|
HahaJust goes to show that EVERYBODY is paying attention to this problem. Yes, it is a problem because it will do no good to consumers. Get with it ISP's, stop trying to get more from us for less. | |
|
| 3 edits
1 recommendation |
Re: HahaThe general public seems to think they can dictate how much these companies can charge for broadband when these same companies have employees to pay and networks to maintain and improve... all while trying to satisy stockholders. Ok so... you dont want metered billing? Everyone will simply get charged MORE for service.
Its simply common sense... and its a tired and worn out topic. | |
|
| | |
Re: HahaThe Bullshit talks and the money walks. Your talking the BS and my money will leave AT&T. You must work for AT&T. Your a fool if you really think AT&T needs caps, etc to meet its obligations and network upgrades. I am no fool but I know that AT&T is feeding its customers crap if it thinks it will get away with this. Have a nice day. | |
|
| | | 1 edit |
Re: HahaBla Bla Bla.. sorry dont work for them but the issue of caps is not important for today but for tomorrow when these companies lose an incredible amount of video revenue. Its the same with how theyve lost incredible revenue due to VoIP ! THIS is something ALL the incumbents will and can control, not just AT&T. | |
|
| | | | |
Re: HahaMore BS. The providers are not running out of bandwidth. As for video revenues. If they are raising rates just to force people to subscribe to video service thats BS too. Part of the problem is there is not enough competition in the marketplace. Of course, I suppose your one of the ones that opposes municipalities starting their own networks.
I am in the south which granted sometimes is annoying. Fortunately, we are watching in NC. Every time clowns like yourself have come into our state introducing bills to implement restrictions on municipal networks the general assembly has set you guys packing. The bills get shelved and the money is ignored. We are watching and I am not afraid to write my representatives again as well as many others in NC watching. It happened last month when such a bill was introduced.
Only a monopoly or perhaps a complicit oligopoly would have the power to place caps in the market to force customers to subscribe to their expensive video service. I hardly even watch TV. I am only interested in the internet not the reality programs and other mindless drivel on TV. I should not have to pay for something I don't use. Besides, the vast majority of people are subscribe to cable or satellite anyway.
as for the MPAA, RIAA, etc they should be ignored. All these companies refuse to adapt to their modern world. Instead they waste our time (taxpayers money and time) in court. I dont' know why AT&T, etc feel owed business to customers. Same goes for the other ISP's. They feel entitled to charge what they wish when they want. In a competitive market the business models and pricing are shaped and formed by the forces of customers not by the company alone. A company is then forced to model their business model to suit customers.
Thanks. | |
|
| | | | | |
Re: HahaYes I am absolutely opposed to muni broadband due to the same principles Im not for nationalized healthcare. Government should stay out of the free market.. thats it.
So, like I said, caps are for protecting these companies in the future. If you feel its better for the ISP's to charge EVERYONE more per month.. thats your opinion. I wonder if you feel we should have a univeral charge for gas and electric regardless of consumption? Hmmm. But like I said, everyones entitled to opinion. | |
|
| | | | | | |
Re: HahaExcept that your greedy opinions ruined us the last 8 years. For profit is fine for internet but not healthcare. When you profit by having yoru customers come back again and again (that is they are still sick and keep coming back) then that is not OK.
Profit is good for many things but not when it comes to the life of a human being which is more important than a profit.
I am business major and you'd think I was a brainwashed right wing idiot. Think again. I have seen the BS in corporations lately. I have seen what the 'hands off' approach did for the banks. They did what they wanted and screwed a lot of people. I'll gladly take government regulation over irresponsible executives. | |
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | S_engineer Premium Member join:2007-05-16 Chicago, IL 1 edit |
Re: HahaThis "everythings done for a profit" is the reason that the taxpayers are on the hook for the BS that Wall Street traded for 8 years (since the repeal of Glass-Steagall). The two trillion dollars our President is being allowed to spend is a direct result of that mentality! | |
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | NOVA_GuyObamaCare Kills Americans Premium Member join:2002-03-05 1 edit |
NOVA_Guy
Premium Member
2009-Jun-23 2:03 pm
Re: HahaI assume you're talking about the laws that forbid banks from getting involved with investment banking, insurance, etc.
