Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    comp.dcom.telecom    |    Telecommunications digest. (Moderated)    |    17,262 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 16,205 of 17,262    |
|    Bill Horne to Michael Trew    |
|    Re: Charter Presses FCC on Pole Attachme    |
|    01 Dec 21 13:55:52    |
      From: malQassRimiMlation@gmail.com              On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 12:39:41AM -0500, Michael Trew wrote:       > In a letter summarizing the November 19 meeting, Charter referenced pole       > attachment disputes in Kentucky, Hawaii, California, and South Carolina but       > mentioned only one pole owner by name. Charter cited Warren Rural Electric       > Cooperative Corporation, a local power company in Kentucky, as an example of       > a pole owner that was being uncooperative."              I'm of two minds on this issue, and I wonder if someone can explain if       there is a basis for Charter's claims in common law.              Some things are meant to be shared: your car is entitled to just as       much space in the lane as mine. I pay a road tax with every gallon of       gas that I buy, as you do, and in theory our shared payments are used       to keep the roads in good repair, with motorists who drive farther       paying more for fuel and therefore contributing more in taxes toward       road wear and tear.              In like manner, rights of way and access to them are assigned to       private companies in order to achieve public benefits: it's difficult       to imagine a telephone pole without any electric wires at the top, and       those poles use rights-of-way next to public streets because they       prevent children from being electrocuted.              But, every profit-making enterprise is always trying to increase its       profits, an so it goes in this case. Charter's claims amount to a       demand that their stockholders enjoy the investments that phone and       electric company shareholders made in poles, siting, construction,       maintenane, local license fees, accident repairs, and all the other       expenses that go with having infrastructure in the first place.              Charter doesn't want to contribute to those costs, even though the       body politic had to forego the taxes or other income that could have       been collected when they were erected so many years ago. I think that       it's time for the taxpayers to get their share.              Bill              --       Bill Horne       (Remove QRM from my address to write to me directly)              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca