said by dadkins :

Get these old farts that are freakin clueless out of office and open the floodgates already!

said by Doctor Four :

Like Senator Ted Stevens, who has been rightly and roundly
ridiculed and lampooned over his "net tubes" speech.

It shouldn't come as much of a surprise that the Internet content companies are winning the PR battle on their home turf in cyberspace, while the phone companies are faring pretty well in swaying opinion against Net neutrality in an arena they know quite well: Washington.

Wilderotter can also hit back when necessary - another quality the telcos require in a spokesperson. She is particularly critical of Google's efforts to promote Net neutrality at a time when the company is widely believed to be assembling its own Internet backbone, and is toying with different access strategies such as Wi-Fi.

"Someone needs to ask Google what its real intention is here," she says. "It is easy to put yourself in the content camp and tie the other guys up in a regulatory box while you secretly develop a whole access network to go after their customers."

said by TK Junk Mail :

Instead of negotiating, Google is battling in the one place it is sure to lose - Congress.

said by TK Junk Mail :

And I think Wilderotter has a good point to make about how Google has no cleaner hands than the telcos in this battle.

said by batterup :

The US under the Bell System had the best communication system in the World. Now with competition the US is 19 in the World.

said by swhx7 :


They did so with the benefit of huge corporate welfare, including direct subsidies ...

said by batterup :

That is B.S. Give me your sources. Who subsidised the Bell System? Don't give me any B.S. link to a B.S. ISP or CLEC stooge site as they don't site their sources ether.

said by bmn :

You and I... Telephone companies are given the ability to set rates that guarantee them profits...

said by batterup :

What company is going to set rates that guarantees them a loss? Do you know how business works?

said by batterup :

What company is going to set rates that guarantees them a loss? Do you know how business works?

said by bmn :


The ILECs are given permission to set prices that guarantee profits,

said by batterup :

That is only in the POTS service, the only service that is still regulated. Broadband is not regulated and prices are set by the company providing the service.

said by bmn :

And your point is? I think you've completely and totally missed the point of this discussion.

said by batterup :

The point is if there was one regulated common carrier Net neutrality would not be an issue.

Net neutrality will permit Google/Microsoft/Yahoo spiderbots to make VOIP choppy and delayed.

said by bmn :

How is that related to my first post in this thread that Telcos are subsidized ?

said by batterup :

You have yet to show me how and where Telcos are subsidized?

I will not accept any numbers from the ISP/CLEC astro turf Telltruth unless Telllies provides a source. Something they have never done.

Do you really believe a two billion dollar tax break?

said by bmn :

Already told you one way... It's in the way that the PSC and PUCs set the rates on the Telcos that allow the to operate with a guaranteed profit... Instead of the government collecting the fees and handing it over to telcos, they just took it right out of our pockets.

You are kidding me, right ? This has been beaten to death many ties over and there are plenty of sources that back the claims of Teletruth, including legislation that's been mentioned on this site. Secondly, there is no evidence to suggest that Teletruth is an astroturf group because there hasn't been anything to show that its being funded by some trade group or corporation. Other astroturf groups have connections that are easily decerned with some research.

As for it being a two billion dollar taxes break... That sum is a combination of tax breaks and PSC/PUC authorized charges that the telcos were allowed to collect.

said by batterup :

Teletruth is registered as a for-profit company. Look at the board of advisers; they all have a stake in being able to leech off another's network. You will not find a true grass roots group as the issues is too complex and boring for the general public to give a hoot.

Tellies and their ilk WorldCom/MCI feed the public shovels full of B.S. and the people swallowed it. Tellies/WorldCom/MCI has been exposed for what they are, greedy robber barons.

You must be happy that you can fool some of the people all of the time.

said by swhx7 :

At first I thought you were a corporate shill, but the lines about wanting something for nothing suggest more of a troll.

The more recent subsidies:
"Through tax breaks and increased service fees, Verizon and the old Bells reaped an estimated $200 billion since the early 1990s to improve subscriber lines in the United States" (niemanwatchdog.org). This techdirt article has more explanation and links.

said by GlennAllen :

"...go after their customers."

"their" customers? Like, in some way, my ISP "owns" me? I think not.

Regardless, the "content" is my concern, not that of my ISP. I pay for my connectivity, and I expect to be able to use it to its fullest--based on my service contract--as I see fit, at my discretion. An ISP that can't abide by its contracts doesn't deserve to have any customers whatsoever. I'm certainly not going to pay my ISP extra for content I don't get from them; I don't expect anyone else to. Google, Yahoo, etc. aren't the ones using my connection. I am.

said by richardpor :

If google can charge you $1.99 for a video why can the telecoms charge extra for special service. It is like buying groceries at the store then expecting the taxi driver to give you a free ride because the driver uses public streets.