Edit: As I recall, it wasn't the past two dumbass administrations (Bush and Obama) that let this happen. The deregulation actually happened during the Clinton years... | |
|
| | | | | | | | | S_engineer Premium Member join:2007-05-16 Chicago, IL 1 edit |
Re: HahaIt was signed by Clinton but passed through congress through repubs. Yes, the repeal is is a Huge part of the reason we're in this financial mess. Compounding this mess was the criminal negligence of the SEC. But I digress. This period of limited, toothless, or no regulation gave these mega corps carte blanche at trading whatever they wanted. Now the tax payers are paying for those trades in bailouts. The consumer is paying for those executive decisions with higher credit card rates, and abusive tactics regarding insurance coverage. Your "unregulated" utopia has negatively filtered into every aspect of our lives. And guess who pays for those negative effects....you...the person that works. Its self serving to have gov't modestly regulate certain entities. When deregulation comes along, you shouldnt be surprised when the consequences cause the pendulum swing to the polar opposite! | |
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | S_engineer |
Re: HahaIts the direct cause for banks like BOA and Citi to buy and trade morgage backed securities and collateralized debt obligations. It allowed Leahman and Bear Sterns to push credit default swaps. All of which was insured by the likes of AIG. So tell me...which individuals should we be looking for to get our money back? | |
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | MTU Premium Member join:2005-02-15 San Luis Obispo, CA |
to S_engineer
Re: HahaTo get it 'right': Republicans, Phil Graham in the Senate, and Jim Leach in the house wrote the Graham-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (to repeal Glass-Steagall at the behest of the Banking industry). The act was passed on a party-line vote (Republicans controlled both houses).
Clinton signed the bill. A veto would have been overridden and Bill liked bankers as most politicians do. (When their not posing for a camera) | |
|
| | | | | | | | funchordsHello MVM join:2001-03-11 Yarmouth Port, MA |
to Anon
said by NOVA_Guy:Same difference when it comes to the current administration, as far as results go. You can choose between so-called "greedy" and "evil" corporations or the greedy, inexperienced, incompetant, ill-intended plans of The Obamination. Given a choice, I prefer the so-called "evil" I know (corporations) over the evil I don't know any day. First off, this is just so much off-topic political posturing. You hate Obama. Vote harder next time. Secondly, I don't believe for a moment that anyone with sanity believes that a for-profit monopolistic-powered corporation is better tuned to the day-to-day interests of the people it serves than a government elected by and for the people. Third, if I'm wrong about that second point, then I wish for your dream to come true for you -- because after you reap the results, your views will change. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Metatron2008You're it Premium Member join:2008-09-02 united state |
Re: Hahasaid by funchords:said by NOVA_Guy:Same difference when it comes to the current administration, as far as results go. You can choose between so-called "greedy" and "evil" corporations or the greedy, inexperienced, incompetant, ill-intended plans of The Obamination. Given a choice, I prefer the so-called "evil" I know (corporations) over the evil I don't know any day. First off, this is just so much off-topic political posturing. You hate Obama. Vote harder next time. Secondly, I don't believe for a moment that anyone with sanity believes that a for-profit monopolistic-powered corporation is better tuned to the day-to-day interests of the people it serves than a government elected by and for the people. Third, if I'm wrong about that second point, then I wish for your dream to come true for you -- because after you reap the results, your views will change. Obama is Bush 2. Bought by the same corporations, doing the same thing. Your a fool to believe in change. The only change was Bush went out, Obama went in. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | 88615298 (banned) join:2004-07-28 West Tenness |
88615298 (banned)
Member
2009-Jun-23 11:37 pm
Re: Hahasaid by Metatron2008:said by funchords:said by NOVA_Guy:Same difference when it comes to the current administration, as far as results go. You can choose between so-called "greedy" and "evil" corporations or the greedy, inexperienced, incompetant, ill-intended plans of The Obamination. Given a choice, I prefer the so-called "evil" I know (corporations) over the evil I don't know any day. First off, this is just so much off-topic political posturing. You hate Obama. Vote harder next time. Secondly, I don't believe for a moment that anyone with sanity believes that a for-profit monopolistic-powered corporation is better tuned to the day-to-day interests of the people it serves than a government elected by and for the people. Third, if I'm wrong about that second point, then I wish for your dream to come true for you -- because after you reap the results, your views will change. Obama is Bush 2. Bought by the same corporations, doing the same thing. Your a fool to believe in change. The only change was Bush went out, Obama went in. So McCain would be better? because that's was your other choice. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Metatron2008You're it Premium Member join:2008-09-02 united state 1 edit |
Re: Hahasaid by 88615298:So McCain would be better? because that's was your other choice. If you read above, I said criminals are making laws. Nobody will be better until the criminals that make laws based on how much they are bribed are replaced by people who do the job their hired for. If you think their is any difference between today's republicans and democrats, try this: Ask them to do something, esp. something they say they won't do in public, and then bribe them with lots of cash. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | funchordsHello MVM join:2001-03-11 Yarmouth Port, MA |
