AT&T Conning Kentucky & Kansas Into Gutting Oversight, DSL AT&T Written Bill Passes Kansas House 118 to 1 Verizon and AT&T want to get out of maintaining or upgrading the tens of millions of DSL users so they can focus on wireless, a move that makes obvious business sense from their perspectives. Verizon Wireless isn't unionized, so Verizon gets rid of union headaches. Wireless services are less regulated, so carriers can get rid of consumer protections. Wireless is easier to install, cheaper to maintain, and the companies make oodles more money by charging users $15 per gigabyte. The problem? The move leaves tens of millions of DSL and plain-old-telephone (POTS) users in a pinch. Hanging up on these users gives cable a huge monopoly on fixed line broadband, and forces DSL users to pay much more money for heavily capped LTE services ($15 per gigabyte). That's assuming those DSL users will have additional options when AT&T and Verizon cuts the cord. Higher prices, worse service, and increased monopoly power in a sector already known for limited competition isn't going to be a good outcome for many of these markets. AT&T and Verizon's plan is one of the most significant shifts in telecom in the last thirty years, and it's somehow flying under the radar among tech news outlets. To make this shift possible both AT&T and Verizon are going state by state, bull rushing politicians, hoping none of them will think about any of the deeper issues raised by this migration. State political Luddites have been easily duped for years by a quick handshake and some telco cash, and this effort appears to be no exception. An AT&T-written bill is speeding through the Kentucky state legislative system as is a similar bill in Kansas, where despite the fact it guts nearly all consumer protections it has sped through the Kasnsas House 118 to 1 without real debate of any kind: A 2006 state law deregulated prices for bundles of services that included wireless, Internet access, cable TV or other video and moved toward deregulating rates for local service in exchanges where competition existed. A 2011 law went further, allowing companies to avoid most state price caps. This year’s bill would allow those companies to avoid even the Kansas Corporation Commission’s consumer protection regulations and minimum quality-of-service standards. Like Kentucky, AT&T sold politicians on the idea by arguing that the shift to wireless requires "modernized" regulations, intentionally ignoring essentially all of the finer details. The bills, as is now status quo, provide AT&T with absolutely everything it wants, while Kansas consumers see less competition and higher prices for data. Despite the fact you'd be hard pressed historically to find any instance where deregulating AT&T didn't hurt consumers, the same story, mouthed by the usual folks, appears to be replaying itself ad infinitum.
|
  LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Williamstown, NJ
kudos:5 |  Welcome to the WIRELESS 21st century
If the telcos weren't putting their infrastructure capital expenditures in to wireless, their shareholders would be looking to invest for the future elsewhere.
And fiber's future is in the backbone(where the US is already very strong and getting stronger) and not in the last mile - that last mile will be wireless.
--
I will be perfectly happy if the budget cuts specified in the Budget Control Act go into effect. 3 cheers for the sequester. Take the money from the drunken federal spenders. | |
|  | brad
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON | Re: Welcome to the WIRELESS 21st century Please stop making me laugh. This is such a joke. Wireless isn't even close to replacing wired connections (as in Internet, not voice traffic) with the useless caps and ridiculously high prices. If wireless was rolled out to replace wireline the network would collapse. | |
| | | tkdslr
join:2004-04-24
Pompano Beach, FL Reviews:
 ·T-Mobile US
 ·Speakeasy
| Re: Welcome to the WIRELESS 21st century said by brad:Please stop making me laugh. This is such a joke. Wireless isn't even close to replacing wired connections (as in Internet, not voice traffic) with the useless caps and ridiculously high prices. If wireless was rolled out to replace wireline the network would collapse.
I gave up on aDSL when my service deteriorated to 384Kb(D) of less for much of the evening(Uverse deployments). I went wireless for both data and voice, but NOT with AT&T.
I figure that's 50 to $60 a month AT&T will never see again.. 
As long as there are four major wireless providers, AT&T & Verizon are making a big mistake by dumping customers..
Once bitten twice shy.. | |
| | | LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Williamstown, NJ
kudos:5 | said by brad:Please stop making me laugh. This is such a joke. Wireless isn't even close to replacing wired connections (as in Internet, not voice traffic) with the useless caps and ridiculously high prices. If wireless was rolled out to replace wireline the network would collapse.
