4 ms·

My Comcast bill, over the course of two consecutive months since the beginning of this year -- and since the apparent, "inevitable" coming end of net neutrality

My Comcast bill, over the course of two consecutive months since the beginning of this year -- and since the apparent, "inevitable" coming end of net neutrality, increased about 25%. My Congressmen are going to hear about this. About how, for the better part of 20 years, Ameritech/SBC/ATT refused to upgrade my neighborhood trunk line, that doesn't even support DSL. In a high-density suburban neighborhood in the home/headquarters state of the corporation. About how Ameritech/SBC (now rebranded ATT) received the better part of three quarters of a billion dollars in tax breaks and other incentives from the State of Illinois, in return for a commitment to provide "universal" (minimum 95% coverage) broadband access throughout the State. Whereupon, they immediately turned around and lobbied the State legislature to let them out of their side of the agreement, that commitment, while keeping the tax breaks and incentives. They're going to hear how, several years ago, I couldn't watch Netflix streaming without constant interruptions, particularly during prime viewing hours, because Comcast refused to peer with Netflix in their datacenters -- at Netflix's expense and providing of the necessary equipment and installation. That problem didn't resolve until the bad publicity and outcry was giving Comcast (and its ilk exercising similar manipulation) an enormous PR black eye. This right at the time Comcast was attempting to launch and gain traction with one of their "competing" streaming video offers. About paid advocacy promoting lies about support for their actions within non-profit centric communities, such as... was it the NAACP, or another organization, that was supporting Comcast quite apparently in return for contributions. How Congressmen supporting these telcos' agenda are functioning as paid shills for these private companies. Not just lobbied. Outright bought, with no effort or success in actually understanding the issues involved. And I don't vote for paid shills. -- P.S. My State Democratic representative made the rounds, a couple of years ago after some heavy local storm damage. I took the opportunity to tell him about our local problem with ATT. (This was after the storm aftermath's crisis period was passed; he wasn't overloaded with it.) He told me that actually, he had a meeting with ATT executives the following day and would bring it up. And that he'd get back to me on that. I never heard a word. And when I followed up later with his staff, I still didn't hear anything. I don't vote for him, any more. I faced that decision again, this past April. And no, still no vote for him.

pasbesoin 8y ago
P.S. I actually do, very occasionally, write my Congresscritters. I'm pretty careful doing so -- doing so well, I hope -- and I have some evidence of some of my correspondence having been read and paid attention to. So when I say they will hear about this, I mean, they actually will. Though I'll write it in a fashion that is more appealing/compelling to them. And regarding some of the history that may not seem to pertain directly to net neutrality? Look, these companies are saying a lot of things as part of their campaign to kill it. And the historical record demonstrates that, with respect to such statements, they are consistently full of shit -- in a self-serving way. They are not to be believed. Neither the people shilling the talking points they've been handed by the companies and their lobbyists.
frockington 8y ago
State reps seem much more willing to help out/listen to their constituents. Every time I've reached out with a state representative they have helped me out. One even drafted a bill and politely told the city to f* off
- pasbesoin 8y ago
  He sounded very interested during our conversation. But, ATT is a very big big-money and political player in our state. Even if he wasn't originally dissembling, the ATT executives may have just shut him right down. Part of my point: I don't care which political party it is. If a member is in bed with this crap -- or even just silently acquiescing, to hell with them. I'd liked this rep, up to that point. If he'd told me there was nothing he could do, or hadn't specifically told me he'd follow up. Maybe I'd grant a bit more benefit of the doubt. Well, I'd still expect him to address the issue -- take a position against the behavior. Instead, silence. Like the silence amongst our supposed "mainstream" politicians in response to the hard right pushing beliefs and policy with no backing in fact. (Or the hard left, when they do that -- although then I can usually at least sympathize with the compassion, when present.) Democrats need to understand that their weak tea "centrist", big business trend no longer sells to the base they need and that needs effective representation. I'm all for effective business. I'm not for monopolies and oligopolies hindering progress for their own relative advantage. Nor sucking at the teat of public money and policy while complaining about their taxes.

pasbesoin 8y ago

P.S. I actually do, very occasionally, write my Congresscritters. I'm pretty careful doing so -- doing so well, I hope -- and I have some evidence of some of my correspondence having been read and paid attention to. So when I say they will hear about this, I mean, they actually will. Though I'll write it in a fashion that is more appealing/compelling to them. And regarding some of the history that may not seem to pertain directly to net neutrality? Look, these companies are saying a lot of things as part of their campaign to kill it. And the historical record demonstrates that, with respect to such statements, they are consistently full of shit -- in a self-serving way. They are not to be believed. Neither the people shilling the talking points they've been handed by the companies and their lobbyists.

frockington 8y ago

State reps seem much more willing to help out/listen to their constituents. Every time I've reached out with a state representative they have helped me out. One even drafted a bill and politely told the city to f* off

pasbesoin 8y ago
He sounded very interested during our conversation. But, ATT is a very big big-money and political player in our state. Even if he wasn't originally dissembling, the ATT executives may have just shut him right down. Part of my point: I don't care which political party it is. If a member is in bed with this crap -- or even just silently acquiescing, to hell with them. I'd liked this rep, up to that point. If he'd told me there was nothing he could do, or hadn't specifically told me he'd follow up. Maybe I'd grant a bit more benefit of the doubt. Well, I'd still expect him to address the issue -- take a position against the behavior. Instead, silence. Like the silence amongst our supposed "mainstream" politicians in response to the hard right pushing beliefs and policy with no backing in fact. (Or the hard left, when they do that -- although then I can usually at least sympathize with the compassion, when present.) Democrats need to understand that their weak tea "centrist", big business trend no longer sells to the base they need and that needs effective representation. I'm all for effective business. I'm not for monopolies and oligopolies hindering progress for their own relative advantage. Nor sucking at the teat of public money and policy while complaining about their taxes.