| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Deuteros" |
| Date: |
27 Feb 2006 08:05:26 PM |
| Object: |
Re: bad news |
"John Doe II" <firsTraveler@centurytel.net> wrote in
news:LtCdnUXsG4EHqJ7ZRVn-qg@centurytel.net:
Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FCC just endorsed the idea of consumers picking the cable channels
they want, rather than taking packages containing channels that they
don't want. I think it's a great idea. I have no use for C-SPAN, Public
TV stations, Speed Channel and a whole bunch of others. There's maybe 10
channels that I view and would pay for. The rest I can live without. How
I would love to see ala carte cable choice for us viewers.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a disaster of anyone interested in variety. If every person with
cable or sat TV has to prechoose each channel, have the channels out
there will be gone in a year.
Yet another example of the government sticking its nose where it doesn't
belong.
.
|
|
| User: "Sean" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
01 Mar 2006 11:04:04 AM |
|
|
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:18x5bn0to4jtd$.dlg@sec12-orange.ultima.com...
"John Doe II" <firsTraveler@centurytel.net> wrote in
news:LtCdnUXsG4EHqJ7ZRVn-qg@centurytel.net:
Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FCC just endorsed the idea of consumers picking the cable channels
they want, rather than taking packages containing channels that they
don't want. I think it's a great idea. I have no use for C-SPAN, Public
TV stations, Speed Channel and a whole bunch of others. There's maybe 10
channels that I view and would pay for. The rest I can live without. How
I would love to see ala carte cable choice for us viewers.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a disaster of anyone interested in variety. If every person with
cable or sat TV has to prechoose each channel, have the channels out
there will be gone in a year.
Yeah, now what a loss to humanity that would be .... perish the thought, I
feel sick just thinking about it.
Yet another example of the government sticking its nose where it doesn't
belong.
Hey I'm with you!!!
Imagine that, a government department standing up for the individual's
freedom of choice in the good ol USA .... tsk, never thought I'd see the day
... what's the world coming to?
<shaking head in disbelief>
Which reminds me, it's about time all the fast food joints made it mandatory
that you can ONLY buy a Burger with a fries and coke AND Supersized the lot
...... I mean how on earth can those poor compaines afford to keep operating
and developing fine healthy cuisine if every tom, *****, and harry waltzes in
and only buys a simple Cheeseburger ... sheesh it's restricting the ability
of good corporate citizens from making a decent profit on their investment,
and it's about time it stopped .. that's what I think.
Not to mention the absolute boom to the economy of making everyone who
bought a new car to also have to buy a Humvee at the same time, or even a
ton of frozen pork bellies ... doesn't matter whether customers needed such
things, because it'd create some real positive growth for industry, and
reduce unemployment to boot. You betya it would! And so much more "variety"
as well.
Yeah it's about time Government just minded their own damn business, and let
people get on with life and their own pursuit of happiness. I mean
shareholders of Cable companies are people too you know! And some may even
want a Humvee!!! :)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Deuteros" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
01 Mar 2006 06:13:28 PM |
|
|
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:WIadnSYY3eOaSZjZRVn-hg@inspired.net.au:
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:18x5bn0to4jtd$.dlg@sec12-orange.ultima.com...
"John Doe II" <firsTraveler@centurytel.net> wrote in
news:LtCdnUXsG4EHqJ7ZRVn-qg@centurytel.net:
Quote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
The FCC just endorsed the idea of consumers picking the cable
channels
they want, rather than taking packages containing channels that they
don't want. I think it's a great idea. I have no use for C-SPAN,
Public TV stations, Speed Channel and a whole bunch of others. There's
maybe 10 channels that I view and would pay for. The rest I can live
without. How I would love to see ala carte cable choice for us
viewers.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
This is a disaster of anyone interested in variety. If every person
with cable or sat TV has to prechoose each channel, have the channels
out there will be gone in a year.
Yeah, now what a loss to humanity that would be .... perish the thought,
I feel sick just thinking about it.
Yet another example of the government sticking its nose where it
doesn't belong.
Hey I'm with you!!!
Imagine that, a government department standing up for the individual's
freedom of choice in the good ol USA .... tsk, never thought I'd see the
day .. what's the world coming to?
You do have a choice. Nobody is forcing you to pay for cable TV.
There's no Cosntitutional right to force a company to sell you a product
the way you want it. If you don't like what the cable company is offering,
then don't give them your money.
Which reminds me, it's about time all the fast food joints made it
mandatory that you can ONLY buy a Burger with a fries and coke AND
Supersized the lot ..... I mean how on earth can those poor compaines
afford to keep operating and developing fine healthy cuisine if every
tom, *****, and harry waltzes in and only buys a simple Cheeseburger ...
sheesh it's restricting the ability of good corporate citizens from
making a decent profit on their investment, and it's about time it
stopped .. that's what I think.
Not to mention the absolute boom to the economy of making everyone who
bought a new car to also have to buy a Humvee at the same time, or even
a ton of frozen pork bellies ... doesn't matter whether customers needed
such things, because it'd create some real positive growth for industry,
and reduce unemployment to boot. You betya it would! And so much more
"variety" as well.
It's obvious you know nothing about economics. I'd like to see an auto
dealer make all customers buy a Hummer along with a new car. They'd be the
first to go out of business.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sean" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
04 Mar 2006 04:55:45 AM |
|
|
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:440638a8$0$49444$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:WIadnSYY3eOaSZjZRVn-hg@inspired.net.au:
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:18x5bn0to4jtd$.dlg@sec12-orange.ultima.com...
"John Doe II" <firsTraveler@centurytel.net> wrote in
news:LtCdnUXsG4EHqJ7ZRVn-qg@centurytel.net:
Quote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
The FCC just endorsed the idea of consumers picking the cable
channels
they want, rather than taking packages containing channels that they
don't want. I think it's a great idea. I have no use for C-SPAN,
Public TV stations, Speed Channel and a whole bunch of others. There's
maybe 10 channels that I view and would pay for. The rest I can live
without. How I would love to see ala carte cable choice for us
viewers.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
This is a disaster of anyone interested in variety. If every person
with cable or sat TV has to prechoose each channel, have the channels
out there will be gone in a year.
Yeah, now what a loss to humanity that would be .... perish the thought,
I feel sick just thinking about it.
Yet another example of the government sticking its nose where it
doesn't belong.