Seems someone at Forbes agrees with me and spells out why:
»www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall···elevant/
--
I will be perfectly happy if the budget cuts specified in the Budget Control Act go into effect. 3 cheers for the sequester. Take the money from the drunken federal spenders. | |
| | | |  NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:6
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| Re: Welcome to the WIRELESS 21st century said by Linklist:Seems someone at Forbes ...
Is looking expectantly at wireless Internet which will offer 50 Mbps, with a 10 GB cap, and $10 for each GB over, for $65 a month. Good news for investor dividends, but I'll be damned if I am going to pay $915 per month for Internet!!! 
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
| | | | | | This idea that wireless will replace fiber requires some snooping around for some ridiculous bandwidth numbers, so I went hunting on google and wikipedia for some statistics and specifications.
Google turned up that according to an article from Cisco, the global mobile data traffic at the end of 2012 was 885 petabytes per month (or 927,989,760 gigabytes per month). So we divide that by 30 days in a month, then 24 hours in a day, then 60 minutes in an hour, then 60 seconds in a minute and we arrive at an impressive 358 gigabytes per second.
According to wikipedia, in 2011 NEC achieved a data rate of 101 terabits per second on a single optical fiber 165 kilometers long. 101 terabits divided by 8 bits in a byte is 12.625 terabytes, multiplied by 1024 gigabytes in a terabyte is 12,928 gigabytes per second.
In other words on average you could fit the mobile traffic of the entire planet through a single optical fiber and still have over 35 times more bandwidth to spare. And from the looks of it, they aren't even beginning to approach the physical limits of data rates through fiber. I would say that fiber is in no danger of becoming outdated any time soon, it remains orders of magnitude faster than any other mode of long distance communication available. | |
|
| | | said by Linklist:The under 30's group gets it. They have pretty much abandoned wired POTS and DSL. Sorry, but wired connections aren't going anywhere. At current $/GB rates, if I switched to wireless my monthly bill will be over $15,000.
The reason DSL died is it's SLOW. Really, really slow. The absolute best, topmost tier around here is only ~2 mbps more then the slowest cable plan you can get, and you can only get that if you're practically next to the central office.
/M | |
| |  The LimitPremium
join:2007-09-25
Greensboro, NC
kudos:2
·Windstream
| As an individual under 30, I'd have to say that apparently I don't get it because I'm definitely not a proponent for wireless last mile.
I hope that you honestly don't believe this.
--
"We will evaluate these integrals rigorously if we can, and non-rigorously if we must".
---Victor Moll, invited talk, Tom Osler Fest (April 17, 2010) | |
| | WHT
join:2010-03-26
Decatur, TX
kudos:5 | said by Linklist:Wireless is replacing wired connections. Correct..but with inferior and much more costly service. | |
| | | Reviews:
 ·DIRECTV
| Re: Welcome to the WIRELESS 21st century EXACTLY.
But the pay off of the so called "public servants" is so pervasive that these companies can do as they please without any fear of penalty.
Anyone who things wireless is a "practical" solution for broadband only works for companies like Verizon or ATT.
The cost to consumers for these wireless service is OUTRAGEOUS! | |
|
| | | Hahahahah. I have never seen some much nonsensical statements in one place. Wireless is replacing what? You made the under 30's look like fools. | |
| | | | | Re: Welcome to the WIRELESS 21st century said by saneblane:Hahahahah. I have never seen some much nonsensical statements in one place. Wireless is replacing what? You made the under 30's look like fools.
I agree with the first 2 sentences 100%
As far as that third sentence, I'd have to say most of the under 30 crowd is so uneducated about almost everything, it's not even funny. They've had their faces buried in cell phones, games, and just generally being so spoiled rotten and given so many hand outs, the world is only going to CONTINUE to go down the tubes FASTER than any rock has ever sunk!!
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/ | |
| | | | The LimitPremium
join:2007-09-25
Greensboro, NC
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Windstream
| Re: Welcome to the WIRELESS 21st century Sadly, this is the case. I see it everywhere I go, but I wouldn't limit it to the under 30 group. Almost everyone is like this. I can't talk politics with anyone unless it's during election season, and even then the scope of that conversation is very limited. People just don't care anymore.
