pr month... and the mandatory telephone line... I dont consider that much becaue we all have phone lines.. and cable carriers our here require a phone line to update your movie downloads and on screen bill service... is cable realy that much faster than dsl... seems when my neighbors get online at night i see my speed drop... no much fun

said by jimraelee:

---

cable goes up without the cable tv service... and in our area modems are included for like $5 pr month...

---

said by jimraelee:

---

and the mandatory telephone line... I dont consider that much becaue we all have phone lines..

---

reply to jimraelee

said by jimraelee:

---

I dont consider that much becaue we all have phone lines..

---

said by tlg:

---

said by jimraelee:

---

I dont consider that much becaue we all have phone lines..

---

Um.... No we don't, I have a broadband connection with VOIP (Vonage). Bellsouth has been banished from my rez.

TG

---

reply to rideboarder

said by rideboarder:

---

said by Phoenix2088:

---

said by vic102482:

---

said by pnh102:

---

said by vic102482:

---

its only fitting that CABLE should have to pay more, and lose to line sharers just like the telecom industry.

---

If you want to pay more per month for cable that's fine. I'd prefer not to, and I certainly think a USF charge for cable is outrageous... this is for glorified TV service, why should people be getting that as a freebie?!

As for the ruling, I am not worried at all, this is the 9th Circus Court of Appeals after all... so the ruling will be overturned in due course.

---

So why shouldnt cable internet suscribers have to pay the same fees as DSL suscribers? Thats like not having to pay a certain tax for roads beacuse you ride a motorcycle.

Both have right of way, and both tear up city streets and both connect to the internet.

---

Cable is more like a McLaren F1 and DSL is like a Chevy Cavalier, lol.

---

uh no

---

reply to rideboarder

said by rideboarder:

---

said by Phoenix2088:

---

said by vic102482:

---

said by pnh102:

---

said by vic102482:

---

its only fitting that CABLE should have to pay more, and lose to line sharers just like the telecom industry.

---

If you want to pay more per month for cable that's fine. I'd prefer not to, and I certainly think a USF charge for cable is outrageous... this is for glorified TV service, why should people be getting that as a freebie?!

As for the ruling, I am not worried at all, this is the 9th Circus Court of Appeals after all... so the ruling will be overturned in due course.

---

So why shouldnt cable internet suscribers have to pay the same fees as DSL suscribers? Thats like not having to pay a certain tax for roads beacuse you ride a motorcycle.

Both have right of way, and both tear up city streets and both connect to the internet.

---

Cable is more like a McLaren F1 and DSL is like a Chevy Cavalier, lol.

---

uh no

---

reply to pnh102
I do not have a landline phone. I work for a wireless telephone company and jsut use wireless. I had earthlink dsl thru covad. The line into my home was used to provide service, but there was no dial tone on it, and I had no Verizon bill to pay.

reply to jimraelee
You pay $45 for Cable

Wow lucky you. In my loccatiob I Pay $49 a month for PPPoA 1120/128..

Thats without the $30 for Phone Line tax and the phone line it's self.

$75 for Phone + DSL vs $100 basic Cable and Cable Internet..

Oh I also have 2 phone lines and for each line I pay for the TAXES.

75+50 About PER MONTH $125 telco charges..

Your complaining about your 3-4meg / 128-512 PPPoE Transfer?

I'm lucky to get 56K where I live. Even with dregulation I can't get access to other Internet providers.

reply to jimraelee
speak for yourself, i pay $70/mo for cable (1.5/128). I would looooove to see competition bring it down to $45.

If you put it that way. Your paying for your cable TV..

I didn't add the cost of the Phone line. put them together and your looking about the same price.