bogey7806

join:2004-03-19

Here bogey7806 Member horrible way to average It doesn't take into account existing facilities co-opted by Verizon and the asymmetrical way they've deployed FiOS. If they go with 150bn as their budgeted amount they'll bust it before they get anywhere near 100% done.



RadioDoc



join:2000-05-11

La Grange, IL RadioDoc Re: horrible way to average And besides, you can't buy votes with broadband...



factchecker

@cox.net factchecker to bogey7806

Anon to bogey7806

This article is one of those, "Hey look at what I figured out on the back of a napkin during lunch" kind of articles.



You are absolutely correct that using Verizon's numbers are erroneous. Verizon's average cost per subscriber to install is also, in large part, due to the fact that most of the deployment is being done in cities. Pulling off the same thing in a rural or suburban area would certainly cost more per subscriber.



It just further illustrates how people abuse averages because they don't realize that averages come with limitations on their usefulness.



RadioDoc



join:2000-05-11

La Grange, IL RadioDoc Re: horrible way to average said by factchecker :



This article is one of those, "Hey look at what I figured out on the back of a napkin during happy hour" kind of articles.

There...more accurate. There...more accurate.



factchecker

@cox.net factchecker Anon Re: horrible way to average said by RadioDoc:



said by factchecker :



This article is one of those, "Hey look at what I figured out on the back of a napkin during happy hour" kind of articles.

There...more accurate.

There...more accurate. Indeed... Thanks.

disc

join:2005-12-31

Raleigh, NC disc to bogey7806

Member to bogey7806

said by bogey7806:



It doesn't take into account existing facilities co-opted by Verizon and the asymmetrical way they've deployed FiOS. If they go with 150bn as their budgeted amount they'll bust it before they get anywhere near 100% done.

It doesn't take into account existing facilities co-opted by Verizon and the asymmetrical way they've deployed FiOS. If they go with 150bn as their budgeted amount they'll bust it before they get anywhere near 100% done.



If anything, this article is erring on the high side, since it assumes every home passed would be a home connected, which is not going to be the case. So somebody could come up with a lower estimate using the splits from Verizon's numbers on their costs on a homes-passed basis vs home-connected basis. Verizon's numbers from a year ago are consistent with what this article tallies as $1500 per home connected. Rural is going to be more expensive, but these numbers are certainly representative of suburban.If anything, this article is erring on the high side, since it assumes every home passed would be a home connected, which is not going to be the case. So somebody could come up with a lower estimate using the splits from Verizon's numbers on their costs on a homes-passed basis vs home-connected basis.

bogey7806

join:2004-03-19

Here bogey7806 Member Re: horrible way to average Erring on the high side?



Hope doesn't displace reality.

disc

join:2005-12-31

Raleigh, NC disc Member Re: horrible way to average said by bogey7806:



Erring on the high side?



Hope doesn't displace reality.

Erring on the high side?Hope doesn't displace reality. Verizon uses the splits/methodology I just described when communicating with their financial analysts. If it's just make believe, I'm sure the financial analysts would love to know about it.

bogey7806

join:2004-03-19

Here bogey7806 Member Re: horrible way to average You're neglecting all inherit costs that Verizon doesn't have to factor in. Yea, you ran fiber to every house...where ya gonna connect it to? Who are you going to get to maintain it? Etc etc....



Anyone who thinks the math is solid is seriously bad with numbers.

disc

join:2005-12-31

Raleigh, NC disc Member Re: horrible way to average said by bogey7806:



You're neglecting all inherit costs that Verizon doesn't have to factor in. Yea, you ran fiber to every house...where ya gonna connect it to? Who are you going to get to maintain it? Etc etc....



Anyone who thinks the math is solid is seriously bad with numbers.

You're neglecting all inherit costs that Verizon doesn't have to factor in. Yea, you ran fiber to every house...where ya gonna connect it to? Who are you going to get to maintain it? Etc etc....Anyone who thinks the math is solid is seriously bad with numbers. If you want math that focuses on the critical costs, this is the right math. The hurdle to investment is the FTTH investment itself. That's what's making the carriers blanch. They'd be happy if it was otherwise just the "inherent" costs you mention.

bogey7806

join:2004-03-19

Here bogey7806 Member Re: horrible way to average No, the carriers are nervous with what they already see. What the hack with a calculator failed to see is the other 70% of the iceberg when he thought his calculations through.



