reply to Telco
Re: This Is News? One last thing. I am not calling you out nor am I a RW as you call them. I am just curious and ask the following question for that reason.
Looking at your posts, is there anything the goverment should not own??
Also, how much is the difference between the US and others is the way employment is tied to health benefits? Verizon's NE employees have showed us that Verizon pays all the health care costs for the employees and their dependents. I was talking to a German fellow on a forum and the standard there is the company pays seven percent of salary and the employee pays seven percent of salary and that gets the employee health coverage.
Also, do those carriers, owned by the government, pay taxes to local areas?? Verizon, in my county in Florida, pays about 2.1 million in property taxes for a county with about 320k people in it.
Sorry, while greed is involved, I hate that too many on this board think that is the only reason. I want to try and understand all the reasons that price might be different.
said by FloridaBoy:the single biggest reason that price COULD be different (lower) is COMPETITION, of which there is none in the U.S. (at least not real competition; one cableco and one telco as a choice is not competition and even that is starting to go away).
...I want to try and understand all the reasons that price might be different.
the single biggest reason the price IS different (higher) is LACK OF COMPETITION and monopoly/duopoly status; this gives the incumbents the power to set whatever price they want.
Great! I happen to agree with you. However, considering they different ways telcos in the US and the rest of the world developed, how do you propose to fix it?? Mandate open access?? Verizon spent alot of money building Fios and it is not that profitable for them. How will lower prices make them stay in the game??
How much money should they be allowed to make nasadude to where you would be ok with it??
Also,Verizon wireline made 21 cents on the dollar last quarter. How much should they be able to make without anyone crying greed?
Comcast made 45 to 47 cents per dollar last quarter. How much should they be able to make without anyone crying greed??
incumbents stop opposing and killing municipal broadband projects
mandatory line sharing for last mile infrastructure
they should be able to make as much money as they can in a competitive environment; a monopoly seems as far from a free market as you can get.
If a municipality goes into the cable business it should cove the entire county. It really should be a separate unit that has to pay taxes at the same rate as the private telco and cable. They should not get any special treatment like free or reduced offices in town hall and other city departments. In other words if they can stand on their own like a private company then more power to them. I just don't think it is fair to take many customers from a private company but force a telco or cable company to continue to pay property taxes at the rate they did before. Who is going to make up those taxes if the telco and cable abandon the area because they can no longer compete.
Muni utilities tend to over charge or under charge and then do not have enough to make upgrades to the plant. Or they over charge and still don't keep the plant up to date.
IF the town wants to fund the project the bond holders should not get tax payer backup. If the project fails then the bond holders take the hit just like a private company.
If the Town wants to build the fiber system as a dump pipe but the customer has to arrange all content then I can be more supportive. I still feel like the system should be county wide so someone outside the populated areas or town limit never gets service like the telcos and cable companies have done.
The only place that has done that is the Power Company in the Chattanooga, TN. If I am reading right they brought FTTH to all customers in their territory. Even Google Fiber is not covering all of KC in either state.
CXM_SplicerLooking at the bigger picturePremiumReviews:
reply to FloridaBoy
quote:Sorry but that is wrong on a couple of levels. First, employees pay co-pays, deductibles, out-of-network expenses, prescriptions, dental, etc. By no means does Verizon pay 'all the health care costs' for its employees (except probably for the upper executives). If you intended to say health care premiums then you also have to consider that they are part of a compensation package. Those employees that chose to have a lower salary to offset the premium are still 'paying'.
Verizon's NE employees have showed us that Verizon pays all the health care costs for the employees and their dependents.
If you want to compare Germany, you should also mention the 30% tax that German corporations pay to the government... in contrast to the credit the federal government gives to Verizon.
Besides taking the reasons the prices might be different into consideration, you also have to consider where the profits end up... who benefits from them and who suffers.