--
"We will evaluate these integrals rigorously if we can, and non-rigorously if we must".
---Victor Moll, invited talk, Tom Osler Fest (April 17, 2010) | |
|
| DolganPremium
join:2005-10-01
Sun Prairie, WI Reviews:
 ·Charter
| You really need to stop drinking the Telco Kool-Aid as Wireless is not even close to being able to handle the loads we place upon our wired infrastructure. Wireless can't even meet the total need that consumers have, so how do you expect it to also meet the needs of Businesses as well? How well would an all wireless call center work out for ATT and Verizon when you have to handle thousands of calls and meet data transport needs for all of the information the CSRs are typing in throughout the day? That's right--wireless would be an utter failure in that situation...it would be the same for most business that rely heavily upon Telecommunications and Data transport. We are many decades away from wireless even coming close to being ready to take over from wired networks...if they ever can. | |
| | NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:6 Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| said by Linklist:And fiber's future is in the backbone(where the US is already very strong and getting stronger) and not in the last mile - that last mile will be wireless.
Sorry, but the price of Last Mile wireless is beyond my budget. There must be a lot of 30-somethings earning in excess of $75,000 a year if current data plans and prices are going to be The Great DSL Killer.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
| | | | said by Linklist:And fiber's future is in the backbone(where the US is already very strong and getting stronger) and not in the last mile - that last mile will be wireless. As some who knows way more about this than the original poster, I can tell you that is false. Fiber depth into the middle mile is slowly increasing. I've seen the presentations and attended a number of technical discussions on this topic from within two of large MSOs operating in the US. Once node sizes fall below a certain point, the cost of the electronics and equipment exceeds just running fiber right out of the node directly to the consumer. | |
| |  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | The lawmakers get the checks, you mean.
A couple of years ago AT&T did this in Oklahoma. Wireless is a bad joke. On us. | |
|
| | There is no government any longer....
... just corporate kleptocracy and their bought & paid for sock puppets. | |
| |  xdeadhead220, 221, Whatever It Takes.Premium
join:2000-11-08
Mechanicsburg, PA | Re: There is no government any longer.... i love how verizon keeps making and breaking promises. isnt their new motto "no more broken promises?" that lasted what... a week? | |
|
elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | Wisdom, Kansas Style The bill doesn't "give cable a monopoly".
Instead, it frees obsolete, unsustainable copper markets, to be competitive via wireless service.
Nothing prevents an overbuilder or cooperative from building their own last-mile network, or for that matter, the local municipality from taking ownership of the copper plant, if they should choose to invoke eminent domain and pay FMV for the franchise. | |
| | ke4pymPremium
join:2004-07-24
Charlotte, NC Reviews:
 ·VOIPo
·Verizon Broadban..
·RoadRunner Cable
·Northland Cable ..
| Re: Wisdom, Kansas Style said by elray:Nothing prevents an overbuilder or cooperative from building their own last-mile network, or for that matter, the local municipality from taking ownership of the copper plant, if they should choose to invoke eminent domain and pay FMV for the franchise.
Good thing this isn't in NC. Because the muni's can't get in that business.
Well, they can. After they jump through so many hoops it bankrupts them... | |
| | | elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | Re: Wisdom, Kansas Style said by ke4pym:said by elray:Nothing prevents an overbuilder or cooperative from building their own last-mile network, or for that matter, the local municipality from taking ownership of the copper plant, if they should choose to invoke eminent domain and pay FMV for the franchise.
Good thing this isn't in NC. Because the muni's can't get in that business. Well, they can. After they jump through so many hoops it bankrupts them... Most government agencies don't need any help going bankrupt.
That's only one of many reasons why they should stay out of the broadband business. Lets leave the BK losses to investors and shareholders, thanks.
But if a muni sincerely wants to, they can, indeed, take over the local franchise, providing they pay for it. What you call "hoops" we call checks and balances, protecting the citizens from the errant folly of their elected officials.
What they can't and shouldn't do easily, is set up their own shop in "competition" with the very entities they once gave exclusive license to, then proceed to bankrupt them (or themselves) with a race-to-the-bottom using taxpayer funds.