So you run FTTH and neglect everything else that the carriers take for granted. Congratulations you've wasted $150bn unless others step up and throw in an equal amount to finish the job.

disc

join:2005-12-31

Raleigh, NC disc Member Re: horrible way to average said by bogey7806:



No, the carriers are nervous with what they already see. What the hack with a calculator failed to see is the other 70% of the iceberg when he thought his calculations through.



So you run FTTH and neglect everything else that the carriers take for granted. Congratulations you've wasted $150bn unless others step up and throw in an equal amount to finish the job.

No, the carriers are nervous with what they already see. What the hack with a calculator failed to see is the other 70% of the iceberg when he thought his calculations through.So you run FTTH and neglect everything else that the carriers take for granted. Congratulations you've wasted $150bn unless others step up and throw in an equal amount to finish the job. Were the industry to end up with FTTH landing in their laps, there would by plenty of players willing to step up to that and spend the additional money needed to make money from it. They would even be willing to compete for a piece of that action through some kind of auction. Not all that different than buying up spectrum at auction.

whocares0

Premium Member

join:2003-07-26

.. whocares0 Premium Member I would preferr to have the FIBER for all because

1, While the ck/rebate would be nice it is a 1 time thing,

while fiber would be used all year.



2, even Cnn this morning used an expression about out or national debt,(that was started in the senate)

not saying our nat'l debt was millions of dollars, nor Billions of dollars, but now the snate is saying our national debt is with this proposal,it would skyrocket into the ""TRILLIONS" of dollars.

jazzy1120



heels_fan

1.20.09 The start of Socialism

Premium Member

join:2003-02-07

Columbia, TN heels_fan Premium Member Re: I would preferr



The Outstanding Public Debt as of 04 Feb 2008 at 02:41:02 PM GMT is

$9,243,532,400,444.54

And has continued to go at a rate of $1.5 Billion dollars a day since Sept 29, 2006

»www.brillig.com/debt_clock/ The national debt has been in the trillions of dollars. for instance, going back to 2006, it was 8.3 Trillion dollarsThe Outstanding Public Debt as of 04 Feb 2008 at 02:41:02 PM GMT is$9,243,532,400,444.54And has continued to go at a rate of $1.5 Billion dollars a day since Sept 29, 2006



dez_nutz

join:2007-02-21

Arab, AL dez_nutz Member Re: I would preferr The national debt has been in the trillions since the late 80s. I wasn't sure what point he was trying to make with the comment but after you responded figured I wasn't alone in thinking he meant it was first time it hit trillions.



Lumberjack

Premium Member

join:2003-01-18

Newport News, VA Lumberjack to whocares0

Premium Member to whocares0

Either way it's a complete waste.



1) You'll have to pay tax on your rebate (this has happened before).

2) Fiber to the home would be nice, but I doubt it will be that cheap AND then the people that could buy sneakers at Walmart aren't the same crowd that can pay for high speed internet. So that would be smack to the face.

3) Either way the government is horrible at managing money and the real solution is to fix our horrible tax system.

4) The government never does anything correct with money in the first place, so lets not let them get that much money to give away.



bamboox

join:2000-12-15

Renton, WA bamboox Member Re: I would preferr said by Lumberjack:



1) You'll have to pay tax on your rebate (this has happened before).

1) You'll have to pay tax on your rebate (this has happened before). That's not quite accurate. You generally don't have to pay income taxes on tax rebates since it's not income. A tax rebate simply means that the government is retroactively reducing your tax bill and hence sends you a check back.

whocares0

Premium Member

join:2003-07-26

.. 1 edit whocares0 Premium Member Re: I would preferr ok for you "'OLDER THEN I AM" guys, when was the last time that the US Gov't had a "SURPLUS ($$$) and not a debt,?



I'am guessing 1950's,maybe 1960's ???



RadioDoc



join:2000-05-11

La Grange, IL RadioDoc Re: I would preferr If you are talking zero debt at all, that hasn't happened for about 175 years. If you are talking no budget deficit, that was during the Clinton administration. There is nothing wrong with having a bit of public debt...that's what things like US Treasury Bonds and Bills are. It's when they are not backed by anything more than a promise to pay that it becomes a problem.

whocares0

Premium Member

join:2003-07-26

.. whocares0 Premium Member Re: I would preferr said by RadioDoc:



If you are talking zero debt at all, that hasn't happened for about 175 years. If you are talking no budget deficit, that was during the Clinton administration. There is nothing wrong with having a bit of public debt...that's what things like US Treasury Bonds and Bills are. It's when they are not backed by anything more than a promise to pay that it becomes a problem.

