 | | More Bailouts Another sign of the ongoing corporate buyout of our government. Both parties are to blame. AT&T buys the dinners and the votes, and gets whatever it wants. | |
|
 |  BF69Premium join:2004-07-28 Camden, TN | Re: More Bailouts Not sure how a cap removal is a "bailout"? And you use "bailout" like it's a bad word. Sure GM got a bialout and they're paying it back and they are now hiring workers back. If no bialout they be out of business and less people working and more FORIEGN cars would be being sold in the US.
Ever borrowed money form mom and dad after you moved out on your own? Sure you did. I guess they bailed YOU our didn't they? | |
|
 |  |  | | Re: More Bailouts no more bailouts:
time to put these older companies out of their misery. stop with the gouging. if u cant compete get the fuck out at&t.take ur business overseas and sucker someone over there. | |
|
 |  |  | | said by BF69:Ever borrowed money form mom and dad after you moved out on your own? Sure you did. I guess they bailed YOU our didn't they? Borrowing money from your parents has ZERO resemblence to getting taxpayer money from a tax base that's hurting to prop up a failing business. GM should have been allowed to fail. | |
|
 |  |  |  BF69Premium join:2004-07-28 Camden, TN | Re: More Bailouts said by footballdude:said by BF69:Ever borrowed money form mom and dad after you moved out on your own? Sure you did. I guess they bailed YOU our didn't they? Borrowing money from your parents has ZERO resemblence to getting taxpayer money from a tax base that's hurting to prop up a failing business. GM should have been allowed to fail. and the ecomomy would be worse off. cut your noe to spite your face? Also it's called a LOAN not a bailout. Ever got a LOAN form a bank? I gues you got bailed out. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  | | Re: More Bailouts said by BF69:and the ecomomy would be worse off. The economy tanked anyway. Should everyone that lost their jobs have gotten taxpayer money to artificially prop their failed business up? | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  cdruGo ColtsPremium,MVM join:2003-05-14 Fort Wayne, IN kudos:7 | Re: More Bailouts said by footballdude:said by BF69:and the ecomomy would be worse off. The economy tanked anyway. Should everyone that lost their jobs have gotten taxpayer money to artificially prop their failed business up? You did. Except it was in the form of a tax credit instead of a loan that had to explicitly be paid back. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  | | Re: More Bailouts said by cdru:Except it was in the form of a tax credit instead of a loan that had to explicitly be paid back. Tax credits allow you to keep your own money, not borrow someone else's. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie.Premium join:2003-02-06 Netcong, NJ | Re: More Bailouts said by footballdude: Tax credits allow you to keep your own money, not borrow someone else's.
If one reads the rants on this supposed forum one reads if The Phone Company legally gets a tax credit they are pure evil and should have all of their assets confiscated and given to the people for free 100/100 to their outhouses. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  MurdocPremium join:2009-02-08 Manitowoc, WI Reviews:
·Comcast
| said by BF69:said by footballdude:said by BF69:Ever borrowed money form mom and dad after you moved out on your own? Sure you did. I guess they bailed YOU our didn't they? Borrowing money from your parents has ZERO resemblence to getting taxpayer money from a tax base that's hurting to prop up a failing business. GM should have been allowed to fail. and the ecomomy would be worse off. cut your noe to spite your face? Also it's called a LOAN not a bailout. Ever got a LOAN form a bank? I gues you got bailed out. No....Bailout means someone screwed up. Loan means you are usually doing the right thing if you have decent credit. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie.Premium join:2003-02-06 Netcong, NJ | Re: More Bailouts said by Murdoc:No....Bailout means someone screwed up. These so called "bailouts" were not a loan or a dole; The US bought the companies stock to keep them from going under. Funny the posters on this supposed forum love it when the government gets into private business; well if they think they will get subsidized porn to their outhouse they do. | |
|
 |  |  | | whats a bialout? did you mean BAILOUT? | |
|
 |  |  | | The point is it is essentially a monopoly industry, and they are using lobbying our government to not only further push rate increases customers can't afford, but to start shutting down vital services to unprofitable areas, hurting the potential for growth in a lot of rural areas. That was another part of this.
The title I used was a bit misleading, I'll admit. But I put it in because I had to put something. But it is a buyout, and it's the same mentality running most of the country into the ground. Corporations are getting their profits not through innovation, but through colluding with government and forced deregulation. | |
|
 |  |  |  batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie.Premium join:2003-02-06 Netcong, NJ | Re: More Bailouts said by osravens:The point is it is essentially a monopoly industry, It was a monopoly; a highly regulated one. at&t is only getting what every other hustle-a-buck "phone" company has. The ability to charge what the market will bear for POTS.