Hey I'm with you!!!
Imagine that, a government department standing up for the individual's
freedom of choice in the good ol USA .... tsk, never thought I'd see the
day .. what's the world coming to?
You do have a choice. Nobody is forcing you to pay for cable TV.
That's true. However someone is forcing someone to pay for Cable TV channels
they do not want, when they want to exercise their freedom of choice of
buying some channels they DO want.
Given the FFC has the powers as endorsed by the "freedom of choice" of the
American people as a whole via decades of Laws and Stautues on the books,
then they can tell the Cable TV companies to do whatever they decide is in
the BEST interests of the American people, whom the FCC actually represents.
Now, I'd suggest you get over it, and accept the will of the people.... or
run for President yourself, win a mandate, and change the damn laws.
There's no Cosntitutional right to force a company to sell you a product
the way you want it.
Look again .... you're missing the obvious, and historical reality.
People demanded cars that were actually SAFE .... the Constitution and
everything below it forced car manufacturers to do just that... at pain of
sanctions including JAIL.
Deal with it, and get over it. :)
If you don't like what the cable company is offering,
then don't give them your money.
I don't. get over it already :)
Which reminds me, it's about time all the fast food joints made it
mandatory that you can ONLY buy a Burger with a fries and coke AND
Supersized the lot ..... I mean how on earth can those poor compaines
afford to keep operating and developing fine healthy cuisine if every
tom, *****, and harry waltzes in and only buys a simple Cheeseburger ...
sheesh it's restricting the ability of good corporate citizens from
making a decent profit on their investment, and it's about time it
stopped .. that's what I think.
Not to mention the absolute boom to the economy of making everyone who
bought a new car to also have to buy a Humvee at the same time, or even
a ton of frozen pork bellies ... doesn't matter whether customers needed
such things, because it'd create some real positive growth for industry,
and reduce unemployment to boot. You betya it would! And so much more
"variety" as well.
It's obvious you know nothing about economics.
It's obvious you know nothing about parody. :)
I'd like to see an auto
dealer make all customers buy a Hummer along with a new car. They'd be the
first to go out of business.
I'd like to see a Cable company make a customer buy a channel they didn;t
want after the new rules take effect. They'll be the first to go out of
business. <VBG>
The first Cable Companies that give the customers what THEY REALLY WANT
...... will make a fortune and remain in business with much less wasted funds
on handling customer enquiries as to WHY they must take 20 channels when
they only want 10.
Follow that sound economic and good business practice theory if you can.
Cheers
.
|
|
|
| User: "Deuteros" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
05 Mar 2006 10:27:16 AM |
|
|
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:T8udnRd9WfQ87pTZRVn-vA@inspired.net.au:
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:440638a8$0$49444$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:WIadnSYY3eOaSZjZRVn-hg@inspired.net.au:
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:18x5bn0to4jtd$.dlg@sec12-orange.ultima.com...
"John Doe II" <firsTraveler@centurytel.net> wrote in
news:LtCdnUXsG4EHqJ7ZRVn-qg@centurytel.net:
Quote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- --
The FCC just endorsed the idea of consumers picking the cable
channels
they want, rather than taking packages containing channels that they
don't want. I think it's a great idea. I have no use for C-SPAN,
Public TV stations, Speed Channel and a whole bunch of others.
There's maybe 10 channels that I view and would pay for. The rest I
can live without. How I would love to see ala carte cable choice for
us viewers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- --
This is a disaster of anyone interested in variety. If every person
with cable or sat TV has to prechoose each channel, have the
channels out there will be gone in a year.
Yeah, now what a loss to humanity that would be .... perish the
thought, I feel sick just thinking about it.
Yet another example of the government sticking its nose where it
doesn't belong.
Hey I'm with you!!!
Imagine that, a government department standing up for the individual's
freedom of choice in the good ol USA .... tsk, never thought I'd see
the day .. what's the world coming to?
You do have a choice. Nobody is forcing you to pay for cable TV.
That's true. However someone is forcing someone to pay for Cable TV
channels they do not want, when they want to exercise their freedom of
choice of buying some channels they DO want.
Too bad. That's the product they are selling and it's not the government's
job to force a company to sell you a product you like. It would be like
saying that I don't use all the features of Microsoft Word so the federal
government should force Microsoft to come out with a version with only the
features I want.
Market forces and technology should be the driving force here, not the
government. We are already seeing individual television shows being offered
for download on the internet. Market forces like these are how companies
should change, not by being strongarmed by the government.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sean" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
06 Mar 2006 09:45:37 PM |
|
|
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:440b1164$0$85890$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:T8udnRd9WfQ87pTZRVn-vA@inspired.net.au:
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:440638a8$0$49444$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:WIadnSYY3eOaSZjZRVn-hg@inspired.net.au:
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:18x5bn0to4jtd$.dlg@sec12-orange.ultima.com...
"John Doe II" <firsTraveler@centurytel.net> wrote in
news:LtCdnUXsG4EHqJ7ZRVn-qg@centurytel.net:
Quote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- --
The FCC just endorsed the idea of consumers picking the cable
channels
they want, rather than taking packages containing channels that they
don't want. I think it's a great idea. I have no use for C-SPAN,
Public TV stations, Speed Channel and a whole bunch of others.
There's maybe 10 channels that I view and would pay for. The rest I
can live without. How I would love to see ala carte cable choice for
us viewers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- --
This is a disaster of anyone interested in variety. If every person
with cable or sat TV has to prechoose each channel, have the
channels out there will be gone in a year.
Yeah, now what a loss to humanity that would be .... perish the
thought, I feel sick just thinking about it.
Yet another example of the government sticking its nose where it
doesn't belong.
Hey I'm with you!!!
Imagine that, a government department standing up for the individual's
freedom of choice in the good ol USA .... tsk, never thought I'd see
the day .. what's the world coming to?
You do have a choice. Nobody is forcing you to pay for cable TV.
That's true. However someone is forcing someone to pay for Cable TV
channels they do not want, when they want to exercise their freedom of
choice of buying some channels they DO want.
Too bad. That's the product they are selling and it's not the government's
job to force a company to sell you a product you like. It would be like
saying that I don't use all the features of Microsoft Word so the federal
government should force Microsoft to come out with a version with only the
features I want.