If you are talking zero debt at all, that hasn't happened for about 175 years. If you are talking no budget deficit, that was during the Clinton administration. There is nothing wrong with having a bit of public debt...that's what things like US Treasury Bonds and Bills are. It's when they are not backed by anything more than a promise to pay that it becomes a problem. RadioDoc THANK YOU, If you are talking zero debt at all, that hasn't happened for about 175 years.



NO i didn't call you an old man or imply that you were a 175 yrs old,(rofl) I just asked a question. oh ok,If you are talking zero debt at all, that hasn't happened for about 175 years.NO i didn't call you an old man or imply that you were a 175 yrs old,(rofl) I just asked a question.



longstreet

join:2004-11-14

Plano, TX longstreet to whocares0

Member to whocares0

said by whocares0:



ok for you "'OLDER THEN I AM" guys, when was the last time that the US Gov't had a "SURPLUS ($$$) and not a debt,?



I'am guessing 1950's,maybe 1960's ???

ok for you "'OLDER THEN I AM" guys, when was the last time that the US Gov't had a "SURPLUS ($$$) and not a debt,?1950's,maybe 1960's ??? The end of the previous Clinton administration saw lots of surplus.



dez_nutz

join:2007-02-21

Arab, AL dez_nutz to bamboox

Member to bamboox

For states like Alabama that tax income after federal tax is withheld, there is a chance the rebate will be taxed by the state because it is a tax break. In 2001 I am pretty sure they didn't tax the rebate but who knows about this one (if it ever goes through)

whocares0

Premium Member

join:2003-07-26

.. 1 edit whocares0 Premium Member Re: I would preferr said by dez_nutz:



For states like Alabama that tax income after federal tax is withheld, there is a chance the rebate will be taxed by the state because it is a tax break. In 2001 I am pretty sure they didn't tax the rebate but who knows about this one (if it ever goes through)

For states like Alabama that tax income after federal tax is withheld, there is a chance the rebate will be taxed by the state because it is a tax break. In 2001 I am pretty sure they didn't tax the rebate but who knows about this one (if it ever goes through) dez=nuts I HATE THAT, i know during my working career, when i was temp in Atl,a state tax was taken out out my ck, wait a minute your telling me your going to charge me,just to live in the state while i work here temp? paid in $1,000,(1 ck) was there for less then a months, got back $600.00



HAVE heard some have it worst, (N,Y.C) Fed'l state, city? dang

glad that isn't here,

jazzy1120 I HATE THAT, i know during my working career, when i was temp in Atl,a state tax was taken out out my ck,paid in $1,000,(1 ck) was there for less then a months, got back $600.00HAVE heard some have it worst, (N,Y.C) Fed'l state, city? dangglad that isn't here,jazzy1120

22773138 (banned)

join:2006-08-29

Texas 22773138 (banned) Member Re: I would preferr It could be worse. Some states tax athletics when they play a game in their state. They don't have to even live in the state. Talk about taxation without representation.



Lumberjack

Premium Member

join:2003-01-18

Newport News, VA Lumberjack to bamboox

Premium Member to bamboox

Not sure how long ago this was done before but I remember thinking exactly as you describe then I TurboTax said "did you get that $300 rebate?" and when I answered yes it added it as income...



Perhaps this time it's a real "rebate" and maybe last time it was an "early refund". I'm just saying, don't be too shocked if you end up having to pay tax on whatever they send regardless of what term they use now.



dez_nutz

join:2007-02-21

Arab, AL dez_nutz Member Re: I would preferr It was in 2001 and it should really be looked at like an advance on your refund for the end of the 2001 tax year. The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 created a new 10% bracket that lowered income taxes owed to the fed gov for the middle class, and was retroactive to Jan 1 2001 so you already paid it in. It also increased your net pay or take home. All this was done to curb a recession due to the bursting of the tech bubble.



To add more to the deficit and debt thing, this didn't help on top of having to increase military spending due to 9/11. That triggered the huge change in the deficit because Clinton increased taxes and slashed military spending in his term. I am not defending Bush nor blaming Clinton for 9/11. The continued change to the deficit chart posted is also due to the war on the terror on top of the tax cuts. Since opinions and views are different on that there is no need to continue about it.



longstreet

join:2004-11-14

Plano, TX longstreet to whocares0

Member to whocares0

Here's a chart, read it and weap.

longstreet 1 edit longstreet to whocares0

Member to whocares0

Granted those 'tax cuts' are for the top 1% of wealth in the country.