Re: Hahasaid by Metatron2008:If you think their is any difference between today's republicans and democrats, try this: Ask them to do something, esp. something they say they won't do in public, and then bribe them with lots of cash. Encouraging criminal activity is probably as good as an idea as committing it yourself. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Metatron2008You're it Premium Member join:2008-09-02 united state |
Re: Hahasaid by funchords:said by Metatron2008:If you think their is any difference between today's republicans and democrats, try this: Ask them to do something, esp. something they say they won't do in public, and then bribe them with lots of cash. Encouraging criminal activity is probably as good as an idea as committing it yourself. Are you serious with that response? I wasn't actually saying to do it, I was making a point. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | funchordsHello MVM join:2001-03-11 Yarmouth Port, MA |
to 88615298
said by 88615298:So McCain would be better? because that's was your other choice. Really. I sent McCain an email, once. I got no reply -- I guess his Etch-a-Sketch was broken. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | fiberguy2My views are my own. Premium Member join:2005-05-20 |
to 88615298
There were other choices... not just McCain and GW Obama. There was Hillary, there was Ron Paul, there was Mitt Romney.. none of them were put up on the top ticket, were they?
There were other choices as the elections started 2 years prior to election day. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | |
to funchords
said by funchords:Secondly, I don't believe for a moment that anyone with sanity believes that a for-profit monopolistic-powered corporation is better tuned to the day-to-day interests of the people it serves than a government elected by and for the people. That all depends on how removed from the people that government is. As long as there is true competition in the market the the business is always better than government. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | mech1164I'll Be Back join:2001-11-19 Lodi, NJ |
to funchords
said by funchords:First off, this is just so much off-topic political posturing. You hate Obama. Vote harder next time. We did the Stupids who thought they were going to get their Houses paid off by him came out in droves. People are only now realizing what a mistake they made. Oh well everybody enjoy the Socialism Komrade. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | fiberguy2My views are my own. Premium Member join:2005-05-20 |
to funchords
quote: Secondly, I don't believe for a moment that anyone with sanity believes that a for-profit monopolistic-powered corporation is better tuned to the day-to-day interests of the people it serves than a government elected by and for the people.
This pipe-dream still exists?? I wasn't aware of that.. I needed a laugh today, thanks. In case you haven't noticed, these "elected representatives" simply say what ever it takes to get elected and into office and then shove their own agenda down the throats of Americans. They're "party representatives".. if they were doing the work of the people, WHY would each person have to campaign? .. the PARTY would say the message to the voting public.. it would be so much easier. If they are elected by the people FOR the people, then tell me something... why do they rely SO much on polls, studies, research, demographics, etc. in order to form their campaign? It's called "pondering" to the voting public.. it's using statistics to figure out the group who has the most to benefit from the promises made on the trail in order to get them elected. If these people TRULY represented the people, they would SIMPLY say what they want to say, plan to do, and not pick up ONE SINGLE demographic study, survey, poll, etc.. Right? Government, today, is on the same level of the business you portray in your post. | |
|
| | | | | | | | 1 edit |
binded to Anon
Anon
2009-Jun-23 4:39 pm
to Anon
no this is why we have all these ponzi schemes and billions of dollars profit to these ass holes that cheated and greedy fuckers took money which no one will be able to get back
its just gone
another point of worthlessness is the class action suits
just to get a few bucks you lose a few thousand bucks and you only get maybe 20 back
LOL greed greed and yet the lawyers once again they went home in there nice car
maybe those are the guys that you should have doing your stock stuff
(mod note: removed name calling) | |
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Metatron2008You're it Premium Member join:2008-09-02 united state
1 recommendation |
Re: Hahasaid by ender7074:said by jkeelsnc:Except that your greedy opinions ruined us the last 8 years. For profit is fine for internet but not healthcare. When you profit by having yoru customers come back again and again (that is they are still sick and keep coming back) then that is not OK. Profit is good for many things but not when it comes to the life of a human being which is more important than a profit. I am business major and you'd think I was a brainwashed right wing idiot. Think again. I have seen the BS in corporations lately. I have seen what the 'hands off' approach did for the banks. They did what they wanted and screwed a lot of people. I'll gladly take government regulation over irresponsible executives. No, you're a brainwashed left wing idiot. The government has no place in the FREE market. Muni broadband will never work. You think that a city can raise the money to lay down fiber, get that fiber to the house, and afford a connection to the backbone? Think again. I sure dont want my taxes to skyrocket so that local government can piss away millions on a project that they will end up mismanaging anyway. Also, you may want to really check your sources. There has been no "hands off" approach with the banks. The government forced the banks into making risky loans. Legislation for major audits of Fanne Mae and Freddie Mac were presented in 2001 and 2005, both of which were shot down in comittee by Democrats. Nice try, you strike out. No, you strike out. Muni broadband that is paid by taxpayers would be exactly the same as the government giving tax dividends and such to current large isp corporations. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Re: HahaRight, its easy to claim that the clinton administration tried to force the banks to make risky loans. BS.