And lastly, again, there is nothing that prevents a 3rd-party overbuilder, CLEC or cooperative, from entering the fray and wiring the neighborhood. | |
| | | | | | Re: Wisdom, Kansas Style Follow the money trail. Why are these types of anti municipal fiber bills universally funded by the telephone and cable companies? Because they're trying to protect taxpayer money out of the goodness of their own heart? | |
| | | | ke4pymPremium
join:2004-07-24
Charlotte, NC Reviews:
·VOIPo
·Verizon Broadban..
·RoadRunner Cable
·Northland Cable ..
| said by elray:Most government agencies don't need any help going bankrupt.
That's only one of many reasons why they should stay out of the broadband business. Lets leave the BK losses to investors and shareholders, thanks.
But if a muni sincerely wants to, they can, indeed, take over the local franchise, providing they pay for it. What you call "hoops" we call checks and balances, protecting the citizens from the errant folly of their elected officials.
What they can't and shouldn't do easily, is set up their own shop in "competition" with the very entities they once gave exclusive license to, then proceed to bankrupt them (or themselves) with a race-to-the-bottom using taxpayer funds.
And lastly, again, there is nothing that prevents a 3rd-party overbuilder, CLEC or cooperative, from entering the fray and wiring the neighborhood.
I find this argument funny.
No, you can't use tax payer dollars to back a broadband solution (read: not directly fund).
But it's okay (at least in this city) to:
Use (local and (as proposed) state) tax payer dollars to fund a renovation of a privately owned NFL stadium.
Use tax payer dollars to fund a trolley to no where (that gets stuck in traffic like cheaper-to-run city buses).
Use tax payer dollars to fund our basketball team.
Now, our water and sewer is tax payer backed. But it is funded by revenue collected by those using the system. Why are people not against this? But against this model for broadband? | |
| | | | axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC | Checks and balances should apply to AT&T, as well as the municipalities. | |
|
| brad
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON | said by elray:Instead, it frees obsolete, unsustainable copper markets, to be competitive via wireless service.
Wireless isn't even close to being competitive with cable. | |
| | | elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | Re: Wisdom, Kansas Style said by brad:said by elray:Instead, it frees obsolete, unsustainable copper markets, to be competitive via wireless service.
Wireless isn't even close to being competitive with cable. Wireless is competitive - "greed" will draw multiple sellers.
Cable is irrelevant in copper-only markets. | |
| | | | CXM_Splicera more sensible viewPremium
join:2011-08-11
NYC
kudos:1 Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| Re: Wisdom, Kansas Style said by elray:said by brad:said by elray:Instead, it frees obsolete, unsustainable copper markets, to be competitive via wireless service.
Wireless isn't even close to being competitive with cable. Wireless is competitive - "greed" will draw multiple sellers. Cable is irrelevant in copper-only markets. If spectrum wasn't a fixed resource you would be right. | |
| | | | | elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | Re: Wisdom, Kansas Style said by CXM_Splicer:If spectrum wasn't a fixed resource you would be right.
According most of the partisans here, spectrum is unlimited.
But while you are technically correct, for purposes of replacing copper service to low-density / rural settings, spectrum availability for fixed-LTE should not be an issue, only the unrealistic expectations of "unlimited" service levels held by a small minority of subscribers. | |
| | | | | | brad
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON | Re: Wisdom, Kansas Style No, it is only the deluded that think spectrum is unlimited. The same people who think wireless is actually adequate for replacing wireline services (under current conditions).
Then it isn't a replacement for wireline services. | |
| | | | | | | CXM_Splicera more sensible viewPremium
join:2011-08-11
NYC
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: Wisdom, Kansas Style True... I think there is a BIG difference is saying 'spectrum is unlimited' and 'there is no spectrum crunch'. I don't think I have ever heard anyone profess the former.
If spectrum is not an issue and demand will create competitors then why don't we have a hundred different wireless competing like they do in parts of Europe? | |
| | | | | | | |
See 6 replies to this post |
| | | ke4pymPremium
join:2004-07-24
Charlotte, NC Reviews:
·VOIPo
·Verizon Broadban..
·RoadRunner Cable
·Northland Cable ..
| said by elray:said by brad:said by elray:Instead, it frees obsolete, unsustainable copper markets, to be competitive via wireless service.