The rest of us get nothing and I make alot of money.



dez_nutz

join:2007-02-21

Arab, AL dez_nutz Member Re: I would preferr said by longstreet:



Granted those 'tax cuts' are for the top 1% of wealth in the country.



The rest of us get nothing and I make alot of money.

Granted those 'tax cuts' are for the top 1% of wealth in the country.The rest of us get nothing and I make alot of money.



Basically between 2000-2003, if you are single and your salary was between 29k and 63k a year, in 2000 you would be paying 28%, in 2001 you would have paid 27.5%, in 2002 you would pay 27%, and in 2003 the final drop to 25%. Which for someone making 349.7 k or more in 2007 there rate dropped from 39.5% to 35%, which seemed like total bs to me. There is also the AMT to figure in but for my point it did affect your net income just not as much as someone making 10x what you did.



Aside from the less tax thing it also upped the child tax credit and dropped the marriage penalty. God knows when your not in the top brackets, married, and have a child every dime helps. I don't see how this would have resulted in you not making anything from it. Even if you didn't get a refund check, they added the 10% bracket for $6000 or less and decreased the income tax percentage. This was a step process from 2001 to 2003 and lowered the % for all brackets.Basically between 2000-2003, if you are single and your salary was between 29k and 63k a year, in 2000 you would be paying 28%, in 2001 you would have paid 27.5%, in 2002 you would pay 27%, and in 2003 the final drop to 25%. Which for someone making 349.7 k or more in 2007 there rate dropped from 39.5% to 35%, which seemed like total bs to me. There is also the AMT to figure in but for my point it did affect your net income just not as much as someone making 10x what you did.Aside from the less tax thing it also upped the child tax credit and dropped the marriage penalty. God knows when your not in the top brackets, married, and have a child every dime helps.



longstreet

join:2004-11-14

Plano, TX longstreet to whocares0

Member to whocares0

I'm not referring to previous years as you are.



Like I said, the cut was for the top 1% in the year 2007.



Since this year deals with the money I get back, I would have liked to see my % drop for my bracket, but only the ultra-rich got that.



dez_nutz

join:2007-02-21

Arab, AL dez_nutz Member Re: I would preferr said by longstreet:



I'm not referring to previous years as you are.



Like I said, the cut was for the top 1% in the year 2007.



Since this year deals with the money I get back, I would have liked to see my % drop for my bracket, but only the ultra-rich got that.

I'm not referring to previous years as you are.Like I said, the cut was for the top 1% in the year 2007.Since this year deals with the money I get back, I would have liked to see my % drop for my bracket, but only the ultra-rich got that.



Right now it's all scheduled to go back pre-2001 levels in 2010 if that makes you feel any better. The stimulus plan from what I can see is going to go down in rebate check value for people who make over 175k, so the 1% wont get a rebate check. I take it your one of the millions of people stuck in the 15% bracket, that the last change was in 1986 when 28% bracket was broken into the 15 and 28%... Similar to the 2001 15 to 15 and 10%. I figured with your statement "I make a lot of money" you would have fallen into the 28% bracket. There are lot more than 1% of the US population above the 15% bracket though. The previous years tax cuts ended in 2003 and hasn't changed. All that has changed is the ceiling on the different brackets which are adjusted for inflation. Basically the changes in 2001 are affecting the returns from 2001-2010 unless they make the tax cut permanent.Right now it's all scheduled to go back pre-2001 levels in 2010 if that makes you feel any better. The stimulus plan from what I can see is going to go down in rebate check value for people who make over 175k, so the 1% wont get a rebate check.



Hornman1

@covad.net Hornman1 to whocares0

Anon to whocares0

said by whocares0:



to have the FIBER for all because

1, While the ck/rebate would be nice it is a 1 time thing,

while fiber would be used all year.



2, even Cnn this morning used an expression about out or national debt,(that was started in the senate)

not saying our nat'l debt was millions of dollars, nor Billions of dollars, but now the snate is saying our national debt is with this proposal,it would skyrocket into the ""TRILLIONS" of dollars.

jazzy1120

to have thebecause1, While the ck/rebate would be nice it is a 1 time thing,while fiber would be used all year.2, even Cnn this morning used an expression about out or national debt,(that was started in the senate)not saying our nat'l debt was millions of dollars, nor Billions of dollars, but now the snate is saying our national debt isjazzy1120

They have done nothing. BILLIONS of dollars. So we should give them more of our money?