However, the fact that the banks were allowed to be deregulated l was what caused the problems. The banks went ahead and made the risky loans and then sold more against them. Nonsense.
Of course, its easy to blame someone else. Banks are good at that. Look at all the ridiculous charges they tack on for every petty thing.
Its one reason why my account is with a credit union. The fees are a lot less, the service is better, and guess what? They don't have the problems the banks had because they weren't approving risky loans and mortgages in the first place (or at least not as much).
Surprised? Now do you think that a profit only motive is good. No one talks about credit unions probably because most of them are not for profit and as such they didn't feel compelled by profit (alone) to tread the deep waters of risky loans. | |
|
| | | | | | | | funchordsHello MVM join:2001-03-11 Yarmouth Port, MA |
to Anon
said by ender7074:Muni broadband will never work. You think that a city can raise the money to lay down fiber, get that fiber to the house, and afford a connection to the backbone? Sure it works. There are a number of muni-broadband projects that work just fine. Look at it this way, if they were all bound to fail, then incumbent companies could just let them fail. No, instead they have to go to court to hold them off. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
binded to Anon
Anon
2009-Jun-23 4:33 pm
to Anon
this sounds great but in the end just like every other city or what not
most if not all of the projects will not be completed at all or will be half assed
or they will be done if you live in a state like mine it will most likely be over cost thanks RI LOL
and then the city will sell it off to verizon for not even 1/3 of the cost that they put in to it | |
|
| | | | | | | | WhatNow Premium Member join:2009-05-06 Charlotte, NC |
to Anon
Wilson NC did it for 35 million. I don't have a problem if the set up a company outside the government but to use muni staff and tax breaks and permits is not a level playing field. The bill in the NC Legislature was to keep the muni fiber ISPs completely separate from the town government. If they act like a private company more power too them. If they raise money and back it with muni taxes, and then don't have to pay muni taxes then no deal. If they use city staff and don't have to get permits or inspections then no deal. The muni ISP should have to jump through exactly the same hoops Joes ISP would have too.
If you owned a business and the town decided they would like to go into competition but used city staff as employees, paid no city taxes and did not have to even pay rent because they used a city building. How long could you compete. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | 1 edit |
Re: HahaThats BS. If it is the city's own technical stuff and their own lines they don't pay tax to themselves! in that case you are just creating a situation to charge the taxpayers more money to benefit the incumbents. The whole point of allowing muni's to build a network is because the incumbents have bad customer service (really bad), sometimes unreliable connections and most especially because they sometimes won't service areas even when they are in town. People even close or in town sometimes are still waiting 10 years for service and the incumbents can't deliver. Perhaps they cannot. Why should a city have to pay taxes to itself. It is not a private business and it is city property. OF COURSE THEY DON'T PAY TAXES TO THEMSELVES. | |
|
| | | | | | | | 1 edit |
fedupwithmorons to Anon
Anon
2009-Jun-23 5:39 pm
to Anon
said by ender7074:The government forced the banks into making risky loans. Banks were not forced to do anything. The repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act allowed banks to disquise shitty loans as sound investments and pass off the risk to others. That's why they made all those bad loans. I supposed you think it was the poor minorities that took out most of those bad loans too, right? | |
|
| | | | | | Metatron2008You're it Premium Member join:2008-09-02 united state
1 recommendation |
to ITALIAN926
If you want government to stay out of the free market, then stop lobbying politicians, and stop letting them pay telcos and cablecos tax dividends. | |
|
| | | | | | 88615298 (banned) join:2004-07-28 West Tenness
1 recommendation |
to ITALIAN926