MMMMM, ever seen how mnay lawsuits Microsoft has lost in the last few years
regarding "bundling" unwanted products into it's software ..... are you from
Mars? <G>
AS usual U only select those things that u can bend to your argument. As
another poster mentioned, Word has other competition .... when it came to
ms windows everyone with any common sense relaises it is a Monopoly at work
in every sense of the "word". Pun intended.
As far as cable goes .... they all play the same rip-off game ... as such
there is no competition, no market forces, because they could get away it
..... well time is up, now they can't play that game anymore, and they are
being forced to change just like Microsoft.
That's exactly WHY Governments exist in the first place ... they [the
people] set the rules of the game.
If the Cable companies don;t like it, then they can go jump ... or cease
doing business altogether. It;s called freedom of choice. Play within the
rules of fair play, or don't play at all.
Market forces and technology should be the driving force here, not the
government. We are already seeing individual television shows being
offered
for download on the internet. Market forces like these are how companies
should change, not by being strongarmed by the government.
So it's OK for individual consumers lacking any choice in the matter in the
market place to be strongarmed by a cable company [all cable companies
working in collusion that is] to buy things u don;t want, but not ok for
the government representing the "people" to strongarm a "poor" little cable
company.
Great logic. Poor widdle cable company being picked on by da big bully ....
sob sob sob.
And I note [given the big snip of my response] that you must support MV
companies selling unsafe vehicles unless "market forces" force them to
change ..... because if the big bad government forces them to do it the
world will surely come to an end.
You're just another crazed fanatic living in a time warp of your own
delusions. Wake up and smell the daisies. Capitalism and market forces are
not God, and Government is not the manifestation of the anti-christ and all
things evil, just because that's what you choose to believe.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Deuteros" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
07 Mar 2006 07:11:57 AM |
|
|
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:CuadnZzPBMx7nJDZnZ2dnUVZ_tKdnZ2d@inspired.net.au:
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:440b1164$0$85890$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:T8udnRd9WfQ87pTZRVn-vA@inspired.net.au:
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:440638a8$0$49444$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:WIadnSYY3eOaSZjZRVn-hg@inspired.net.au:
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:18x5bn0to4jtd$.dlg@sec12-orange.ultima.com...
"John Doe II" <firsTraveler@centurytel.net> wrote in
news:LtCdnUXsG4EHqJ7ZRVn-qg@centurytel.net:
Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
-- -- --
The FCC just endorsed the idea of consumers picking the cable
channels
they want, rather than taking packages containing channels that
they don't want. I think it's a great idea. I have no use for
C-SPAN, Public TV stations, Speed Channel and a whole bunch of
others. There's maybe 10 channels that I view and would pay for.
The rest I can live without. How I would love to see ala carte
cable choice for us viewers.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
-- -- --
This is a disaster of anyone interested in variety. If every
person with cable or sat TV has to prechoose each channel, have
the channels out there will be gone in a year.
Yeah, now what a loss to humanity that would be .... perish the
thought, I feel sick just thinking about it.
Yet another example of the government sticking its nose where it
doesn't belong.
Hey I'm with you!!!
Imagine that, a government department standing up for the
individual's freedom of choice in the good ol USA .... tsk, never
thought I'd see the day .. what's the world coming to?
You do have a choice. Nobody is forcing you to pay for cable TV.
That's true. However someone is forcing someone to pay for Cable TV
channels they do not want, when they want to exercise their freedom of
choice of buying some channels they DO want.
Too bad. That's the product they are selling and it's not the
government's job to force a company to sell you a product you like. It
would be like saying that I don't use all the features of Microsoft
Word so the federal government should force Microsoft to come out with
a version with only the features I want.
MMMMM, ever seen how mnay lawsuits Microsoft has lost in the last few
years regarding "bundling" unwanted products into it's software .....
are you from Mars? <G>
The lawsuit against Microsoft was NOT about bundling products customers
didn't want, it was about was about how bundling products with Windows was
unfair to the competition, whose products had to be downloaded while
everyone already had a copy of Internet Explorer. Notice that Microsoft
basically won and they still bundle their software.
AS usual U only select those things that u can bend to your argument. As
another poster mentioned, Word has other competition .... when it came
to ms windows everyone with any common sense relaises it is a Monopoly
at work in every sense of the "word". Pun intended.
As far as cable goes .... they all play the same rip-off game ... as
such there is no competition, no market forces,
Yes, cable companies have competition: other cable companies. Also,
telephone companies are getting into the game now, and people are now able
to download single TV shows off the internet.
because they could get away it .... well time is up, now they can't play
that game anymore, and they are being forced to change just like
Microsoft.
Microsoft wasn't forced to change.
That's exactly WHY Governments exist in the first place
The government's job is not to force businesses to sell you a certain
product because you are unhappy with the old one. Especially when it's
something as unnecessary as cable TV.
Market forces and technology should be the driving force here, not the
government. We are already seeing individual television shows being
offered
for download on the internet. Market forces like these are how
companies should change, not by being strongarmed by the government.
So it's OK for individual consumers lacking any choice in the matter in
the market place to be strongarmed by a cable company [all cable
companies working in collusion that is] to buy things u don;t want,
Strongarmed by the cable company? That's a new one. Did they put a gun to
your head and force you to buy cable TV?
As I recall, if you don't like their product, you don't have to buy it.
Obviously enough people like their product and think the price is worth it
because they pay for it every month.
but not ok for the government representing the "people" to strongarm a
"poor" little cable company.
No, it isn't. Especially in this case. If you don't like what the cable
company is selling, then don't buy their product or start your own cable
company.
Just wait a few years. With the advent of digital cable and TV over IP,
your wish might come true without government interference.
Great logic. Poor widdle cable company being picked on by da big bully
.... sob sob sob.
And I note [given the big snip of my response] that you must support MV
companies selling unsafe vehicles unless "market forces" force them to
change ..... because if the big bad government forces them to do it the
world will surely come to an end.
When bundled cable TV threatens your life, then we'll talk.
Besides, it's in the best interest of car companies to sell safe cars,
unless they like lawsuits and losing money.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sean" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
07 Mar 2006 04:11:14 PM |
|
|
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:440d869d$0$64591$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:CuadnZzPBMx7nJDZnZ2dnUVZ_tKdnZ2d@inspired.net.au:
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:440b1164$0$85890$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:T8udnRd9WfQ87pTZRVn-vA@inspired.net.au:
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:440638a8$0$49444$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:WIadnSYY3eOaSZjZRVn-hg@inspired.net.au:
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:18x5bn0to4jtd$.dlg@sec12-orange.ultima.com...
