[kwlug-disc] UBB CRTC decision to be reviewed ...

[Chris Frey]

On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 06:50:14PM -0500, unsolicited at swiz.ca wrote:
> Per the FP link provided, the pundits are making it about amount of
> downloading. e.g. Netflix is in there.

Grrrr.... megacorporations get enough sympathy already. :-)  I'm not
angry at you, just the meme.

<sarcasm> "Oh, those poor, poor corporations... they *need* those higher
rates, and those big CEO salaries or they just can't compete!  Oh my!
If we don't cut their taxes some more, they'll leave!  And then what
will we do for jobs?  Yes Mr. CEO, please get even richer off the backs
of us lucky Canadians while we polish your DSL modem collection!"  </sarcasm>


> As you can see even from Brent's comments, this very quickly (d)evolves
> into a downloading what, consuming how much, making a reasonable total
> downloading cap of X, ran., er, deb..., er, discussion.

If people attack with confusion, respond with clarity.

If Bell doesn't want to provide the service people want, at a price
comparitive to the rest of the world's bandwidth costs, they should
get out of the way of the companies that do.  Bandwidth is not some
scarse resource, and people are willing to pay for it if the costs
and resources are managed properly.

Bell is not managing them properly.  Maximizing profit without competition
is not proper management.  I'm sure there's someone out there
that would be glad to relieve Bell of its burden of making $16 billion
annual profits...

Why are we feeling guilty for wanting to use the service we are so
obviously paying for?

Yes, I know Bell gets that profit from many sources, not just bandwidth...
this is part of the *problem*, not a reason to raise rates even more.
As a government-aided monopoly, they should be using that $16 billion
to lower rates.

- Chris