said by ITALIAN926:Yes I am absolutely opposed to muni broadband due to the same principles Im not for nationalized healthcare. Government should stay out of the free market.. thats it. There ISN'T a free market in broadband. The fact you don't realize that shows tell us a lot. Please get educated. the fact is if NO ONE wanted to put out the cost of providing boradband why CAN'T a local government do it? Exactly which "free market" are they hurting? There is no market. | |
|
| | | | | | | ••••••• |
| | | | | | funchordsHello MVM join:2001-03-11 Yarmouth Port, MA 1 edit |
to ITALIAN926
said by ITALIAN926:Yes I am absolutely opposed to muni broadband due to the same principles Im not for nationalized healthcare. Government should stay out of the free market.. thats it. I like my government roads. I like my city water service. I can see a municipal data network being very much like a system of roads or a water department. As to our system of healthcare, that's fine until somebody gets hurt. Then the insurance companies refuse to cover him, and given the inflated prices caused by our insurance system, an individual can't afford the care that he needs. -- Robb, cancer survivor, 100% cured, denied insurance coverage multiple times due to his history of cancer | |
|
| | | | | | | NOVA_GuyObamaCare Kills Americans Premium Member join:2002-03-05 |
NOVA_Guy
Premium Member
2009-Jun-23 3:23 pm
Re: HahaI'm glad you like roads with plenty of potholes and plenty of gridlock every day. I see government-run programs as very much a metaphysical representation of DC's roads-- potholes, rough rides, gridlock, needless enforcement traps, people who don't understand when and where to walk, and slow moving idiots all over the place. | |
|
| | | | | | | | funchordsHello MVM join:2001-03-11 Yarmouth Port, MA |
Re: Hahasaid by NOVA_Guy:I'm glad you like roads with plenty of potholes and plenty of gridlock every day. I see government-run programs as very much a metaphysical representation of DC's roads-- potholes, rough rides, gridlock, needless enforcement traps, people who don't understand when and where to walk, and slow moving idiots all over the place. Well, I'm convinced that DC is the exception to every rule. I honestly don't get this place. Toto and I are ready to go home. But to use DC as the example of anything common brings your whole argument into question. By and large, we have a great system of public roads in the United States. | |
|
| | | | | | S_engineer Premium Member join:2007-05-16 Chicago, IL |
to ITALIAN926
said by ITALIAN926:. Government should stay out of the free market.. thats it. How can you aspouse free market principles regarding companies that have been heavily subsidized from our gov't via tax incentives? And if caps are to protect these companies in the future, then why not change to a pay-per-use model that would help the consumer save for the future? | |
|
| | | | | | | ••• |
| | | | | | |
to ITALIAN926
Lets take Gov out of everything !!!! What would happen if All roads to be maintained by private sector ?
Wouldn't it be a surprise to see that the road in front of your house not being maintained as they don't make profit ?
May be they start charging you by the weight of your car or number of tires it has?
May be they start dictating what type of vehicle you could use on the road.
..... | |
|
| | | | | | | ••• |
| | | | | | KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little Guy Premium Member join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK Netgear WNDR3700v2 Zoom 5341J
|
to ITALIAN926
said by ITALIAN926:Yes I am absolutely opposed to muni broadband due to the same principles Im not for nationalized healthcare. Government should stay out of the free market.. thats it. Could you explain your position further? There are many valid cases where Government enters a market to provide or create services that the private markets won't or can't. There are also many cases where a Government regulated monopoly can make more economic sense then unregulated free market. | |
|
| | | | | | woody7 Premium Member join:2000-10-13 Torrance, CA |
to ITALIAN926
yea, your 'FREE" market is doing a bang up job! | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | | ••• |
| | | |
-1 recommendation |
Flibbetigibbet to ITALIAN926
Anon
2009-Jun-23 3:58 pm
to ITALIAN926
Re: HahaLet's see... what did the old AT&T do when they lost "incredible revenue" in long-distance charges that were totally bogus?
They went broke. Which is what should happen to dinosaur companies who can't change with technology (at least when Uncle Sugar doesn't prevent it--$100 billion to Government Motors).