This is the stupidest thing I have heard of in recent memory. I know who ever brought this up surely didn't realize that the companies in question have done nothing except sue other smaller companies and municipalities who decided to do it on their own. What did they sue these people for? Restraint of trade! Of course.

THEY HAVE ALREADY BEEN PAID FOR THIS WORK! And they continue to get more money from us. OK, now they are throwing us a bone or two to keep us quiet. After almost TEN YEARS! But they will not give us real speed until they are in control of fees and access and content. This is not conspiracy theory, it is fact and in the public record.

Please check out this web site instead of whining, speculating and talking about "Free Market Theory," which is totally bogus. I'm not a Socialist or a Communist, but I'm not a Fascist either. Unbridled Capitalism is Enron and Hedge Funds and Real Estate loans that don't make sense but pay big commissions and cause bankruptcy. Let the buyer beware? Hey all you retards who talk about the Free Market. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AND THERE NEVER WILL BE. or should i say, God help us if there was.

Capitalism is not a social institution. It is a business model that needs restraints to protect the society from Fascism. It will not solve or deal with social problems, especially on a large scale. It is Jr. High School thinking. Oh boy, you mean I can do anything I want? Like Libertarianism, it is a giant cop out of social responsibility.

The reason I bring it up is that this is a perfect example of what the businesses who are getting these tax breaks say: the money will trickle down to the public and do the social good of providing the internet to everyone. But is that what happened? NO. And now they are lining up for another round from some very willing people on this forum. This is how Fascism takes hold, a little at a time.

Just like in Iraq, where our Free Market mercenary companies, who had no bid contacts are making Billions of Dollars off the lives of our troops. War profiteering. Where does that fit into the Free Market concept? How does Capitalism solve that social issue?

National Debt? Who cares as long as the right bottom lines are good each quarter. Hey, the people who did this will be retired to their speaking engagements and golf when the real $hit hits the fan. Wow, give our measly rebates back to the government. What a concept. The fact is, the big telephone and cable companies started to get paid for this work almost ten years ago in the form of huge tax breaks and subsidies. In exchange for those BILLIONS of dollars over the years, they were supposed to get to work and give everyone access to the super highway, which is 100/100.They have done nothing. BILLIONS of dollars. So we should give them more of our money?This is the stupidest thing I have heard of in recent memory. I know who ever brought this up surely didn't realize that the companies in question have done nothing except sue other smaller companies and municipalities who decided to do it on their own. What did they sue these people for? Restraint of trade! Of course.THEY HAVE ALREADY BEEN PAID FOR THIS WORK! And they continue to get more money from us. OK, now they are throwing us a bone or two to keep us quiet. After almost TEN YEARS! But they will not give us real speed until they are in control of fees and access and content. This is not conspiracy theory, it is fact and in the public record.Please check out this web site instead of whining, speculating and talking about "Free Market Theory," which is totally bogus. I'm not a Socialist or a Communist, but I'm not a Fascist either. Unbridled Capitalism is Enron and Hedge Funds and Real Estate loans that don't make sense but pay big commissions and cause bankruptcy. Let the buyer beware? Hey all you retards who talk about the Free Market. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AND THERE NEVER WILL BE. or should i say, God help us if there was.Capitalism is not a social institution. It is a business model that needs restraints to protect the society from Fascism. It will not solve or deal with social problems, especially on a large scale. It is Jr. High School thinking. Oh boy, you mean I can do anything I want? Like Libertarianism, it is a giant cop out of social responsibility.The reason I bring it up is that this is a perfect example of what the businesses who are getting these tax breaks say: the money will trickle down to the public and do the social good of providing the internet to everyone. But is that what happened? NO. And now they are lining up for another round from some very willing people on this forum. This is how Fascism takes hold, a little at a time.Just like in Iraq, where our Free Market mercenary companies, who had no bid contacts are making Billions of Dollars off the lives of our troops. War profiteering. Where does that fit into the Free Market concept? How does Capitalism solve that social issue?National Debt? Who cares as long as the right bottom lines are good each quarter. Hey, the people who did this will be retired to their speaking engagements and golf when the real $hit hits the fan.

Hornman1 Hornman1 Anon Re: I would preferr



»www.savetheinternet.com/=faq I forgot the web site. Check this out and see what is really going on.

questionable1

join:2005-10-18

Phoenix, AZ questionable1 Member First post? I don't know about that guy but I can really use the money. My fiances' medicine costs over 4k a month... insurance pays everything but 500... That would be 1 month i could breath easy.



