What do you do about it? Why you become an ilec of course! Sent from my iPhone
> On May 30, 2019, at 6:31 AM, Mark Radabaugh <[email protected]> wrote: > > USF is actually even worse than what you describe. It’s the perfect example > of a system with zero checks on its ability to grow combined with an > incentive for abuse. > > The contribution rate is set based on whatever funds the program needs. > Need an extra billion for lifeline? No problem, the USF percentage just > adjusts itself. > > The providers add this to the bottom line as a fee. Nothing requires the > recovery fee to equal the USF remittance - this becomes a big profit center > for the provider. > > The providers get to keep charging excessive fees for locked in customers and > get reimbursed by USF. > > Getting money out of USF from the various funds is difficult. This has > inspired a entire industry of consultants to help schools, libraries, > providers, etc. to navigate the process. > > Consultants only want to work with the largest providers who have a staff to > deal with USF so there is zero incentive for the schools, libraries, etc. to > search for competitive or local access. > > The recipients of the schools and libraries funds have no incentive to search > for competitive providers since they are paying only a small portion of the > actual rate. > > It funds an entire bureaucracy and industry of consultants. > > Small rural carriers are prolific and effective contributors to the > politicians of both parties that enable the system. > > > The only check on this is Congress - and talking to your congress critter > about USF just makes them go to sleep. It’s not exciting, and on the list > of issues they are hearing about its about number 9,748. Any attempt to > reign it in is met by ’think of the kids’, ’telemedicine’ and some made up > number about how many people lack the basic human right of Internet. > Showing up in DC lobbying to not spend money is not effective. Nobody ever > won an election by saving money. > > What do we do about it? Wish I had the answer. So far the best WISPA has > been able to come up with is doing our best to make USF funding available to > all providers and to try to avoid funding overbuilds. The issue is made > more difficult by providers who are not willing to do the work required to > avoid being overbuilt - file 477’s and offer phone service. > > Mark > > >> On May 29, 2019, at 8:31 PM, Ken Hohhof <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> OK, some may think I’m getting into politics, but that is not my intention. >> >> It strikes me that we are starting to get things that look like taxes, swim >> like taxes, and quack like taxes, but are not treated like they’re taxes. >> Tariffs are starting to seem that way. Another example that bothers me more >> and more as the contribution rate goes up is USF. What is that other than a >> tax on long distance phone service? That generates a slush fund for some >> unelected bureaucrats to dispense. Mostly to big telcos. >> >> Normally taxes are passed by Congress, and they take the heat for it at the >> next election. Normally Congress also decides how to spend the revenue. >> >> As long as tariffs are relatively small, you can view them as part of trade >> policy. Same with USF, if it wasn’t so big, you could overlook that it is >> essentially a tax that nobody voted for, used for corporate welfare. >> >> >> From: AF <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Lewis Bergman >> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2019 5:37 PM >> To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] tariffs on servers >> >> I don't think there is much thought to how it works in the consumer level >> other than it is supposed to make the tariffed goods more expensive thereby >> making other options more competitive. >> In that respect, it is likely working. Changing global supply chain >> relationships doesn't move quickly though. Vietnam for instance has had >> trouble meeting the same standards as China. Seems hard to imagine but after >> a few decades of manufacturing for the US China has gotten pretty good at it. >> >>> On Wed, May 29, 2019, 5:23 PM Jason McKemie >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> One thing about the tariffs that is especially irritating to me is that if >>> tariffs are imposed at, for example 30% on steel, then the domestic >>> supplier just raises their prices by 29%. Is this the way that this is >>> supposed to work? >>> >>>> On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 3:18 PM Ken Hohhof <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> I’m in the process of buying a couple Supermicro servers, and I’m told >>>> that due to tariffs, prices have already gone up around 10% and will be >>>> going up another 15% on or about June 1. >>>> >>>> Are others running into the same thing? It sounds like I need to place my >>>> order now. That’s not a trivial increase. >>>> >>>> We’ve also received tariff notifications from tower steel vendors, power >>>> supply vendors, cable vendors, and we saw Cambium increase prices a few >>>> months ago. Some of these like the steel and cable you just eat, but >>>> potentially everything we buy except bandwidth may be going up. I wonder >>>> if bandwidth suppliers will figure out a way to jack up prices claiming >>>> tariffs! >>>> -- >>>> AF mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >>> >>> -- >>> AF mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >> -- >> AF mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > -- > AF mailing list > [email protected] > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
-- AF mailing list [email protected] http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