They can't handle that, they can get out of the business. | |
|
| | |
to ITALIAN926
att made more then one billion dallars the first three months of the year. that is after they pay off anything. | |
|
| | | ••••••••••••••• |
| | |
to ITALIAN926
said by ITALIAN926:Ok so... you dont want metered billing? Everyone will simply get charged MORE for service. But what little semblance of competition we have is just enough to keep it in check. Metering allows them to advertise a really cheap price knowing they will make it up via the obfuscated metered charges. By making them sell at a flat rate they are stuck balancing the need to gouge people and the want to advertise a lower price than anything that could compete. It's a very important check to keep the system balanced for the consumer. And in the end paying an extra 5-10 bucks a month is much much more appealing than getting a 10k bill because your computer was hacked, or always paying an extra 30 bucks a month due to a netflix subscription. | |
|
| | |
to ITALIAN926
said by ITALIAN926:The general public seems to think they can dictate how much these companies can charge yeah. It's called the free market. Deal with it. | |
|
| |
to Luminaris
said by Luminaris: Get with it ISP's, stop trying to get more from us for less. Unfortunately, that's the way a lot of businesses are these days. They've gotten greedy, pure and simple. It used to be all about providing a good service at a price that was both fair to the customer and profitable to the company. Now it's about providing the least amount of service for the highest price you can get away with. | |
|
| | |
Re: HahaIt's never been like that. Ever, ever, ever. I highly recommend you read "A People's History of the United States" by Howard Zinn. It's extremely revealing of the true nature of businesses in the US from the day it was found by Columbus. | |
|
| |
to Luminaris
We've consistently just drifted too far off topic. There are other places for redundant partisan bickering. | |
|
Bit00 Premium Member join:2009-02-19 00000 |
Bit00
Premium Member
2009-Jun-23 11:06 am
LIARS - In video revenues they trustIf these AT&T whores were telling the truth, then basic service fees for Internet would tank, replaced by metered billing.
But, noooooooooo, they want to charge Grandmothers the CURRENT prices while just gouging everyone else in defense of video revenues. | |
|
| ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• |
Lark3po Premium Member join:2003-08-05 Madison, AL |
Lark3po
Premium Member
2009-Jun-23 11:11 am
I love it!I love Grandmothers! They will always tell you what think think without the sugar-coating! | |
|
|
LOLBoy I would love to be a fly on the wall over in AT&T marketing right now. When you get pimp slapped by grandmothers you have officially failed at marketing. | |
|
| ••••• |
r81984Fair and Balanced Premium Member join:2001-11-14 Katy, TX |
r81984
Premium Member
2009-Jun-23 11:19 am
We need to stop this now or...we will end up being like canada. Rogers (Canada Cable ISP) Ultra Lite 2 GB cap - 512kbps for $26 Lite 25 GB cap - 3mbps for $36 Express 60 GB cap - 10Mbps for $47 Extreme / Extreme Plus 95 GB cap 10Mpbs for $60
Ultra Lite $5.00/GB to a maximum of $25.00 Lite $2.50/GB to a maximum of $25.00 Express $2.00/GB to a maximum of $25.00 Extreme $1.50/GB to a maximum of $25.00 Extreme Plus $1.25/GB to a maximum of $25.00
Basically they will have an excuse to charge every plan $25 extra. Do we want the US to become like this??? | |
|
| •••• |
funchordsHello MVM join:2001-03-11 Yarmouth Port, MA 2 edits |
Hahahahaha -- AT&T has it's own "Raging Grannies" | |
|
| •••• |
Masque join:2001-12-04 Auburn, MI |
Masque
Member
2009-Jun-23 11:31 am
You Go Granny!AT&T really doesn't know who they're dealing with....they're in deep doo-doo now. | |
|
|
compromise?the ONLY way i would ever except a cap on any company was they completely took away throttling. I don't have that with TWC, but people like I think on optimum and or comcast, when they upload too much or whatever they get pushed down to dsl speeds. If they took away that, and left a 250gb cap, I think everyone will live with that. Don't get me wrong though, I think there should be NOTHING for the price we pay. No throttling, or metered billing. | |
|
| |
Re: compromise?I won't live with that. Caps are meaningless. They don't manage network congestion. Let me repeat:
Caps do not manage network congestion.
No ISP has ever revealed their internal economic statistics. Some estimates put them at making $40/person/month of profit. Since the ISP market is far, *far* from a free one, caps would have to be justified by a real economics argument. BTW, this is impossible for a company making billions in profit each year. | |
|
| dvd536as Mr. Pink as they come Premium Member join:2001-04-27 Phoenix, AZ |
to executor04
said by executor04:the ONLY way i would ever except a cap on any company was they completely took away throttling. I don't have that with TWC, but people like I think on optimum and or comcast, when they upload too much or whatever they get pushed down to dsl speeds. If they took away that, and left a 250gb cap, I think everyone will live with that. Don't get me wrong though, I think there should be NOTHING for the price we pay. No throttling, or metered billing. people on BOOST don't get capped, unsure about others but with fios in most CV areas, i doubt regular OOL gets capped either. | |
|
amungus Premium Member join:2004-11-26 America |
amungus
Premium Member
2009-Jun-23 11:39 am
guarantee...that my grandparents wouldn't want this either... if they could even get DSL, or cable.