"John Doe II" <firsTraveler@centurytel.net> wrote in
news:LtCdnUXsG4EHqJ7ZRVn-qg@centurytel.net:
Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
-- -- --
The FCC just endorsed the idea of consumers picking the cable
channels
they want, rather than taking packages containing channels that
they don't want. I think it's a great idea. I have no use for
C-SPAN, Public TV stations, Speed Channel and a whole bunch of
others. There's maybe 10 channels that I view and would pay for.
The rest I can live without. How I would love to see ala carte
cable choice for us viewers.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
-- -- --
This is a disaster of anyone interested in variety. If every
person with cable or sat TV has to prechoose each channel, have
the channels out there will be gone in a year.
Yeah, now what a loss to humanity that would be .... perish the
thought, I feel sick just thinking about it.
Yet another example of the government sticking its nose where it
doesn't belong.
Hey I'm with you!!!
Imagine that, a government department standing up for the
individual's freedom of choice in the good ol USA .... tsk, never
thought I'd see the day .. what's the world coming to?
You do have a choice. Nobody is forcing you to pay for cable TV.
That's true. However someone is forcing someone to pay for Cable TV
channels they do not want, when they want to exercise their freedom of
choice of buying some channels they DO want.
Too bad. That's the product they are selling and it's not the
government's job to force a company to sell you a product you like. It
would be like saying that I don't use all the features of Microsoft
Word so the federal government should force Microsoft to come out with
a version with only the features I want.
MMMMM, ever seen how mnay lawsuits Microsoft has lost in the last few
years regarding "bundling" unwanted products into it's software .....
are you from Mars? <G>
The lawsuit against Microsoft was NOT about bundling products customers
didn't want, it was about was about how bundling products with Windows was
unfair to the competition, whose products had to be downloaded while
everyone already had a copy of Internet Explorer. Notice that Microsoft
basically won and they still bundle their software.
AS usual U only select those things that u can bend to your argument. As
another poster mentioned, Word has other competition .... when it came
to ms windows everyone with any common sense relaises it is a Monopoly
at work in every sense of the "word". Pun intended.
As far as cable goes .... they all play the same rip-off game ... as
such there is no competition, no market forces,
Yes, cable companies have competition: other cable companies. Also,
telephone companies are getting into the game now, and people are now able
to download single TV shows off the internet.
because they could get away it .... well time is up, now they can't play
that game anymore, and they are being forced to change just like
Microsoft.
Microsoft wasn't forced to change.
That's exactly WHY Governments exist in the first place
The government's job is not to force businesses to sell you a certain
product because you are unhappy with the old one. Especially when it's
something as unnecessary as cable TV.
Market forces and technology should be the driving force here, not the
government. We are already seeing individual television shows being
offered
for download on the internet. Market forces like these are how
companies should change, not by being strongarmed by the government.
So it's OK for individual consumers lacking any choice in the matter in
the market place to be strongarmed by a cable company [all cable
companies working in collusion that is] to buy things u don;t want,
Strongarmed by the cable company? That's a new one. Did they put a gun to
your head and force you to buy cable TV?
As I recall, if you don't like their product, you don't have to buy it.
Obviously enough people like their product and think the price is worth it
because they pay for it every month.
but not ok for the government representing the "people" to strongarm a
"poor" little cable company.
No, it isn't. Especially in this case. If you don't like what the cable
company is selling, then don't buy their product or start your own cable
company.
Just wait a few years. With the advent of digital cable and TV over IP,
your wish might come true without government interference.
Great logic. Poor widdle cable company being picked on by da big bully
.... sob sob sob.
And I note [given the big snip of my response] that you must support MV
companies selling unsafe vehicles unless "market forces" force them to
change ..... because if the big bad government forces them to do it the
world will surely come to an end.
When bundled cable TV threatens your life, then we'll talk.
Besides, it's in the best interest of car companies to sell safe cars,
unless they like lawsuits and losing money.
So you do agree after all that there is a role for Government to play within
market forces.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Deuteros" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
08 Mar 2006 09:12:51 AM |
|
|
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:oaydnZ6URuCZmJPZRVn-uA@inspired.net.au:
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:440d869d$0$64591$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:CuadnZzPBMx7nJDZnZ2dnUVZ_tKdnZ2d@inspired.net.au:
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:440b1164$0$85890$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:T8udnRd9WfQ87pTZRVn-vA@inspired.net.au:
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:440638a8$0$49444$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:WIadnSYY3eOaSZjZRVn-hg@inspired.net.au:
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:18x5bn0to4jtd$.dlg@sec12-orange.ultima.com...
"John Doe II" <firsTraveler@centurytel.net> wrote in
news:LtCdnUXsG4EHqJ7ZRVn-qg@centurytel.net:
Quote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-- -- -- --
The FCC just endorsed the idea of consumers picking the cable
channels
they want, rather than taking packages containing channels that
they don't want. I think it's a great idea. I have no use for
C-SPAN, Public TV stations, Speed Channel and a whole bunch of
others. There's maybe 10 channels that I view and would pay for.
The rest I can live without. How I would love to see ala carte
cable choice for us viewers.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-- -- -- --
This is a disaster of anyone interested in variety. If every
person with cable or sat TV has to prechoose each channel, have
the channels out there will be gone in a year.
Yeah, now what a loss to humanity that would be .... perish the
thought, I feel sick just thinking about it.
Yet another example of the government sticking its nose where it
doesn't belong.
Hey I'm with you!!!
Imagine that, a government department standing up for the
individual's freedom of choice in the good ol USA .... tsk, never
thought I'd see the day .. what's the world coming to?
You do have a choice. Nobody is forcing you to pay for cable TV.
That's true. However someone is forcing someone to pay for Cable TV
channels they do not want, when they want to exercise their freedom
of choice of buying some channels they DO want.
Too bad. That's the product they are selling and it's not the
government's job to force a company to sell you a product you like.
It would be like saying that I don't use all the features of
Microsoft Word so the federal government should force Microsoft to
come out with a version with only the features I want.
