9 ms·

Did anyone really expect anything different? These are the same companies who took tax breaks in return for a promise to build out a fiber optic network and the

by lovich 8y ago

Did anyone really expect anything different? These are the same companies who took tax breaks in return for a promise to build out a fiber optic network and then never did it while pocketing the money. At this point AT&T and their peers aren't fucking society, we are actively asking them to

rcombine 8y ago
We need stronger regulations on businesses and corporations. Eroding them has clearly resulted in negative effects.
- mfatica 8y ago
  Not sure how you reach that conclusion about regulations which are separate from taxes
- drocer88 8y ago
  We need less regulations. We need more people boycotting Silicon Valley nonsense, AT&T, Verizon, Facebook , google etc. These guys LOVE regulation. It will build them a bigger moat.
  - dtwest 8y ago
    We need to stop making generalizations about regulations. Some are good, some are bad, some are both.
- SkyBelow 8y ago
  Is the solution to corrupt government giving money to corporations to have more government?
  - bilbo0s 8y ago
    That one's easy. The solution to corrupt government is good government, which people are free to elect if they choose. And the solution to corrupt corporations is to be tough on crime, ie - regulations with real teeth. Which the good government, that people can elect if they choose, can easily enact. Now if people don't want to elect good government, if they want to stick with the sort of government they are currently electing term after term, well, I guess I don't know what to tell them? But yeah, solution to electing corrupt government officials should be blindingly obvious. Don't do that. Elect officials who are not corrupt. When you hire someone for your company, depending on the position, you likely do a criminal check, a credit check, a general background check, a drug check, etc etc etc. All those kinds of employment related checks we all have to do. Most of us don't do that when we vote, we just kind of say, "Meh, this guy's on my team, I'll vote for him."
- snarf21 8y ago
  We need to split up all the mega-mergers that have happened in the last 15 years. Every time one of these is realized, you are looking at a 10-20% job cut across both companies. Splitting them up will allow for more competition and bring the jobs back (somewhere).
- paulddraper 8y ago
  Thinking regulation hurts big players like AT&T.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
rayiner 8y ago
This article and your assertion are a really good example of how falsehoods become an unquestioned part of the accepted narrative. AT&T never "promised to create a net 7,000" jobs. The article admits as much: it quotes AT&T's CEO as saying that AT&T would invest an additional $1 billion, which is equivalent to 7,000 jobs. The article never analyzes the truth of that claim. It never determines whether AT&T actually invested that money. (In fact, AT&T is in the middle of a big push to deploy more fiber: https://www.cordcuttersnews.com/att-plans-to-expand-fiber-internet-to-14-million-locations-by-mid-2019. https://www.cordcuttersnews.com/att-plans-to-expand-fiber-in...) Instead, the article points to completely unrelated layoffs that resulted from a merger. (There was also the question of who exactly this "promise" was made to. The article quotes Stephenson's comments in a speech to the Economic Club of New York, not any sort of filing to the government.) The same is true for the "promise to build out a fiber optic network." AT&T never "promised" to do that. The arguments at the time were that deregulation would lead to higher investment into things like broadband. What nobody anticipated at the time was that the mobile revolution would happen, and all that new capital would be redirected to building wireless networks instead. That doesn't make the original claim a misrepresentation. And from a practical standpoint, it's better that all this money got invested in mobile instead of building FTTH.
- JaimeThompson 8y ago
  More fully quoting him might be helpful "“From my standpoint, the driver of this is the business tax reform… if we get investment going, we get productivity going, we get wage gain going, we invest another billion dollars. Every billion dollars AT&T invests is 7,000 hard hat jobs. These are not entry-level jobs. These are 7,000 jobs of people putting fiber in ground, hard hat jobs that make $70,000 to $80,000 per year,” Stephenson said at an event hosted by The Economic Club of New York on Wednesday."
  - rayiner 8y ago
    Right, but the question still is: did AT&T invest that $1 billion? AT&T's capital expenditures in 2017 was $21.6 billion, and $25 billion in 2018: https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/at-t-s-capex-to-rise-to-25b-2018-from-just-21-6b-2017-tax-reform-firstnet https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/at-t-s-capex-to-rise.... In 2019, it is expected to be $23 billion: https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/at-t-expects-2019-gross-capital-investment-in-23-bln-range-1027860606 https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/at-t-expects....