Great sub-title for the article. It is indeed a complete and utter rip off and is very easy to spot. Nobody wants this. Glad there are some actual grandmothers out there speaking their minds and being heard.
Since it's already too late, ISPs might as well suck it up and do what they can to move forward instead of crying about it and trying to claim they've got no choice.
They have PLENTY of choice.
If they didn't, why'd they ever upgrade speeds and then cry when people use those connections? For the most part, DSL is better suited than cable to handle people actually using their line to its fullest potential. Pure hogwash that they can't keep up. They're far enough ahead to also have everything tapped! In any case, they DO still have plenty of money, and plenty more time to keep making sure capacity upgrades are set before rolling out yet another speed increase... I'm sure even grandmothers would rather have a slightly slower link if it could be used as often as needed without concern for "overage" or "caps" or "monitoring" or any number of other pointless bean counting and snarky things.
Whatever happens, I'm sure this won't be the last we hear of capping/metering/non-neutral/non-free internet. I'm sure they'd love to have us cornered and locked down even further than China's internet.
What they fail to recognize is that people crave freedom. Well, most do. Guess there are still enough up-tight, authoritarian minded, busybody, "I'm better than you," "My ___ don't stink," people in this world who crave and salivate over the chance to micro-manage and control every aspect of everyone's business.
It's a shame too, life's too short to be so cold, bitter, mean, and wasteful. | |
|
| Lark3po Premium Member join:2003-08-05 Madison, AL |
Lark3po
Premium Member
2009-Jun-23 1:08 pm
Re: guarantee | |
|
| | fatnesssubtle
join:2000-11-17 fishing |
Re: guaranteeNow imagine you're a cow. | |
|
|
BSAT&T had better lower my monthly bill if they are going to impose caps or start metered billing. Otherwise, I am gone. I have better things to do than play games with the phone company. I do have choices and i am not afraid to exercise them. | |
|
| |
Re: BSYes , go to another ISP that will impose caps in the future.
LOL | |
|
FAQFixer Premium Member join:2004-06-28 Powder Springs, GA 1 edit |
FAQFixer
Premium Member
2009-Jun-23 11:54 am
If it on the internet it must be trueIt doesn't matter what side of the argument you're on this is pure bullcrap propaganda. It's funny how some can clearly see right through any propaganda put out by Corporate America and see it for what it is. Yet those same people some how believe that there are unbiased gandmas (edited)spontaneously voicing outrage. | |
|
| ••••• |
|
AT&T doesn't know what its doingDear AT&T,
Do you realize how ignorant you are? Have you ever heard of the character Sophia Petrillo from the Golden Girls? Well, perhaps you should watch an episode because this is the kind of "granny" your going to anger with this BS. I guarantee a few will be glad to call and cuss at you. I don't want to see that happen. However, your inviting it with this nonsense.
I have no sympathies at all. Grannies of the world be ready and don't be afraid to speak your minds. | |
|
| 1 edit |
John Keels
Anon
2009-Jun-23 8:04 pm
Re: AT&T doesn't know what its doingPlease excuse me on one part. My posts were connected to some messages posted by those who understood what I was saying about caps, etc.
My posts were not directed at you guys. Though it may appear that way. Speicifically, my posts were direct at italian from CT and nova from VA.
So, if I offended someone who understood what i was saying then I apologize.
