NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/ont/general/2074

Text File | 1992-11-15 | 2.8 KB | 59 lines

Newsgroups: ont.general
Path: sparky!uunet!uunet.ca!shark!latour!mcr
From: [e-mail] (Michael Richardson)
Subject: Re: Long-Distance: Who's got the Feeling now?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Sandelman Software Works, Debugging Department, Ottawa, ON
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Distribution: can
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 06:44:08 GMT
Lines: 47

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Chris Lewis) writes:
>>Why is the system set up this way?  Because, in a monopoly situation,
>>the service provider (ie. Bell) can do what they want.  A competitive
>>marketplace would never sustain this kind of cross-subsidy.  But it
>>allows Bell to claim cheaper local rates.
>
>This is entirely false.  CRTC sets rates.  The situation is precisely
>because the CRTC, indirectly the government and the electorate (ie:
>us) feels that "basic service" is close enough to a right rather than
>a privilege that the higher resource consuming users pay more than
>a "fair" share.

  I've always been somewhat peeved that Bell Canada is owned by BCE,
essentially a for-profit company. (I was going to say ``privately'',
but its stocks are traded. Still, *I* don't own any and few of the
people who would be affected by local call rate hikes do). What is the
story with the other regionals? (BCTel, NBTel, etc..)
  Since the CRTC has essentially regulated most aspects of the
Canadian telephone system in the past, why not make the *local*
telephone system a municipal responsability? Get Bell out of that for
good and let the people decide what they want to do with telephone.
  It makes sense to me: the government pays for the other means of
``communication'' --- roads, bridges, airports, and it has been
suggested that IP links across the continent be paid for by agencies
of the various governments. (At least offsetting the start up costs)

  Bell Canada becomes just another LD provider in this picture. I
can't see how service can be much worse than that Bell provides. (Why
can't they just give me a damn appointment and keep it for phone
installation? Am I the only who is simply dropped into a loop on their
stupid electronic receptionist system? )

>It would also be amusing to see your reaction if Bell started charging
>you fairly, per minute, for your news link to xenitec - a local call away
>ain't it?

  I think that this would profoundly alter our culture. Not that I
*like* the phone. I hate it most of the time....
  Say it ain't so, Chris. Please, tell it is all speculation :-)



--
   :!mcr!:            |  The postmaster never | So much mail,
   Michael Richardson |    resolves twice.    |  so little time.
HOME: [e-mail]     Bell: [phone]
SCHOOL: [e-mail]