MMMMM, ever seen how mnay lawsuits Microsoft has lost in the last few
years regarding "bundling" unwanted products into it's software .....
are you from Mars? <G>
The lawsuit against Microsoft was NOT about bundling products customers
didn't want, it was about was about how bundling products with Windows
was unfair to the competition, whose products had to be downloaded
while everyone already had a copy of Internet Explorer. Notice that
Microsoft basically won and they still bundle their software.
AS usual U only select those things that u can bend to your argument.
As another poster mentioned, Word has other competition .... when it
came to ms windows everyone with any common sense relaises it is a
Monopoly at work in every sense of the "word". Pun intended.
As far as cable goes .... they all play the same rip-off game ... as
such there is no competition, no market forces,
Yes, cable companies have competition: other cable companies. Also,
telephone companies are getting into the game now, and people are now
able to download single TV shows off the internet.
because they could get away it .... well time is up, now they can't
play that game anymore, and they are being forced to change just like
Microsoft.
Microsoft wasn't forced to change.
That's exactly WHY Governments exist in the first place
The government's job is not to force businesses to sell you a certain
product because you are unhappy with the old one. Especially when it's
something as unnecessary as cable TV.
Market forces and technology should be the driving force here, not
the government. We are already seeing individual television shows
being offered
for download on the internet. Market forces like these are how
companies should change, not by being strongarmed by the government.
So it's OK for individual consumers lacking any choice in the matter
in the market place to be strongarmed by a cable company [all cable
companies working in collusion that is] to buy things u don;t want,
Strongarmed by the cable company? That's a new one. Did they put a gun
to your head and force you to buy cable TV?
As I recall, if you don't like their product, you don't have to buy it.
Obviously enough people like their product and think the price is worth
it because they pay for it every month.
but not ok for the government representing the "people" to strongarm a
"poor" little cable company.
No, it isn't. Especially in this case. If you don't like what the cable
company is selling, then don't buy their product or start your own
cable company.
Just wait a few years. With the advent of digital cable and TV over IP,
your wish might come true without government interference.
Great logic. Poor widdle cable company being picked on by da big bully
.... sob sob sob.
And I note [given the big snip of my response] that you must support
MV companies selling unsafe vehicles unless "market forces" force them
to change ..... because if the big bad government forces them to do it
the world will surely come to an end.
When bundled cable TV threatens your life, then we'll talk.
Besides, it's in the best interest of car companies to sell safe cars,
unless they like lawsuits and losing money.
So you do agree after all that there is a role for Government to play
within market forces.
Minimal at best. I say car companies should be able to offer car models
with minimal safety features so that lower income families can afford cars.
.
|
|
|
| User: "bride_of_excession" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
08 Mar 2006 10:53:24 AM |
|
|
On 08 Mar 2006 15:12:51 GMT
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:oaydnZ6URuCZmJPZRVn-uA@inspired.net.au:
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:440d869d$0$64591$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:CuadnZzPBMx7nJDZnZ2dnUVZ_tKdnZ2d@inspired.net.au:
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:440b1164$0$85890$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:T8udnRd9WfQ87pTZRVn-vA@inspired.net.au:
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:440638a8$0$49444$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:WIadnSYY3eOaSZjZRVn-hg@inspired.net.au:
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:18x5bn0to4jtd$.dlg@sec12-orange.ultima.com...
"John Doe II" <firsTraveler@centurytel.net> wrote in
news:LtCdnUXsG4EHqJ7ZRVn-qg@centurytel.net:
Quote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-- -- -- --
The FCC just endorsed the idea of consumers picking the cable
channels
they want, rather than taking packages containing channels that
they don't want. I think it's a great idea. I have no use for
C-SPAN, Public TV stations, Speed Channel and a whole bunch of
others. There's maybe 10 channels that I view and would pay for.
The rest I can live without. How I would love to see ala carte
cable choice for us viewers.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-- -- -- --
This is a disaster of anyone interested in variety. If every
person with cable or sat TV has to prechoose each channel, have
the channels out there will be gone in a year.
Yeah, now what a loss to humanity that would be .... perish the
thought, I feel sick just thinking about it.
Yet another example of the government sticking its nose where it
doesn't belong.
Hey I'm with you!!!
Imagine that, a government department standing up for the
individual's freedom of choice in the good ol USA .... tsk, never
thought I'd see the day .. what's the world coming to?
You do have a choice. Nobody is forcing you to pay for cable TV.
That's true. However someone is forcing someone to pay for Cable TV
channels they do not want, when they want to exercise their freedom
of choice of buying some channels they DO want.
Too bad. That's the product they are selling and it's not the
government's job to force a company to sell you a product you like.
It would be like saying that I don't use all the features of
Microsoft Word so the federal government should force Microsoft to
come out with a version with only the features I want.
MMMMM, ever seen how mnay lawsuits Microsoft has lost in the last few
years regarding "bundling" unwanted products into it's software .....
are you from Mars? <G>
The lawsuit against Microsoft was NOT about bundling products customers
didn't want, it was about was about how bundling products with Windows
was unfair to the competition, whose products had to be downloaded
while everyone already had a copy of Internet Explorer. Notice that
Microsoft basically won and they still bundle their software.
AS usual U only select those things that u can bend to your argument.
As another poster mentioned, Word has other competition .... when it
came to ms windows everyone with any common sense relaises it is a
Monopoly at work in every sense of the "word". Pun intended.
As far as cable goes .... they all play the same rip-off game ... as
such there is no competition, no market forces,
Yes, cable companies have competition: other cable companies. Also,
telephone companies are getting into the game now, and people are now
able to download single TV shows off the internet.
because they could get away it .... well time is up, now they can't
play that game anymore, and they are being forced to change just like
Microsoft.
Microsoft wasn't forced to change.
That's exactly WHY Governments exist in the first place
The government's job is not to force businesses to sell you a certain
product because you are unhappy with the old one. Especially when it's
something as unnecessary as cable TV.
Market forces and technology should be the driving force here, not
the government. We are already seeing individual television shows
being offered
for download on the internet. Market forces like these are how
companies should change, not by being strongarmed by the government.
So it's OK for individual consumers lacking any choice in the matter
in the market place to be strongarmed by a cable company [all cable
companies working in collusion that is] to buy things u don;t want,
Strongarmed by the cable company? That's a new one. Did they put a gun
to your head and force you to buy cable TV?
As I recall, if you don't like their product, you don't have to buy it.
Obviously enough people like their product and think the price is worth
it because they pay for it every month.
but not ok for the government representing the "people" to strongarm a
"poor" little cable company.