Btw, Nova, since you live in cul de sac land I am glad you paid for your own street. That sprawled mess is too expensive for the government to afford to provide sewer, water, roads etc that far out of town in the first place. As for the gated community, thats ridiculous. | |
|
|
thejosherrr
Anon
2009-Jun-23 12:01 pm
comcast and there 250gbi go past 300 gigs all the time but comcast does not send me warnings but i think they let it slide because there are now 4 brodband providers were i live and i pay a shit load for there hd dvr and premium channels my normal bill from comcast is around 140-180 bucks so if and when i get a first warning from them that very day i am droping all my comcast services and turning in my gear at the comcast sales office that is 3 blocks from my apartment.... | |
|
| •••• |
fireflierCoffee. . .Need Coffee Premium Member join:2001-05-25 Limbo |
fireflier
Premium Member
2009-Jun-23 12:58 pm
Wrong group to upset!If these are truly grandmothers who are upset with AT&T's tactics and word is spreading, AT&T is going to be in for a real firestorm. First, senior citizens are typically more involved in voting and interacting with their elected officials. Second, many are retired and have a little time to spare when writing angry letters to corporations and their elected officials. If the AARP puts this in a newsletter, AT&T may be in big trouble. . . | |
|
baineschile2600 ways to live Premium Member join:2008-05-10 Sterling Heights, MI |
grandmasmost grandmas cant turn on a computer, let alone meter their own bandwidth | |
|
| Doctor OldsI Need A Remedy For What's Ailing Me. Premium Member join:2001-04-19 1970 442 W30 |
Re: grandmassaid by baineschile:most grandmas cant turn on a computer, let alone meter their own bandwidth Wow, that is pure misinformation. Why are you making up FUD and posting like it is some kind of fact. | |
|
DownTheShorePray for Ukraine Premium Member join:2003-12-02 Beautiful NJ |
You Go, Grandmas!quote: "We grandmothers know a ripoff when we see one," says one poster. "Im insulted AT&T thinks grandmothers like myself would be dumb enough to fall for their scams," says another. "Now grandfathers might be something else, which is why I pay the bills in this house," she says.
ROTFLMAO! Based upon my own family observations, so true. | |
|
|
AT&T along with the other ISP's needs a regulatory procto. These weasels think that consumers will put up with their Bull Feces. Like many politicians these jerks continue to lie to consumers and believe that consumers are too stupid to realize that the ISP's are simply trying to deceive them. AT&T along with the other ISP's need to be treated like the AT&T's Bell System of the 1930's and have their services declared a monopoly and have their pricing and terms and conditions regulated. In the mid thirties the Federal Government wanted to step in and prevent AT&T from buying up all of the Independent Telephone Companies in order to set predatory pricing. AT&T agreed to be declared a monopoly and to be regulated. The Government will never reach it's objectives for wide spread affordable broadband deployment if they do not regulate all ISP's. | |
|
|
amazingThis is what democracy is about. I am glad that my posts spawned debate. Republicans hate it. They'd rather do as Bush did and sweep the secrets they don't want known under the rug.
Nonetheless, we are all able to have our own opinions. I am glad this is happening.
Nonetheless, Glass-Steagall actually was repealed during the Clinton Admin and it is something I hold against him along with NAFTA.
Anyway, I am glad that this healthy debate is occuring. It airs out people's frustrations and hopefully something positive can be done with it.
As for the Free Market. Throughout the last 50 years the Free Market worked best with companies who had a responsible, ethical approach to doing business. Unfettered Free Market, Capitalism leads to drastics.
I am sure some of you have heard of the DeBeers/Anglo American company. That is a drastic. However, it is an example of where unchecked and unregulated capitalism without accountability leads to abuse and the profit for a few people at the tremendous expense and exploitation of others.
If you don't believe me than watch the old Frontline Episode about DeBeers or just do some research into the company and how they do business and you will understand better why unfettered capitalism is a real mistake. Unchecked it becomes just as mean as totalitarianism or the screwed up version of communism that the USSR had. Profit without regulation becomes profit at the expense of society and of people.
Thanks. | |
|
|
Faux Free Market and Faux ISPs - vote for "Dumb Pipe"There is no true free market in U.S. Telecommunications. Telco is a national asset and ownership is Federally regulated. That is why there isn't a foreign owned (e.g. T-mobile) landline service.
Your ISPs are not really ISPs but side businesses for a main product. Cable has Video, and Telephone has Voice, until the internet came around. Now they have both.
Funny how Internet provided new features for the incumbent carriers that they didn't have before.
And they want to control any future innovation or intrusion by capping the bandwidth.
If it were a "free market" AT&T Mobility would offer a 200 MB, a 5 GB, and an unlimited data for whomever would pay the rate - but they don't.
What are these companies selling Speed or GB of data? | |
|
|
HEY GRANDMA!YOU WERE SOLD OUT BY DSLREPORTS.COM A LONG TIME AGO! CLICK HERE: » Editorial: Caps are welcome [356] commentsYou were sold out a long time ago and now this site is complaining and trying to get around the 180 spin they wrote. it's funny when I read these articles about "capping=bad" when this site (and it's owner) stated they were welcome!! | |
|
| •••
|
|
|