This supposed forum is ecstatic that the people are "cutting the cord" and land-lines from The Phone Company are disappearing. You wanted "competition" you got it.
That said in NJ POTS is totally regulated even if it comes over glass. If I get a $10,000 bill from Verizon I only have to pay the $23 POTS charge and they can't take my dial-tone away; it will stay that forever and a day. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  KearnstdElf WizardPremium join:2002-01-22 Mullica Hill, NJ | Re: More Bailouts thats because the Telco does not own NJ, the Mafia does. 
and I dont see Verizon pushing the Mob out any time soon when it comes to owned political critters. -- [65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie.Premium join:2003-02-06 Netcong, NJ | Re: More Bailouts said by Kearnstd:thats because the Telco does not own NJ, the Mafia does. 
and I dont see Verizon pushing the Mob out any time soon when it comes to owned political critters. I know NJ and I know NJ telephone unions. Never, never, never had there been any outside control of the IBEW or CWA both AFL-CIO affiliates. Every union official came up from the local rank and file. The biggest complaint was the union and company were a bit to cosy. Some strikes, I believe, were prearranged so The Phone Company could tell the share holders they were forced to give a bit more because of the hardship imposed on the subscribers by the large sinewy men walking up and down in front of the gate. | |
|
 |  wings10I Am LegendPremium join:2004-06-09 South Elgin, IL | I agree. | |
|
 |
 |  openbox9Premium join:2004-01-26 japan kudos:2 | Re: What the Phone Parasites never mention! POTS customers are already dropping service at an increasing rate, and that's with regulated rates. Deregulated rates will only increase the trend. POTS providers face significant competition from cable companies entering the voice market. Add in the trend towards wireless only, and I honestly can't believe it's taking this long to deregulate traditional dial tone. | |
|
 |  |  |
 |  |  |  openbox9Premium join:2004-01-26 japan kudos:2 | Re: What the Phone Parasites never mention! said by Mr Matt:Wire line carriers would like to force customers from regulated service to unregulated service. Ok. So?said by Mr Matt:The two major wire line carriers have wireless networks so why not force customers to cellular No forcing has been required. Many people are leaping to mobile devices for their communications.said by Mr Matt:Once Bush took over, his administration stabbed the CLEC's in the back. Slanted political discussions are silly. Neither side truly has your best interest in mind, so please stop trying to blame politicians.said by Mr Matt:If the wire line carriers were forced to divest their interests in their wireless networks they would changer their tune. Wire line prices would go down and suddenly there might be no benefit in switching to cellular. No, the POTS spinoffs would be allowed to wither into obscurity. Do you truly believe that the major telcos really want to be in the residential POTS business? We don't live in a pre-80s world anymore. | |
|
 |  |  |  batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie.Premium join:2003-02-06 Netcong, NJ | said by Mr Matt:If the wire line carriers were forced to divest their interests in their wireless networks they would changer their tune. Wire line prices would go down and suddenly there might be no benefit in switching to cellular. You tell them. How did that work for you back in 84? | |
|
 |  |
 | | its not USA anymore it well now be AT&T soon God what pigs I pay the guys in our country with my tax money to get greedy ATT pay them to over charge or deny service for USA customers. | |
|
 shimonmorPremium join:2000-12-30 Sedro Woolley, WA | Money Talks The core tenet of government is "money talks". They prostitute themselves for campaign contributions so they can get re-elected. It's a dirty, vicious cycle. There is only one solution: TERM LIMITS! | |
|
 |  |
 |  | | Re: Money Talks Term limits would make everything worse. Being an endless rotating cycle of characters would make the system full of essentially industry shills.
The key is getting the money out of the system altogether through public financing. | |
|
 |  |  BF69Premium join:2004-07-28 Camden, TN | Re: Money Talks said by osravens:Term limits would make everything worse. Being an endless rotating cycle of characters would make the system full of essentially industry shills. I think the fact that term limits prevented a 3rd term for Bush speaks to the validity of them. I'm pretty sure republicans are glad Clinton didn't get a 3rd term.
