Have I got a deal for you.
AT&T takes about $275 a month from me. If it weren’t such a hassle to switch providers I would switch to my only other choice in the US monopoly here, Comcast. I’ve been with them before, so really I have no choice. The product is good, but just way over-priced.
Colbert used to call them AT & Treason back in the Bush days, and that is still the best term to describe them.
Welcome to the US of Oligarchy.
That perfectly encapsulates just how utter abysmal the U.S. telecommunications infrastructure is. Many of us don’t have a choice, and those that do 99% of the time are stuck between the maws of two hungry lions. Your income is going to get eaten away either way for a sub-par service. And just think of all the extra costs that are going to come if the telecom companies get their dream of killing Net Neutrality.
The Donald promised in his campaign that this merger would not go through???The hang up right now is something to do with selling CNN. But the real issue should be how can you merge these two companies that provide service for TV??? This merger will kill competition—what moron can’t see this. People need to fight to make the internet just like a utility. SUPPORT THE COMMONS.
This is one of many examples of what nearly four decades of decriminalizing (euphemism is “deregulation”) regulations promulgated during the first half of the 20th century looks like.
Its the Reagan RevLOOTion writ large.
Perhaps Saint Ron’s successors need to be brought to justice and sentenced to time in Guantanamo ?
I used to have AT&T as my long distance carrier, years ago. Then one day I got a letter from them telling me they were stopping service to my rural location because it was too costly for them and they pulled out. (I live 40 miles from Salt Lake City.) This is AT&T; 100% about greater profits every quarter, not about delivering a good product to as many people as possible, while lobbying for legislation to prevent competition especially from municipalities that wish to develop their own ISPs.
To this day, I have one phone/ISP provider to “choose” from, a local outfit that stepped in when AT&T pulled out. It’s really nice they are local–great customer service. The downside is they cannot compete; my actual service is limited to under 3bps usually running at 1.5 bps, and it will be years before the fibre just two blocks from my home reaches me, or I can pay $110,000 to run it myself.
At least my little ISP has an excuse for its inability to upgrade infrastructure–cost. AT&T is the perfect example of a bad corporate actor in that it behaves like my poor ISP, investing far too little in infrastructure, except it has tons of money. $1 billion dollars would buy a whole lot of infrastructure, but AT&T will avoid that investment in favor of quarterly profits, because that’s what the law requires–profits for shareholders and the rest of us be damned.