Honestly I'm all for higher speeds and getting stuff to everyone, but I'm not going to say no to something like this



pnh102

Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty

Premium Member

join:2002-05-02

Mount Airy, MD pnh102 Premium Member Rebate Checks + Permanent Tax Cuts People always make better use of money than government.



Of course, the rebate checks are just a feel-good measure that won't really do squat for the economy. I know our checks will simply go towards existing debt. If you want real stimulus, lower all business taxes to 0, cut out most BS government regulations and make the other tax cuts permanent.



MarkyD

Premium Member

join:2002-08-20

Oklahoma City, OK MarkyD Premium Member FTTP/FTTH does not mean higher speeds. Take AT&T for example. The max I can get over my FTTP is 10/1.5 for nearly $60 a month. FTTH does not necessarily mean ground breaking throughput.



ztmike

Mark for moderation

Premium Member

join:2001-08-02

Michigan City, IN ztmike Premium Member W. Bush>moron. Welcome to the world of W. Bush. The WORST president in U.S history.

Freezone

join:2000-09-29

Southfield, MI Freezone Member Most people are not going to blow it?



At least with the food stamp idea the money would have been spent right away. Since I always owe the IRS I will not see a check at all anyway Or are they are going to pay down their personal debt. Those checks will do little to help the economy if it goes towards paying down credit debt.At least with the food stamp idea the money would have been spent right away. Since I always owe the IRS I will not see a check at all anyway



woody7

Premium Member

join:2000-10-13

Torrance, CA ·Time Warner Cable

·Charter

woody7 Premium Member pffftttt......... So we give even more money to the telcos and cablecos, and it still won't happen. Between the tax breaks and bogus fees for so many years, this really should be a non issue.Who got us into this mess, and why are we bailing them out? I'm not for recession, but why are we bailing them out without some kind of stipulation at least? Some of these lending issues border on the criminal. What is next, bailing them out for "student" loans? End of rant



atuarre

Here come the drums

Premium Member

join:2004-02-14

EC/SETX SWLA atuarre Premium Member WRONG Most YOUNG Americans will blow that money. The older ones may save it, or use it to pay down some debt, but young Americans are probably going to blow it on something stupid.



gatorkram

Need for Speed

Premium Member

join:2002-07-22

Winterville, NC 1 recommendation gatorkram Premium Member I have a dream... Wouldn't this be great?



FTTH for everyone....



The current providers could save a lot of money not having to upgrade all their last mile equipment and networks, and focus solely on providing access over the new network...



Oh man... Wouldn't it just be crazy, if you could pick from 100s of different providers... Real competition...



Of course, lots of you will say, oohhh nooosss we don't want the government having control over our internets..... ahhhh the sky is falling, the world is coming to an end...



Don't kid yourself, they already have as much or as little control and access to the pipes as they want...



BUILD THE NETWORK! Who cares how much it cost? I for one don't.



For once in a long time the government could do something again for the people...



sharkpedal

join:2005-05-04

PA sharkpedal Member WIIFM



I still think the rebate checks are a joke and Bush did this in 2000 and it was stupid. To quote Lewis Black the only way to stimulate the economy with the checks is if we all go out and spend it at the same time.



"I just got a $300 check from the US Govt...I knew this wasnt gonna work because nobody, NOBODY got a $300 check and looked at it and went 'Son of Bitch...free at last!'...G'd dammit, $25 for the house payment, $4 for the car payment, 8 cents for gas....I'm home free!!!" - Lewis Black Whats in it for me seems to be the appropriate question here. I already am wired for Fiber and use it. Let me figure out how to buy my own "Sneakers at Walmart" (and by the way, how the f do they know I shop thereI still think the rebate checks are a joke and Bush did this in 2000 and it was stupid. To quote Lewis Black the only way to stimulate the economy with the checks is if we all go out and spend it at the same time."I just got a $300 check from the US Govt...I knew this wasnt gonna work because nobody, NOBODY got a $300 check and looked at it and went 'Son of Bitch...free at last!'...G'd dammit, $25 for the house payment, $4 for the car payment, 8 cents for gas....I'm home free!!!" - Lewis Black



dvd536

as Mr. Pink as they come

Premium Member

join:2001-04-27

Phoenix, AZ dvd536 Premium Member Re: WIIFM said by sharkpedal:



I still think the rebate checks are a joke and Bush did this in 2000 and it was stupid. I still think the rebate checks are a joke and Bush did this in 2000 and it was stupid. That was just a tax advance[this one probably will be too]



Hmmmmm

@ameritech.net Hmmmmm to sharkpedal

Anon to sharkpedal

said by sharkpedal:



I still think the rebate checks are a joke and Bush did this in 2000 and it was stupid.