The key is getting the money out of the system altogether through public financing. Not going to happen. Hell the US supreme court has stated coprotations can give as much as they want to canddiates. You're asking the foxes to vote to lock themselves out of the henhouse. | |
|
 |  |  |  | | Re: Money Talks Oh, I know it's not going to happen. But that's precisely the point. It's going to get a lot worse before it gets better.
Evidence shows that when term limits are imposed (as they have been in many state legislatures), interest groups and lobbyists get more power. Lawmakers need to get up to speed quickly, and they're more than happy to rely on wherever they can get information. The telcos are more than happy to oblige. | |
|
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD | Stuff Costs Money I don't see why rates should be artificially capped when it does indeed cost real money to keep that service in place. -- "Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|
 |  | | Re: Stuff Costs Money The costs aren't really rising. AT&T isn't laying new copper. And raising costs on what is really a dinosaur will encourage people to keep cutting their landlines, which AT&T would love to do away with all support for.
The price caps are less of the issue and more of the fact that it can allow AT&T to remove existing copper. These rural areas aren't going to get u-Verse to replace it, they're just going to be screwed. | |
|
 |  |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD | Re: Stuff Costs Money said by osravens:The costs aren't really rising. Where is this documented? Are you 100% certain that AT&T's costs for its landline operations in Kansas are the same or less than they were last year? -- "Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|
 |  |  |  | | Re: Stuff Costs Money AT&T could very easily prove or disprove what their costs are by showing the books.
But the point stands, AT&T isn't laying copper anywhere, merely repairing any existing or newly discovered problem areas. We all know the cost of phone calls has drastically dropped in the last 20 years, both in wireline and wireless communications.
The cap only existed on the basic tier of service. We all know AT&T made their money on adding features, through long distance, caller ID, three-way calling, etc., and they've been able to increase those fees whenever they felt like it. Remember that before you feel sorry for poor old abused and broke AT&T.
Raising prices achieves AT&T's dream of being able to get off the copper network, force everyone into u-Verse, VoIP or the Mobility unit. | |
|
 |  |  |  | | Even if costs were rising I don't think they would be rising more than the Federal Access Charge which has continually risen. Even though all evidence we have seen is that costs are very low on mainting POTs networks. | |
|
 |  | | Costs has been offset by off-shoring good jobs which increases their bottom line (margins). People make less but corporations expect them to pay more for a service that costs penies to deliver. The old formula in cutting costs was through inovation and investment.
The new formula is to offshore 75% of your workforce with little to no investment and charge as much as can for as long as possible. I really don't see why costs for some services goes up when operational cost have gone done over time. If there were new features It's understandable but if it's the same status quo there is no logic beside greed. | |
|
 |  LinklistPremium join:2002-03-03 Longport, NJ kudos:5 | said by pnh102:I don't see why rates should be artificially capped when it does indeed cost real money to keep that service in place. When rates are regulated it takes a long time to get rates raised when inflation hits with a vengeance. So any company that wants the ability to adjust prices to changing conditions hates caps. And inflation is going to return this year with a vengeance: »www.usatoday.com/money/industrie···on_N.htm
So I don't blame AT&T for wanting rate caps removed. -- Record your speedtest.net results in DSLReports SpeedWave »www.speedtest.net/wave/afe201cb84d45c88 | |
|
 |  |  Kamus join:2011-01-27 El Paso, TX | Re: Stuff Costs Money "So I don't blame AT&T for wanting rate caps removed."
I agree, everything AT&T does is admirable.
-Removing price caps. -Enrolling jailbreakers on their tethering plan -Putting 150/250 GB caps in place in anticipation of an unprecedented bandwidth demand because of HD video instead of doing what ISP's in europe do (offer MORE speed) -Attempting to buy the competition for 39 billion dollars instead of using that money to upgrade their obsolete copper networks.
I wouldn't blame them either if i was a major stockholder, but that's about it. | |
|
 OneEye join:2006-04-15 Peachtree City, GA | AT&T or Comcast. What a miserable choice. Porting of my phone number from AT&T to an ooma telo voip device will be complete by April 4th. I've been a customer of Bellsouth and AT&T since 1965. IMHO, AT&T is the most unethical American corporation now doing business in the U.S.
I only wish I had another choice other than the government sponsored monopolies of AT&T or Comcast for my internet connection.