Wireless isn't even close to being competitive with cable. Wireless is competitive - "greed" will draw multiple sellers. Cable is irrelevant in copper-only markets. What is a copper-only market? Last I checked, cable was delivered over copper (in 98.9% of the cases). | |
|
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·Mediacom
·T-Mobile US
| nice (biased?) article Divide between European and U.S. telcos widens
quote:
BARCELONA (Reuters) - When the bosses of global mobile operators meet in Barcelona this week, there will be an elephant in the room: the widening gap between fast-growing and richly-valued U.S. telecoms companies and their ailing European counterparts.
A overcrowded market, tough regulations and recession are hampering European telcos' ability to invest in faster networks, increasing the risk that the region's flagging economy falls further behind the United States and parts of Asia. [...]
more
»news.yahoo.com/divide-between-eu···tor.html | |
| | | | Re: nice (biased?) article That article was about Wireless companies only, not all broadband providers. Wired service is a whole lot faster and cheaper than wireless broadband. I think it is very telling that the countries cleaning our clocks in every metric of internet access are all primarily WIRED broadband countries. | |
| | CXM_Splicera more sensible viewPremium
join:2011-08-11
NYC
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| The article you quote clearly points out the reason for the difference is lack of competition here vs. incredible competition in Europe. It is also talking about the 'quality' from a shareholder point of view, not from a customer point of view.
I guess you could take the stance that we should have monopolies because that gives them the ability to squeeze customers for more money to invest. Such a stance is anti-capitalistic though, and another example of why business actually hates the concept of the free market. | |
| | | KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service
| Re: nice (biased?) article Bingo. They are talking about how wealthy the companies are from an investor's standpoint; How much profits they are bringing.
The US companies are valued SO MUCH HIGHER because they face limited competition and able to overcharge AT WILL.
This article is complaining about how they wish European wireless companies could rip off consumers as much as US ones can!
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
| | | | CXM_Splicera more sensible viewPremium
join:2011-08-11
NYC
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: nice (biased?) article Yes, exactly. Of course it is true that a company that overcharges its customers will have extra cash to invest (if they feel like it) but when they have such limited competition... why bother? Where is the incentive? Look how long it is taking some US companies just to roll out 3G!
Coincidentally, Karl also posted a piece today about "France to Spend $27 Billion On Fiber to the Home"; last time I checked, they were in Europe. So apparently, Europe doesn't really have a problem raising cash for infrastructure, they have a 'problem' raising dividends for the shareholders. | |
|
 mobOn the next level..Premium
join:2000-10-07 | I will sell ATT the secret I possess the magic spell for making anything pass the house and senate in Kansas. ATT can buy this spell for only 1500 Kilograms each of gold bullion and platinum bullion. | |
| | | | Re: I will sell ATT the secret said by mob:I possess the magic spell for making anything pass the house and senate in Kansas. ATT can buy this spell for only 1500 Kilograms each of gold bullion and platinum bullion.
How much is that in Amurrican? | |
| | |  AMDUSERPremium
join:2003-05-28
Earth
kudos:1 | Re: I will sell ATT the secret Almost 3,307 pounds of each...
gold: @ about $1600 per oz.... $84,695,200
platinum: @ $744.44 per oz.... $39,389,809.28
Pricing: hxxp://www.monex.com/liveprices | |
| | | | mobOn the next level..Premium
join:2000-10-07 | Re: I will sell ATT the secret Rather cheap for an entire state, wouldn't you say? | |
|
| | The elephant in the room. The elephant in the room is actually that they deregulated and allowed monopolies to buy out and run businesses that compete with their own. The problem here is a monopoly with near unlimited cash can buy out a competitor. Then they decide which makes the most money and close the free market ending all competition but one. Ie Creating a enforced monopoly where prices are fixed.
We literally allow telcom monopolies to soak up government tax subsidies for wire line and allow them to use that money to buy out a fledgling wireless industry. They then decide wireless gives a monopoly more gouging power over the public so we let them shut down wire line service so they can be allowed to charge more without having to compete with a conflicting/competing service they also "opps" happen to own. It's pure corruption and a attack on the free market principles.
