  en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Just another reason... To go VoIP or wireless for phone service.
Telcos are charging more for the same service that's been around for a LONG time.
Sad that I can pay $3/month for unlimited calling on Skype, yet the 'line charge' on AT&T/VZ will be almost triple that.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
 | | |  Lobbying dollars in action
 | |
|
|  CylonRedPremium,MVM
join:2000-07-06
Bloom County | Re: Just another reason... Voip and wireless have their own serious issues for me to even think of using either one as a main phone - especially since I have kids.
I could go with a smaller ILEC - Cincinnati Bell over AT&T if need be. | |
|
| Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| said by en102:To go VoIP or wireless for phone service. Telcos are charging more for the same service that's been around for a LONG time.... agreed.
hopefully, the incumbents will give up the wireline phone business soon and leave it to the small clecs. then we just have to put up with the greedy bastards for broadband or wireless. | |
|
|  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| The Subscriber Line Charge (Read: More Telco Slush Fund)
needs to GO AWAY... NOT be INCREASED 25%.
Sheesh. I'd love a POTS line but they keep on insisting on pricing it out high with all the slush and crap tacked on.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
| | en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Re: Just another reason... Yeah - the taxes/fees/unfees cost more than the service itself.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
 n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY
 ·Optimum Online
| FCC Line Charge The "FCC Line Charge" in and of itself is the biggest ripoff to date. It seemed to make sense back in the early 1980's when AT&T was first broken up and the regional companies needed funds to establish their networks. However, now it is just another fee that goes right to the bottom line of the ILEC's without any oversight or justification. No wonder so many people are dumping POTS for other technologies. Perhaps when AT&T and Verizon get a clue they will be better able to compete again in the landline arena.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears. | |
|
|  woody7Premium
join:2000-10-13
Torrance, CA | Re: FCC Line Charge This nimrod should be in jail for malfeasance.
--
BlooMe | |
|
| | NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:4 Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
1 edit | Re: FCC Line Charge said by woody7:This nimrod should be in jail for malfeasance. Malfeasance is not a crime in its own right. People can have their employment terminated for malfeasance, but putting people in prison for malfeasance would be akin to putting people in prison for poverty.
If, through malfeasance, a harm has been done, there is a tort, at the least.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
|
| Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA
1 edit | The FCC Line Charge is NOT A TAX it's a so called tariff and goes right back to the telco. The archaic tariff system (actually government endorsed false advertising and crooked accounting) should have met its demise years ago. | |
|
 woodwardXMission BroadbandVIP
join:2000-12-28
Salt Lake City, UT | Meanwhile... ...the FCC charges USF fees on VoIP lines now as well. And USF fees have steadily incremented every year. | |
|
| KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service
| Re: Meanwhile... said by woodward:...the FCC charges USF fees on VoIP lines now as well. And USF fees have steadily incremented every year. Yeah, must be great to have a federally protected profit margin. No matter how obsolete or how much you fail to adjust your products to the market the abuse of Government power will leverage charges on your Competitor's services to give you money, so even if you lose, you still win.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
| | ridiculous These "fees" are ridiculous. Pretty soon these fees will be more than advertised price.
How can this be legal??? | |
|
| Reviews:
·ProLog
·Verizon Online DSL
 ·voip.ms
| Re: ridiculous The fees and taxes already cost more than the phone service in spite of the recent rate hike Verizon NJ was granted. ( The basic phone service went from 8.25/mo to 11.45/mo)
My most recent bill:
Flat Rate Service 11.45
Subscriber line charge 6.29
USF 0.72
Excise tax 1.08
State Tax 2.62
E911 1.80
Total Fees & Taxes 12.51
So my the taxes and fees are 1.06/month MORE than the cost of my dial tone.
Tim
--
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits. | |
|
| | Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: ridiculous said by pende_tim:The fees and taxes already cost more than the phone service in spite of the recent rate hike Verizon NJ was granted. ( The basic phone service went from 8.25/mo to 11.45/mo) My most recent bill: Flat Rate Service 11.45 Subscriber line charge 6.29 USF 0.72 Excise tax 1.08 State Tax 2.62 E911 1.80 Total Fees & Taxes 12.51 So my the taxes and fees are 1.06/month MORE than the cost of my dial tone. Tim Oh damn... | |
|
| | | Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA | Re: ridiculous Except that Subscriber Line Charge isn't a tax at all and goes right back to Verizon. If both the government and Verizon were willing to be honest your bill would read Flat Rate Service 17.74 and there would be no Subscriber Line Charge at all. | |
|
| | Martin couldn't sell anything There's a lot of opposition now because Martin's heavy-handed style (he's a Cheney protege) has offended everyone under the sun. For good reason, he can't be trusted. He has not laid the groundwork for this with the public and Congress the way he should have.
However, this is not a rush job. The intercarrier compensation docket first opened, and took Comments, in April of 2001! Rather than decide it, he put it off, took more Comments, put it off, took more Comments, and sat on it. Only in July, a fed-up DC Circuit Court of Appeals ordered a decision on ISP-bound call rates by Nov. 5th. (They had found the current ".0007" plan illegal in 2002, remanded it, and their remand was ignored.)
The current Access Charge system dates back to the late 1970s and (revised) early 1980s. It's totally obsolete. The overall intercarrier compensation rules are a complete mess. Broadband is actually being held hostage, in many cases, to the subsidy demands of rural ILECs, who are given free rein to spend our money with reckless abandon. So reform is desperately overdue.
AT&T, Verizon, and the rurals all have different agendas. Martin wants to please all three but can't, so it sounds like he's taking the sanest of the ILEC approaches (he still wants to screw CLECs) and reducing the high rates paid to rurals. But this is not a final decision: There's a Further NPRM to refine things. He really wanted to leave this to his successor and no doubt the next FCC (majority control changes on Jan. 21 or so if Obama wins) will have a lot left to do. And they can changes things too if they want. It's a very complex mess. | |
|
|
|