No, it isn't. Especially in this case. If you don't like what the cable
company is selling, then don't buy their product or start your own
cable company.
Just wait a few years. With the advent of digital cable and TV over IP,
your wish might come true without government interference.
Great logic. Poor widdle cable company being picked on by da big bully
.... sob sob sob.
And I note [given the big snip of my response] that you must support
MV companies selling unsafe vehicles unless "market forces" force them
to change ..... because if the big bad government forces them to do it
the world will surely come to an end.
When bundled cable TV threatens your life, then we'll talk.
Besides, it's in the best interest of car companies to sell safe cars,
unless they like lawsuits and losing money.
So you do agree after all that there is a role for Government to play
within market forces.
Minimal at best. I say car companies should be able to offer car models
with minimal safety features so that lower income families can afford cars.
Good for population control too!
b_of_e
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "bride_of_excession" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
07 Mar 2006 04:25:56 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 7 Mar 2006 13:45:37 +1000
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote:
Government is not the manifestation of the anti-christ and all
things evil
Of course not, the anti-christ will have to be *competent*.
OTOH, evil *is* stupid... On second thought, maybe... Hmmm....
b_of_e
.
|
|
|
| User: "Otto Bahn" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
07 Mar 2006 04:56:51 PM |
|
|
"bride_of_excession" <bride_of_excession@oy.vey> wrote
Government is not the manifestation of the anti-christ and all
things evil
Of course not, the anti-christ will have to be *competent*.
God sent me here to slay him. He'd better hurry up, though,
because I ain't gonna live forever.
--oTTo--
According to Prot from K-Pax, you relive your mistakes an
infinite number of times
.
|
|
|
| User: "bride_of_excession" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
07 Mar 2006 05:13:50 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 7 Mar 2006 17:56:51 -0500
"Otto Bahn" <GoAheadKissMyAss@Blew.Devels.com> wrote:
"bride_of_excession" <bride_of_excession@oy.vey> wrote
Government is not the manifestation of the anti-christ and all
things evil
Of course not, the anti-christ will have to be *competent*.
God sent me here to slay him. He'd better hurry up, though,
because I ain't gonna live forever.
--oTTo--
According to Prot from K-Pax, you relive your mistakes an
infinite number of times
How is the old Codger?
b_of_e
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sean" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
07 Mar 2006 06:28:23 PM |
|
|
"bride_of_excession" <bride_of_excession@oy.vey> wrote in message
news:20060307142556.3f9cb51c.bride_of_excession@oy.vey...
On Tue, 7 Mar 2006 13:45:37 +1000
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote:
Government is not the manifestation of the anti-christ and all
things evil
Of course not, the anti-christ will have to be *competent*.
OTOH, evil *is* stupid... On second thought, maybe... Hmmm....
b_of_e
hehehehe, good point :)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sean" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
06 Mar 2006 09:56:43 PM |
|
|
PS
"Deuteros" <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:440b1164$0$85890$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
"Sean" <santimvah_notspam@yahoo.com> wrote in
You do have a choice. Nobody is forcing you to pay for cable TV.
That's true. However someone is forcing someone to pay for Cable TV
channels they do not want, when they want to exercise their freedom of
choice of buying some channels they DO want.
Too bad. That's the product they are selling and it's not the government's
job to force a company to sell you a product you like. It would be like
saying that I don't use all the features of Microsoft Word so the federal
government should force Microsoft to come out with a version with only the
features I want.
Market forces and technology should be the driving force here, not the
government. We are already seeing individual television shows being
offered
for download on the internet. Market forces like these are how companies
should change, not by being strongarmed by the government.
Under the new rules, you and any other consumer are still free to choose to
pay for as many channels as want to that you DON"T WANT or Watch ..... so be
aware, the government is not taking away your right to be gullible. Only you
can do that. <G>
I'd recommend you take the top shelf 600 channel package @ $1000 per month
...... Cable companies need all the profits they can get now. Be a good sport
for the economy and keep buying everything that you don't need.
Growth is God .... long live the Almighty Buck$ .... and May the Market
Force be with You!!!
;-)))))
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Curly Surmudgeon" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
27 Feb 2006 09:20:40 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 21:05:26 -0500, Deuteros wrote:
"John Doe II" <firsTraveler@centurytel.net> wrote in
news:LtCdnUXsG4EHqJ7ZRVn-qg@centurytel.net:
Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FCC just endorsed the idea of consumers picking the cable channels
they want, rather than taking packages containing channels that they
don't want. I think it's a great idea. I have no use for C-SPAN, Public
TV stations, Speed Channel and a whole bunch of others. There's maybe 10
channels that I view and would pay for. The rest I can live without. How
I would love to see ala carte cable choice for us viewers.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a disaster of anyone interested in variety. If every person with
cable or sat TV has to prechoose each channel, have the channels out
there will be gone in a year.
Yet another example of the government sticking its nose where it doesn't
belong.
Uhm, the FCC _created_ and inititiated satellite TV allowing
mega-corporations to monopolize the airways. Either break their
monopolies or guarantee a level playing field. Permitting monopolies to
bundle useless garbage and force you to purchase all at inflated prices
cannot be allowed.
-- Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beware the American Taliban
------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "Deuteros" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
28 Feb 2006 08:37:08 PM |
|
|
Curly Surmudgeon <curly@curlysurmudgeon.com> wrote in
news:mrSdncFvjMJqXZ7ZRVn-uw@comcast.com:
On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 21:05:26 -0500, Deuteros wrote:
"John Doe II" <firsTraveler@centurytel.net> wrote in
news:LtCdnUXsG4EHqJ7ZRVn-qg@centurytel.net:
Quote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
The FCC just endorsed the idea of consumers picking the cable
channels
they want, rather than taking packages containing channels that they
don't want. I think it's a great idea. I have no use for C-SPAN,
Public TV stations, Speed Channel and a whole bunch of others. There's
maybe 10 channels that I view and would pay for. The rest I can live
without. How I would love to see ala carte cable choice for us
viewers.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
This is a disaster of anyone interested in variety. If every person
with cable or sat TV has to prechoose each channel, have the channels
out there will be gone in a year.
Yet another example of the government sticking its nose where it
doesn't belong.
Uhm, the FCC _created_ and inititiated satellite TV allowing
mega-corporations to monopolize the airways.