How consumers are ALLOWED to spend their dollars are being literally voted by lobbyists (rotating door!) and regulators staffed by companies they are supposed to regulate!
There is no democracy, no republic, only who has the biggest wallet having ANY say at all in what is best for the public now. If you want to complain opps political parties are allowed to own majority shares in media. Even if they don't media will never post news that offends a paying advertiser. They'll convert the public on a scape goat most likely someone trying to fix the problem.
--
--
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the corporations discover that money can elect representatives to vote themselves a monopoly, buy media to blame 'The Godless' and forced price inflation on the public. | |
| BiggA
join:2005-11-23
EARTH Reviews:
·Comcast
| This makes no sense yet again As usual, DSLReports is reporting that somehow AT&T is just going to stop offering DSL service. That's ridiculous. They want out of regulation, which is bad, but DSLReports shouldn't be spreading this FUD about ending DSL service. What company in their right mind would get rid of existing infrastructure that's already paid for? Once it's there, it's a cash cow. The flip side is that they aren't upgrading to fiber, but rather leaving 6mbps DSL as the fasest thing they can handle and not upgrading the systems. | |
| | Zoder
join:2002-04-16
Miami, FL | Re: This makes no sense yet again Then why'd Verizon sell off their lines a few years ago in all of those states? | |
| | | BiggA
join:2005-11-23
EARTH Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: This makes no sense yet again They didn't get rid of the lines. In fact, those systems now have MORE DSL, as they are owned by a company that is focused on rural DSL. Like in New Hampshire where they installed a bunch of ADSL2+ RDSLAMs.
They're not going to just get rid of something that's already built, and rather profitable. That just doesn't make any sense. If anything, the article is about hanging up on the extremely far out landlines, which are so far out that they don't have DSL anyways, and probably are basically unused. | |
|
| KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service
| said by BiggA:What company in their right mind would get rid of existing infrastructure that's already paid for? That's *exactly* what AT&T is doing.
And they just don't abandon it if they can find somebody else to sell it too. (Windstream.) If not, they just let it die.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
BiggA
join:2005-11-23
EARTH Reviews:
·Comcast
| What they SHOULD do Is pass a law that says AT&T has to offer either POTS -OR- GPON fiber to every household. If they let AT&T get rid of the copper in exchange for GPON, they would actually be incented to build the GPON so that they could scrap the copper... which then they actually would, unlike now, where they just keep copper as they don't want to run two systems. | |
| | | | Re: What they SHOULD do said by BiggA:Is pass a law that says AT&T has to offer either POTS -OR- GPON fiber to every household. If they let AT&T get rid of the copper in exchange for GPON, they would actually be incented to build the GPON so that they could scrap the copper... which then they actually would, unlike now, where they just keep copper as they don't want to run two systems.
What they should do is not allow their laws to be written by AT&T lobbyists. | |
| | | BiggA
join:2005-11-23
EARTH | Re: What they SHOULD do It's a give and take. Give them killing copper... iff they build GPON. | |
|
 RR ConductorNWP RR Co.,serving NW CAPremium
join:2002-04-02
Redwood Valley, CA
kudos:1 | Scott Walker and his anti-union band "Verizon Wireless isn't unionized, so Verizon gets rid of union headaches"
Translation-They can treat the workers like crap, pay them low wages and give them no benefits, no pesky moral obligations for these companies!
--
| |
| | | Kentucky SB88 anyone from Kentucky needs to make their voice heard, below is a link to the Kentucky Legislature. SB88 has already passed the KY Senate, but it is expected to have a much harder time in the House. Email your legislator and tell them how you feel.
»www.lrc.ky.gov/ | |
| Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| AT&T and Verizon didn't "sell" politicians on the idea, the politicians sold out to AT&T and Verizon. How much did AT&T and Verizon pay the politicians under the table for the laws? Being a state politician must be a lucrative position -how much do they collect under the table in a year? | |
| | | | Re: AT&T and Verizon You might be surprised at how cheaply you can buy a politician, at least in Kentucky. KY oldtimers may remember the infamous BOPTROT scandal, when a bunch of legislators were caught in an FBI investigation. The Speaker of the House was caught on videotape saying "Bless your heart" as he took his $500 bribe. | |
|
| |
|
|
