Long live Obamacare
#221
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I currently don't have access to any high speed internet at my house other than Satellite $110 a month which pretty much sucks basically dialup speed from 4pm to 10pm daily and watching much YouTube will put it over the FCC limit and throttle it back to unusable speed for 24 hours. $6,500 will get me Cable. Phone Company won't upgrade switches to allow DSL. Cell phones have crummy signal that constantly drops off.
Bob
Bob
https://www.miataturbo.net/insert-bs...nternet-62738/
Cliffs:
Satellite based internet, $49/mo, either 7mbs or 12mbs download 1.5 upload 5GB/mo limit, though. You can get 15GB for $79 IIRC if you need more.
#222
Tour de Franzia
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/supporter1.gif)
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Republic of Dallas
Posts: 29,085
Total Cats: 375
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Not that I really disagree but to be fair to the video you are only shown one angle of the ramp from a bridge that is very close. On the other side of the bridge there may have been ample warnings and that driver coud have just been retarded or considering it happened to be caught on camera it could have even been intentional. Again not saying that is the case but the perspective of the video is rather limited to pass any real judgement.
#223
Tour de Franzia
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/supporter1.gif)
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Republic of Dallas
Posts: 29,085
Total Cats: 375
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I currently don't have access to any high speed internet at my house other than Satellite $110 a month which pretty much sucks basically dialup speed from 4pm to 10pm daily and watching much YouTube will put it over the FCC limit and throttle it back to unusable speed for 24 hours. $6,500 will get me Cable. Phone Company won't upgrade switches to allow DSL. Cell phones have crummy signal that constantly drops off.
Bob
Bob
Have you considered moving to an area with superior internet speeds?
#227
Moderator
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/supporter1.gif)
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/moderator.png)
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 20,884
Total Cats: 3,075
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
And I thought the problem with cell phones was not the phones themselves (which are made in China, Malaysia, etc.) but the govt heavily regulating the number of carriers, services they are required to provide, services they are forbidden to provide, frequencies, formats, towers and their locations. Maybe I'm wrong, but usually businesses will try to offer better services when government doesn't provide artificial barriers to new competition.
#228
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The free-market developed the iPhone
Government regulation oligopolizes the radio waves
Oligopoly is illegal, unless the government controls it.
If the government is leasing all available bandwidth frequencies/locations for cellular telephones, then price is determined entirely by consumer demand. As long as there are more carriers than bandwidth, all competing companies will bid as high as they can while still expecting to make a profit from the consumer. If they think they can charge $100/consumer, they will pay the government (in theory) roughly twice what they would have paid the government for the same bandwidth rights if they felt like they could only charge $50/consumer and maintain the same base of consumers. This all works perfectly so long as there are more carriers than bandwidth available. Once the number of carriers drops so that bandwidth is available for all of them, they can now bid far less for the same bandwidth, and the revenue which used to be used to pay for bandwidth permits (effectively you paying the government for bandwidth, through a 3rd party carrier, increasing gov't revenues) now becomes corporate profits. Such a scenario *should* entice new businesses to start lower-priced cellular services, but - A: the cost for a market bandwidth permit is a significant barrier to entry, and B: the larger companies tend to buy out the smaller companies anyways, which tends to limit competition enough so that those bandwidth permits remain relatively inexpensive to established carriers.
Government regulation oligopolizes the radio waves
Oligopoly is illegal, unless the government controls it.
If the government is leasing all available bandwidth frequencies/locations for cellular telephones, then price is determined entirely by consumer demand. As long as there are more carriers than bandwidth, all competing companies will bid as high as they can while still expecting to make a profit from the consumer. If they think they can charge $100/consumer, they will pay the government (in theory) roughly twice what they would have paid the government for the same bandwidth rights if they felt like they could only charge $50/consumer and maintain the same base of consumers. This all works perfectly so long as there are more carriers than bandwidth available. Once the number of carriers drops so that bandwidth is available for all of them, they can now bid far less for the same bandwidth, and the revenue which used to be used to pay for bandwidth permits (effectively you paying the government for bandwidth, through a 3rd party carrier, increasing gov't revenues) now becomes corporate profits. Such a scenario *should* entice new businesses to start lower-priced cellular services, but - A: the cost for a market bandwidth permit is a significant barrier to entry, and B: the larger companies tend to buy out the smaller companies anyways, which tends to limit competition enough so that those bandwidth permits remain relatively inexpensive to established carriers.
Last edited by fooger03; 07-03-2012 at 04:32 PM.
#231
Boost Czar
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/supporter1.gif)
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/admin.png)
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,688
Total Cats: 4,113
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Dont resuce drowning people if youre hired to sit and provide a false sense of security:
Hallandale Beach Lifeguard Fired For Leaving His Zone To Rescue Drowning Man | NBC 6 Miami
Hallandale Beach Lifeguard Fired For Leaving His Zone To Rescue Drowning Man | NBC 6 Miami
#233
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,799
Total Cats: 179
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
For what it's worth, the lifeguard left his station to rescue someone who was in the "No lifeguard; swim at your own risk" zone. I still don't understand firing him over it, unless they have a strict policy due to liability.
I'm not defending it, just shedding some more light. Kudos to the lifeguard and his co-workers who quit in solidarity.
I'm not defending it, just shedding some more light. Kudos to the lifeguard and his co-workers who quit in solidarity.
#235
Tour de Franzia
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/supporter1.gif)
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Republic of Dallas
Posts: 29,085
Total Cats: 375
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Dont resuce drowning people if youre hired to sit and provide a false sense of security:
Hallandale Beach Lifeguard Fired For Leaving His Zone To Rescue Drowning Man | NBC 6 Miami
Hallandale Beach Lifeguard Fired For Leaving His Zone To Rescue Drowning Man | NBC 6 Miami
#236
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I am not saying government should take it over but I do think this is something where intervention should be used in the promotion of the general welfare of the nation. I’d rather my tax dollars be spent improving the nation’s infrastructure to make the nation more competitive on a world market and enhancing opportunity than in starting foreign wars and coddling the rich and rich corporations to the point it just becomes a servant to the rich and the corporations.
The US has been made a great country and land of opportunity because the federal government has in the past intervened in many instances such as this, Rail system, highway system, etc.
Bob
#240
Boost Czar
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/supporter1.gif)
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/admin.png)
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,688
Total Cats: 4,113
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
don't worry, you'll find out when their done drafting the over 19,000 page tax code for the ACA, non-tax.
quick searching:
Under Section 9001 of the ACA, health insurance issuers and sponsors of self-funded group health plans will be assessed an excise tax on any benefits provided to employees that exceed a pre-determined threshold. The excise tax is imposed beginning in 2018.
The amount of the excise tax is 40 percent of an amount considered to be an excess benefit.
An excess benefit is the cost of coverage for health benefits that is more than the annual limit of $10,200 for self-only coverage and $27,500 for self and spouse or family coverage. The annual limit is subject to adjustment for health costs, age and gender and cost-of-living adjustments.
more: For tax years after 2017, a 40% nondeductible excise tax will be levied on insurance companies and plan administrators for any health coverage plan to the extent that the annual premium exceeds $10,200 for single coverage and $27,500 for family coverage.
in otherwords, the solgan for 2018 will be: let the rationing begin!