by lovich 8y ago

rcombine 8y ago

We need stronger regulations on businesses and corporations. Eroding them has clearly resulted in negative effects.

mfatica 8y ago
Not sure how you reach that conclusion about regulations which are separate from taxes
drocer88 8y ago
We need less regulations. We need more people boycotting Silicon Valley nonsense, AT&T, Verizon, Facebook , google etc. These guys LOVE regulation. It will build them a bigger moat.
- dtwest 8y ago
  We need to stop making generalizations about regulations. Some are good, some are bad, some are both.
SkyBelow 8y ago
Is the solution to corrupt government giving money to corporations to have more government?
- bilbo0s 8y ago
  That one's easy. The solution to corrupt government is good government, which people are free to elect if they choose. And the solution to corrupt corporations is to be tough on crime, ie - regulations with real teeth. Which the good government, that people can elect if they choose, can easily enact. Now if people don't want to elect good government, if they want to stick with the sort of government they are currently electing term after term, well, I guess I don't know what to tell them? But yeah, solution to electing corrupt government officials should be blindingly obvious. Don't do that. Elect officials who are not corrupt. When you hire someone for your company, depending on the position, you likely do a criminal check, a credit check, a general background check, a drug check, etc etc etc. All those kinds of employment related checks we all have to do. Most of us don't do that when we vote, we just kind of say, "Meh, this guy's on my team, I'll vote for him."
snarf21 8y ago
We need to split up all the mega-mergers that have happened in the last 15 years. Every time one of these is realized, you are looking at a 10-20% job cut across both companies. Splitting them up will allow for more competition and bring the jobs back (somewhere).
paulddraper 8y ago
Thinking regulation hurts big players like AT&T.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

rayiner 8y ago

This article and your assertion are a really good example of how falsehoods become an unquestioned part of the accepted narrative. AT&T never "promised to create a net 7,000" jobs. The article admits as much: it quotes AT&T's CEO as saying that AT&T would invest an additional $1 billion, which is equivalent to 7,000 jobs. The article never analyzes the truth of that claim. It never determines whether AT&T actually invested that money. (In fact, AT&T is in the middle of a big push to deploy more fiber: https://www.cordcuttersnews.com/att-plans-to-expand-fiber-internet-to-14-million-locations-by-mid-2019. https://www.cordcuttersnews.com/att-plans-to-expand-fiber-in...) Instead, the article points to completely unrelated layoffs that resulted from a merger. (There was also the question of who exactly this "promise" was made to. The article quotes Stephenson's comments in a speech to the Economic Club of New York, not any sort of filing to the government.) The same is true for the "promise to build out a fiber optic network." AT&T never "promised" to do that. The arguments at the time were that deregulation would lead to higher investment into things like broadband. What nobody anticipated at the time was that the mobile revolution would happen, and all that new capital would be redirected to building wireless networks instead. That doesn't make the original claim a misrepresentation. And from a practical standpoint, it's better that all this money got invested in mobile instead of building FTTH.

JaimeThompson 8y ago
More fully quoting him might be helpful "“From my standpoint, the driver of this is the business tax reform… if we get investment going, we get productivity going, we get wage gain going, we invest another billion dollars. Every billion dollars AT&T invests is 7,000 hard hat jobs. These are not entry-level jobs. These are 7,000 jobs of people putting fiber in ground, hard hat jobs that make $70,000 to $80,000 per year,” Stephenson said at an event hosted by The Economic Club of New York on Wednesday."
- rayiner 8y ago
  Right, but the question still is: did AT&T invest that $1 billion? AT&T's capital expenditures in 2017 was $21.6 billion, and $25 billion in 2018: https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/at-t-s-capex-to-rise-to-25b-2018-from-just-21-6b-2017-tax-reform-firstnet https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/at-t-s-capex-to-rise.... In 2019, it is expected to be $23 billion: https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/at-t-expects-2019-gross-capital-investment-in-23-bln-range-1027860606 https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/at-t-expects....