Explain how the FCC created satellite TV.
Either break their monopolies or guarantee a level playing field.
Permitting monopolies to bundle useless garbage and force you to
purchase all at inflated prices cannot be allowed.
There are no inflated prices. TV isn't a necessity and nobody is forcing
you to pay for it. You only have yourself to blame for paying "inflated"
prices.
Despite what you may think or say, if you are paying for cable or
satellite, you obviously think the price is worth it. If you didn't, you
wouldn't be paying for it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
28 Feb 2006 11:57:18 PM |
|
|
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
Curly Surmudgeon <curly@curlysurmudgeon.com> wrote in
news:mrSdncFvjMJqXZ7ZRVn-uw@comcast.com:
On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 21:05:26 -0500, Deuteros wrote:
"John Doe II" <firsTraveler@centurytel.net> wrote in
news:LtCdnUXsG4EHqJ7ZRVn-qg@centurytel.net:
Quote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
The FCC just endorsed the idea of consumers picking the cable
channels
they want, rather than taking packages containing channels that they
don't want. I think it's a great idea. I have no use for C-SPAN,
Public TV stations, Speed Channel and a whole bunch of others. There's
maybe 10 channels that I view and would pay for. The rest I can live
without. How I would love to see ala carte cable choice for us
viewers.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
This is a disaster of anyone interested in variety. If every person
with cable or sat TV has to prechoose each channel, have the channels
out there will be gone in a year.
Yet another example of the government sticking its nose where it
doesn't belong.
Uhm, the FCC _created_ and inititiated satellite TV allowing
mega-corporations to monopolize the airways.
Explain how the FCC created satellite TV.
The airwaves are public property under control of the FCC.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Deuteros" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
01 Mar 2006 06:14:24 PM |
|
|
(Ray Fischer) wrote in
news:440537be$0$58063$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net:
Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
Curly Surmudgeon <curly@curlysurmudgeon.com> wrote in
news:mrSdncFvjMJqXZ7ZRVn-uw@comcast.com:
On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 21:05:26 -0500, Deuteros wrote:
"John Doe II" <firsTraveler@centurytel.net> wrote in
news:LtCdnUXsG4EHqJ7ZRVn-qg@centurytel.net:
Quote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
----
The FCC just endorsed the idea of consumers picking the cable
channels
they want, rather than taking packages containing channels that they
don't want. I think it's a great idea. I have no use for C-SPAN,
Public TV stations, Speed Channel and a whole bunch of others.
There's maybe 10 channels that I view and would pay for. The rest I
can live without. How I would love to see ala carte cable choice for
us viewers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
----
This is a disaster of anyone interested in variety. If every person
with cable or sat TV has to prechoose each channel, have the
channels out there will be gone in a year.
Yet another example of the government sticking its nose where it
doesn't belong.
Uhm, the FCC _created_ and inititiated satellite TV allowing
mega-corporations to monopolize the airways.
Explain how the FCC created satellite TV.
The airwaves are public property under control of the FCC.
Where in the Constitution does it say that the airwaves are public
property?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Curly Surmudgeon" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
01 Mar 2006 06:50:38 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 01 Mar 2006 02:37:08 +0000, Deuteros wrote:
Curly Surmudgeon <curly@curlysurmudgeon.com> wrote in
news:mrSdncFvjMJqXZ7ZRVn-uw@comcast.com:
On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 21:05:26 -0500, Deuteros wrote:
"John Doe II" <firsTraveler@centurytel.net> wrote in
news:LtCdnUXsG4EHqJ7ZRVn-qg@centurytel.net:
Quote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
The FCC just endorsed the idea of consumers picking the cable
channels
they want, rather than taking packages containing channels that they
don't want. I think it's a great idea. I have no use for C-SPAN,
Public TV stations, Speed Channel and a whole bunch of others. There's
maybe 10 channels that I view and would pay for. The rest I can live
without. How I would love to see ala carte cable choice for us
viewers.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
This is a disaster of anyone interested in variety. If every person
with cable or sat TV has to prechoose each channel, have the channels
out there will be gone in a year.
Yet another example of the government sticking its nose where it
doesn't belong.
Uhm, the FCC _created_ and inititiated satellite TV allowing
mega-corporations to monopolize the airways.
Explain how the FCC created satellite TV.
Are you just trolling or really ignorant of the FCC?
The Federal Communications Commission sets the requlations on all forms of
electromagnetic transmission in the United States. Each year changes are
made, some small such as adding FRS or large, creating the Citizens Band
from the previous Amateur Radio 10 meter band.
About 2 decades ago the FCC proposed, and Congress agreed, to create a
span of frequencies solely for Satellite Television use. These were know
as the 'C' band and 'X' band (this is from memory) which used relatively
large antennas. The 'C' band antenna was about 2.5 meters in diameter.
Transmissions are regulated to prevent collisions. Power, bandwidth,
modulation, and content are regulated. Later another Satellite TV band
was created which DirecTV and others now use.
By reserving these frequencies for specific uses the FCC encourages heavy
investment in infrastructure. It takes some serious money to build and
launch a satellite. Nobody is going to risk that amount of capital
wihtout guarantees, that is how the FCC "created" satellite TV.
Either break their monopolies or guarantee a level playing field.
Permitting monopolies to bundle useless garbage and force you to
purchase all at inflated prices cannot be allowed.
There are no inflated prices.
Many disagree with that claim.
TV isn't a necessity and nobody is forcing
you to pay for it. You only have yourself to blame for paying "inflated"
prices.
Despite what you may think or say, if you are paying for cable or
satellite, you obviously think the price is worth it. If you didn't, you
wouldn't be paying for it.
Despit what you may think or say there are monopolies. We can argue
whether these are good or bad things but not that they exist.
-- Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beware the American Taliban
------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "Deuteros" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
01 Mar 2006 06:56:20 PM |
|
|
Curly Surmudgeon <curly@curlysurmudgeon.com> wrote in
news:KPmdnS7FML0m3ZvZnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@comcast.com:
On Wed, 01 Mar 2006 02:37:08 +0000, Deuteros wrote:
Curly Surmudgeon <curly@curlysurmudgeon.com> wrote in
news:mrSdncFvjMJqXZ7ZRVn-uw@comcast.com:
On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 21:05:26 -0500, Deuteros wrote:
"John Doe II" <firsTraveler@centurytel.net> wrote in
news:LtCdnUXsG4EHqJ7ZRVn-qg@centurytel.net:
Quote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- --
The FCC just endorsed the idea of consumers picking the cable
channels
they want, rather than taking packages containing channels that they
don't want. I think it's a great idea. I have no use for C-SPAN,
Public TV stations, Speed Channel and a whole bunch of others.
There's maybe 10 channels that I view and would pay for. The rest I
can live without. How I would love to see ala carte cable choice for
us viewers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- --
This is a disaster of anyone interested in variety. If every person
with cable or sat TV has to prechoose each channel, have the
channels out there will be gone in a year.
Yet another example of the government sticking its nose where it
doesn't belong.
Uhm, the FCC _created_ and inititiated satellite TV allowing
mega-corporations to monopolize the airways.
Explain how the FCC created satellite TV.
Are you just trolling or really ignorant of the FCC?
The Federal Communications Commission sets the requlations on all forms
of electromagnetic transmission in the United States. Each year changes
are made, some small such as adding FRS or large, creating the Citizens
Band from the previous Amateur Radio 10 meter band.
About 2 decades ago the FCC proposed, and Congress agreed, to create a
span of frequencies solely for Satellite Television use. These were
know as the 'C' band and 'X' band (this is from memory) which used
relatively large antennas. The 'C' band antenna was about 2.5 meters in
diameter.
Transmissions are regulated to prevent collisions. Power, bandwidth,
modulation, and content are regulated. Later another Satellite TV band
was created which DirecTV and others now use.
By reserving these frequencies for specific uses the FCC encourages
heavy investment in infrastructure. It takes some serious money to
build and launch a satellite. Nobody is going to risk that amount of
capital wihtout guarantees, that is how the FCC "created" satellite TV.
The FCC doesn't create frequencies. The control the use of them, which is,
of course, unconstitutional.
Either break their monopolies or guarantee a level playing field.
Permitting monopolies to bundle useless garbage and force you to
purchase all at inflated prices cannot be allowed.
There are no inflated prices.
Many disagree with that claim.
That's fine, but if you are willing to pay for something that you claim is
"inflated" then how can you really claim it was inflated?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Curly Surmudgeon" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
01 Mar 2006 11:46:26 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 00:56:20 +0000, Deuteros wrote:
Curly Surmudgeon <curly@curlysurmudgeon.com> wrote in
news:KPmdnS7FML0m3ZvZnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@comcast.com:
On Wed, 01 Mar 2006 02:37:08 +0000, Deuteros wrote:
Curly Surmudgeon <curly@curlysurmudgeon.com> wrote in
news:mrSdncFvjMJqXZ7ZRVn-uw@comcast.com:
On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 21:05:26 -0500, Deuteros wrote:
"John Doe II" <firsTraveler@centurytel.net> wrote in
news:LtCdnUXsG4EHqJ7ZRVn-qg@centurytel.net:
Quote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- --
The FCC just endorsed the idea of consumers picking the cable
channels
they want, rather than taking packages containing channels that they
don't want. I think it's a great idea. I have no use for C-SPAN,
Public TV stations, Speed Channel and a whole bunch of others.
There's maybe 10 channels that I view and would pay for. The rest I
can live without. How I would love to see ala carte cable choice for
us viewers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- --
This is a disaster of anyone interested in variety. If every person
with cable or sat TV has to prechoose each channel, have the
channels out there will be gone in a year.
Yet another example of the government sticking its nose where it
doesn't belong.
Uhm, the FCC _created_ and inititiated satellite TV allowing
mega-corporations to monopolize the airways.
Explain how the FCC created satellite TV.
Are you just trolling or really ignorant of the FCC?
The Federal Communications Commission sets the requlations on all forms
of electromagnetic transmission in the United States. Each year changes
are made, some small such as adding FRS or large, creating the Citizens
Band from the previous Amateur Radio 10 meter band.
About 2 decades ago the FCC proposed, and Congress agreed, to create a
span of frequencies solely for Satellite Television use. These were
know as the 'C' band and 'X' band (this is from memory) which used
relatively large antennas. The 'C' band antenna was about 2.5 meters in
diameter.
Transmissions are regulated to prevent collisions. Power, bandwidth,
modulation, and content are regulated. Later another Satellite TV band
was created which DirecTV and others now use.
By reserving these frequencies for specific uses the FCC encourages
heavy investment in infrastructure. It takes some serious money to
build and launch a satellite. Nobody is going to risk that amount of
capital wihtout guarantees, that is how the FCC "created" satellite TV.
The FCC doesn't create frequencies.
You're moving the target. You asked how the FCC created Satellite TV. I
answered that question explicitly and in detail. Rather than thank me
for the time spent to eradicate your ignorance you wave your hand and
launch another non-sequitor.
Nobody suggested that the FCC "created frequencies" which is a pretty dumb
assertion. Do not expect me to chase your straw men or follow your
distractions again.
The control the use of them, which is,
of course, unconstitutional.
Your claims do not make it so.
Either break their monopolies or guarantee a level playing field.
Permitting monopolies to bundle useless garbage and force you to
purchase all at inflated prices cannot be allowed.
There are no inflated prices.
Many disagree with that claim.
That's fine, but if you are willing to pay for something that you claim
is "inflated" then how can you really claim it was inflated?
Where did you get the impression that I'm paying for anything?
-- Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beware the American Taliban
------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
01 Mar 2006 12:14:25 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 21:05:26 -0500, in alt.atheism , Deuteros
<deuteros@xrs.net> in <18x5bn0to4jtd$.dlg@sec12-orange.ultima.com>
wrote:
"John Doe II" <firsTraveler@centurytel.net> wrote in
news:LtCdnUXsG4EHqJ7ZRVn-qg@centurytel.net:
Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FCC just endorsed the idea of consumers picking the cable channels
they want, rather than taking packages containing channels that they
don't want. I think it's a great idea. I have no use for C-SPAN, Public
TV stations, Speed Channel and a whole bunch of others. There's maybe 10
channels that I view and would pay for. The rest I can live without. How
I would love to see ala carte cable choice for us viewers.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a disaster of anyone interested in variety. If every person with
cable or sat TV has to prechoose each channel, have the channels out
there will be gone in a year.
Yet another example of the government sticking its nose where it doesn't
belong.
Since the government gave the monopoly the cable companies I am not
sure why you see this as not government business.
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