Competition is the only answer to this entire mess. | |
|
 |  ackman join:2000-10-04 Atlanta, GA | Re: AT&T or Comcast. What a miserable choice. Agreed, well said. | |
|
 |  MurdocPremium join:2009-02-08 Manitowoc, WI | Same problem here Att and comcrap only area, with some wireless isps but with low caps. | |
|
 firefoxPremium join:2000-12-03 San Jose, CA | So is this an April Fool's joke? Seriously? At the heels of the Google KC fiber announcement, this shows up? How long has AT&T and their paid legislators been working on this? The timing couldn't be more impeccable. | |
|
 ackman join:2000-10-04 Atlanta, GA | nice Long live the Fascist States of America! | |
|
 Reviews:
·ooma
·Optimum Online
·Verizon FiOS
| billions of cash & stock for merger the states are stupid and the politicians corrupt. that does not let the people off the hook voting for the bastards in the first place.
a company is too big when it has unfair influence upon state and federal goverment... let's think about which industries and foreign interests have that power:
defense oil banks wall street china saudi arabia
approval of the merger puts at&t in a position to be somewhere at the bottom of the list (if state & federal regulators are THAT STUPID).
I pity the fool that lets this happen. (Mr. T) | |
|
 JohnInSJPremium join:2003-09-22 San Jose, CA | deregulation is now bad? Wow. Neat. | |
|
 lkrupp join:2001-07-14 Collinsville, IL | The bozos in this thread... Where do you people get off complaining about this? There are numerous choices available for telephone service. The big telcos haven't had a monopoly on service for twenty years now. You can get basic dial tone from just about anywhere these days, not to mention VOIP from a number of providers. Wireline dial tone is dying rapidly, killed by cell, cable, and other services, NONE of which are regulated. But for some reason you whiners think basic phone service still needs to be regulated. There hasn't been a need to regulate landline service for years because of fierce competition. I have three adult children and NONE of them has a landline. They all have cell phones, VOIP or other alternatives.
Bunch of crying, whining, ignorant at&t haters who don't have a clue as to why this deregulation happened. | |
|
 |  |
 |  | | You may have competition where YOU live, but for many Americans who live in rural areas, there is still NO competition. at&t may very well be the only player in town, and thanks to this ... they may NOT be required to continue offering some or all of these services to the rural communities they serve today.
What happens to these communities and the jobs there, when the ONLY phone company in town, pulls out and no longer offers service? Pray the town can afford to launch a telephone co-op or something, otherwise the town will die. If the town dies, those jobs die and the good Americans who live there, might as well just die. They'd be forced to move elsewhere! Granted, who would want to buy a house in a town that doesn't even have phone service available?? Without the sale of the previous home to finance the new home, in some other town that hopefully has phone service still, how are these families supposed to cope? I somehow doubt Obama will provide a bailout to them.
at&t doesn't give two shits about the residents of BFE, Kansas! It costs too much money to continue to provide service there, they don't make enough money on the landline operations, so they'd rather just fold up tent and go home!
As much as I'd like to see the 'new' at&t wither up and die a painful death, I think the Federal government should open up the Universal Service Fund to get these rural communities up to par with major cities, in terms of communication services available. The money is there, and building out fiber could certainly open up new jobs and markets for more than just the 'new' at&t. Isn't that why we've been paying into the USF since the Spanish-American War?? | |
|
 |  |  batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie.Premium join:2003-02-06 Netcong, NJ | Re: The bozos in this thread... said by t3ln3t :Isn't that why we've been paying into the USF since the Spanish-American War?? No that was/is the Federal Excise Tax.
Before the promise of a free lunch by MCI, the old AT&T was mandated to provide Universal Service at a Reasonable (government approved) Cost. Will MCI and other competitors could do that and for pennies and gig.
Oh my less than 10 years after the deregulation of AT&T MCI was not bringing 100/100 to the outhouses; but they promised. 
What to do what to do? I know create a mega billion dollar public slush fund filled every year by tax payers. This will bring back the way it was when AT&T was the phone company. Won't it?  | |
|
 |  rraAdvice join:2008-09-19 Kingsville, MO | take me back... | |
|
 | | Here in PA... Our wireless bills went down a few dollars a month last summer.
The legislature here is extremely consumer protection oriented.
- A -- LETS GO METS! | |
|
 |  batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie.Premium join:2003-02-06 Netcong, NJ | Re: Here in PA... said by FastiBook:Our wireless bills went down a few dollars a month last summer.
The legislature here is extremely consumer protection oriented. Really? I thought the only price control was on POTS. The only other government price controls I know of are on milk; it can't be sold BELOW a cretin price. | |
|
 |
|