I still think the rebate checks are a joke and Bush did this in 2000 and it was stupid. really stupid part of what happened the last time the Feds handed out "free" money.



I clearly recall them sending a letter to everyone in advance telling them that they were going to be getting check for $300. And how wonderful getting that Whopping Great Check was going to be.



You know, rather than simply mailing them the check and letting them figure it out. God only knows how many millions were wasted in mailing out all those stupid "heads up!" letters.



Personally, I thought that was the government's way of letting me know, oh-so-subtlely, that putting them in charge of any amount of money is a HUGE mistake. Because they have zero incentive to control their costs.



I mean, any private company with shareholders to answer to would have had their entire BOD burned at the stake is they pissed away money needlessly mailing out millions of letters like that. You forgot thestupid part of what happened the last time the Feds handed out "free" money.I clearly recall them sending a letter to everyone in advancethem that they were going to be getting check for $300. And howgetting that Whopping Great Check was going to be.You know, rather than simplyand lettingfigure it out. God only knows how many millions were wasted in mailing out all those stupid "heads up!" letters.Personally, I thought that was the government's way of letting me know, oh-so-subtlely, that putting them in charge ofamount of money is a HUGE mistake. Because they have zero incentive to control their costs.I mean, anycompany with shareholders to answer to would have had their entire BOD burned at the stake is they pissed away money needlessly mailing out millions of letters like that.



FFH5

Premium Member

join:2002-03-03

Tavistock NJ FFH5 Premium Member Sorry - just give me the money I can spend it better than giving it to some government bureaucracy to dole out for infrastructure improvements. Especially after that bureaucracy sucks out the usual 30% in overhead to pay for their worthless drone jobs.



Hornman1

@covad.net Hornman1 Anon Re: Sorry - just give me the money said by FFH5:



I can spend it better than giving it to some government bureaucracy to dole out for infrastructure improvements. Especially after that bureaucracy sucks out the usual 30% in overhead to pay for their worthless drone jobs.

I can spend it better than giving it to some government bureaucracy to dole out for infrastructure improvements. Especially after that bureaucracy sucks out the usual 30% in overhead to pay for their worthless drone jobs.

So are these the people you would get to build up the infrastructure? They have done nothing and they have sued private companies and municipalities for trying to do it on their own. I guess that is what you call overhead?

The big companies want to control access and content and they will not give us more than a taste until they either have that Control or are defeated by our friends in and out Congress who are fighting for us. Control also means a toll both on the on ramp for the super highway.

Do you suppose they are going to give us speeds that might potentially put some of their great networks out of business? Are they going to give us the capability of having our own HDTV stations? Not hardly.

What you are hearing these days about success of our internet is mostly lies. Lies brought to you by the same people who brought you Iraq, the "Foreign Power" of Al Qaeda, and have relieved us of our need for habeas corpus and personal privacy. All through fear and intimidation.

Check out #6 and the whole sight here:

»www.savetheinternet.com/=faq I have news for you. The cable and telephone companies have already taken the money from you and they won't give it back. They were given huge tax breaks back in the nineties to do the job. If they had started then it would be done by now. That is why Japan has it. They actually did their job.So are these the people you would get to build up the infrastructure? They have done nothing and they have sued private companies and municipalities for trying to do it on their own. I guess that is what you call overhead?The big companies want to control access and content and they will not give us more than a taste until they either have that Control or are defeated by our friends in and out Congress who are fighting for us. Control also means a toll both on the on ramp for the super highway.Do you suppose they are going to give us speeds that might potentially put some of their great networks out of business? Are they going to give us the capability of having our own HDTV stations? Not hardly.What you are hearing these days about success of our internet is mostly lies. Lies brought to you by the same people who brought you Iraq, the "Foreign Power" of Al Qaeda, and have relieved us of our need for habeas corpus and personal privacy. All through fear and intimidation.Check out #6 and the whole sight here:



Dogfather

Premium Member

join:2007-12-26

Laguna Hills, CA 1 recommendation Dogfather Premium Member Rebate checks It's not the job of Joe Taxpayer to wire rural America. These rebates are to stimulate the economy, not go straight into the pockets of telcos and cable operators.



