If ISPs have to collect, does that mean they are also eligible for subsidies?
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Ken Hohhof <[email protected]> wrote: > So did all you folks stop worrying about the 5 GHz rules? They are > already a done deal, the end of new equipment authorization is coming soon, > to be followed by end of sale. > > Seems like this is as big an issue if not bigger than having to pay into > USF which, let's face it, we just turn around and add as a below-the-line > charge on customer bills. Customers have already proved they don't pay > attention to below-the-line charges, plus all the competition would be > doing it as well. The main downside I see is if they increase the size of > the CAF fund and our big competition gets even more subsidies to overbuild > us. > > > -----Original Message----- From: Rory Conaway > Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 8:14 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the future of being an ISP > > > You should change it to, "when required by corrupt, geriatric, ignorant, > and moronic government politicians". There is no question why Obama is > pushing this, he is an ideological idiot with absolutely no management or > economic skills. Add to that his feelings are hurt that the rest of the > country is now seeing him for the egomaniac immature child that he is. > Wheeler is now just trying to keep his job temporarily but I guarantee is > trying to find a way out of this that preserves his lobbying business. > The second he can get out, preserve his reputation, and probably not let > his boss destroy the country and his future/former clients any further > economically than he already has, including the 1200 new regulations taking > effect now that will cost at least $200B this year alone, he's gone. > > All I know is I didn't go far enough with my Tom Wheeler article. Obama > blindsided me on his need to destroy another industry and make government > bigger. > > Rory > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bill Prince > Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 10:21 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the future of being an ISP > > We have always had the disclaimer in our service agreement that it would > include taxes/surcharges if/when required by the government. Doesn't make > it taste any better, but it covers the reality. > > bp > <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> > > On 1/21/2015 6:23 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote: > >> On 1/21/15 18:07, Rory Conaway wrote: >> >>> I think we need to tell every single customer why the rates went up. >>> There is another election in 2 years. >>> >>> >> >> Your rates aren't going up. The explanation to the customer is simple: >> "the total bill is higher because the government added a new tax. The >> pre-tax price of service hasn't changed. We're not making any money >> off this, if anything it adds more overhead to collect it. If you're >> unhappy with this tax then call/write your representatives in congress." >> >> ~Seth >> > > >