Telcos already get billions for rural deployment from the USF, that's enough. If rural communities need more free-bes let them pass a local bond measure and borrow the money themselves like California has to do to rebuild its crumbling infrastructure.



ztmike

Mark for moderation

Premium Member

join:2001-08-02

Michigan City, IN 2 edits ztmike Premium Member The future. Isn't that what this is all about?



Imagine how many jobs this would create for the U.S and not some 7-10 dollar job either.



So in doing this (investing in FTTH upgrades) would not only create jobs it would also help the economy, and maybe even get people to work from home, thus taking traffic off our congested roadways and less pollution and less oil being spent.



And not to mention the future of what FTTH could do for everybody.



But yet we have a president who decides to just send out checks that will give someone the opportunity to spend on something maybe once or twice, for the most part.



Thus not helping the economy where it REALLY needs it.



Not to mention the cost of the Iraqi war which sits at a staggering 491 1/2 billion dollars:



»www.nationalpriorities.o ··· war_home



BUT: Its already to late, congress has decided already. So go ahead and wait for your check to come this July only to be able to spend it at 1 or 2 places, just don't blow it all in one place, as they say.

I'm sorry but only dumbasses would be against the money being used for people to blow to go towards a future investment..Imagine how many jobs this would create for the U.S and not some 7-10 dollar job either.So in doing this (investing in FTTH upgrades) would not only create jobs it would also help the economy, and maybe even get people to work from home, thus taking traffic off our congested roadways and less pollution and less oil being spent.And not to mention the future of what FTTH could do for everybody.But yet we have a president who decides to just send out checks that will give someone the opportunity to spend on something maybe once or twice, for the most part.Thus not helping the economy where it REALLY needs it.Not to mention the cost of the Iraqi war which sits at a staggering 491 1/2 billion dollars:BUT: Its already to late, congress has decided already. So go ahead and wait for your check to come this July only to be able to spend it at 1 or 2 places, just don't blow it all in one place, as they say.

qworster

join:2001-11-25

Bryn Mawr, PA qworster Member you mean You mean go to Walmart and buy sneakers made in China!

cornelius785

join:2006-10-26

Worcester, MA cornelius785 Member i vote for ftth i'd rather see a mass fiber deployment than rebate checks. to me atleast, rebate checks are a quick temporary fix that may or may not pay off in the long run. many people have said/believe that FTTH is the future. why not take a large step to that goal? i doubt $150B would cover 100M households. i'm sure it would make a serious dent, but assuming $1500 per household is probably not that accurate given the towns that verizon has wired themselves (not to large, not that rural, above ground utilities, not many MDUs).



i'd sort of like to see the $150B used to partially 'reimburse' companies that are actively (or have set a plan to) deploying fiber starting from some date. i wouldn't give money before hand since the money just disappear. this would decrease the risk for companies to deploy fiber.

arroyodos

Premium Member

join:2003-01-18

North Canton, OH arroyodos Premium Member Is This Socialism? I thought we were supposed to let market forces determine everything. Is the author of the original comment suggesting that people in this country decide on what they need? I am sure if we are patient, and when healthy profits can be made --corporate America will provide us with all that we need n -- in their good time. This is the responsible way to go. Anything other than the free market is socialism --- for heaven's sake!!

nozzer

join:2004-06-25

Waltham, MA nozzer to arroyodos

Member to arroyodos

"Socialism" is not the opposite of "Free Market". Sweden is an example of a "socialist country", yet there is also plenty of "free market"

axus

join:2001-06-18

Washington, DC axus Member checks are fast The idea is that people spend the money right away... and that the money we would have lost in a future recession is greater than the 150billion given away. I think it's probably a wash at best, but I don't see a problem with it.



Trying to throw money at our broadband problem would probably waste a lot of it. I heard that the schools misused a lot of the money they were given for technology.

stilltrying9

join:2008-02-04

Sesser, IL stilltrying9 Member No More Govt Spending Rebate checks are ridiculous. We must stop the govt from spending altogether on wasteful things whether its rebates or not. These administrations whether they be dems or reps are spending ridiculously. No FTTH, no rebate checks, and no taxes altogether. Pull our policing military out of international borders and the BIG TWO quit spending by the GOVT and NO MORE WARS. RP for president to get this country straightened out. We are headed for a mess and the rebate checks or govt financed FTTH will only worsen the fall of the dollar because its more borrowing and more spending. Now W is proposing to give us our most massive budget ever, and this is from a CONSERVATIVE, LOL. Democrats are no better either. Quit choosing sides and start choosing politicians.