What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Meet Keith: Best Buy Employee and Possible Singing Sensation. view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy - One employee proves he has the chops and the passion to star in Best Buy's holiday campaign.
173 Comments
- carguy84, on 10/12/2007, -1/+33Direct link, bypass the blog:
http://blog.tomevslin.com/2006/03/att_is_ripping_.html - definiteform, on 10/12/2007, -7/+24And you aren't the least bit mad that AT&T doesn't help out the soldiers that give them the freedom to ***** people over with their internet plans?
- snowbooch, on 10/12/2007, -6/+20halliburton does not produce weapons, they are primarily an energy company and also have a construction and logistics group (KBR)
- xLiKx, on 10/12/2007, -6/+19troops shouldn't be paying for ANYTHING like that during war. they're fighting for our country and we're charging them for phone calls? what is that? companies should be donating their services to them, not taking advantage of them. what a shame.
- headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17You can argue all day about how 21 cents is cheap for an over seas call, but the fact is it probably cost AT&T a fraction of that. The rest is all profit. I think I remember a time when American companies bent over backwards to support American troops. Maybe that means giving phone calls at cost. I dunno. I guess those times are over, and the all mighty dollar trumps all.
There is VoIP in Iraq, but that also cost more than a few pennies. There are companies that have that market all wrapped up to themselves.
But in reality, most US troops don't notice the high price and don't care. When in a combat zone, they -- we -- actually finally make as much money as a McDonalds cashier. So we actually feel "rich", and don't mind spending the money to call home and hear a, "I love you".
***** AT&T. - imjustabill, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Capitalism? They have an exclusivity contract, have no competition, and can pretty much charge what they want. Doesn't sound like capitalism to me.
- w0rd, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13If you'd read that article in question, you'd see that the connections there barely suffice for email. VOIP is out of the question.
- AlonFW, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Is this really gouging?
As a point of reference I checked Verizon's rates from CA to
Iraq .98
Iran .61
UAE .41
Kuwait .51
so .21/min is at least half off, and possibly as much as 80% off. - stupidclese, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11The US military does allow VOIP in Iraq. Where is all of this information coming from? The networks are run differently at every base and different services are allowed at different bases. Also, messaging programs like AIM and MSN are almost never blocked and they can always voice chat via these programs.
- Petrarch1603, on 10/12/2007, -6/+15This 'article' is poorly written. Its all Tom this and Tom that. This isn't really news, its just some blog entry that relies on one source. There is no way to size up the different points in the article: "AT&T is also reportedly blocking access to 800 numbers of other carriers, which would be illegal in the U.S." If that's true, document it, don't just put "reportedly" before the statement. The article doesn't even take into account AT&T's side. I think that 21 cents a minute is a reasonable price for intercontinental telephony.
- w0rd, on 10/12/2007, -15/+24"You do realize that they're calling from a different country in a different continent, right? I'd say "twenty one cents per minute" is pretty reasonable in a third world country with an ongoing war and an almost non-existent infrastructure."
I'd say that paying 2 cents is pretty reasonable for fighting an unreasonable war. 21-45 cents might be fine for everyone else but these kids (yes, mere children, boys with shaved heads and guns) should be able to call their mothers and lovers because they are far away from home and may never return.
"Long distance calling costs money. If the boys out there doing they're job can't be responsible adults to pay for services in which they use, then maybe they shouldn't be over there, weapons in hand."
You know, I don't support this war, not in the least. But I sure as hell am not going to take that out on these kids over there getting shot to ribbons. When you are over there watching your best friend get his face shot off, perhaps I'll listen to your crap. Excuse my anger sir, but maybe you should shut the ***** up.
"You sit on your ass and type on your computer while people fight for your country and you have the balls to say they should pay. Don't be such a fing *****."
Agreed. - drbroccoli, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12I'm sick of AT&T's crap. First trying to make free wifi illegal, now this. The whores.
- mousky, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Don't confuse the free market with capitalism. One is about the exchange of goods and services. The other is about amassing wealth aka capital. Any good capitalist aims to become a monopoly.
- mousky, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9You do realize that when you refer to the "US Government" you are really referring to the US taxpayer.
- Josto, on 10/12/2007, -17/+25The solution?
Bring em home
-- "If the issue gets more mainstream coverage I wouldn't even be surprised if it comes into play as regulators consider the BellSouth acquisition."
HAHA, now it is front page of digg
Don't be coy AT&T - stupidclese, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11It is a total scam for the troops. The place where troops are predominantly getting ripped off is in Kuwait, either before deployment to Iraq or prior to redeployment home to the states, although many deployed troops are stationed in Kuwait for their duration. The phone service isn't where the rip off ends; the internet costs $5 per hour! In almost all of Iraq there is a service set up for voip calls on the cheap. When I was there it was segovia, and the price was something like 2 - 4 cents a minute.
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Iraq is like a pool of sharks in a feeding frenzy. Practically everyone involved is a crook. Corporate crooks, political crooks, terrorist crooks, gangsters, and rival nations looking to take advantage of the situation. Everyone is making a fortune while the Iraqis themselves, US soldiers, and US taxpayers are getting raped. In some cases, literally!
Having said that, it doesn't surprise me at all that AT&T would want to get in on the action. Here's another recent example of the kind of crime that's been routine in Iraq:
A federal jury on Thursday ordered a U.S. defense contractor accused of war profiteering in Iraq to pay more than $10 million in damages and fines.
In the first civil fraud case brought against a military contractor during the Iraq war, the jury in Alexandria, Va., found that Custer Battles LLC committed fraud in 37 instances in connection with a $9 million contract to help distribute new currency in Iraq.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-03-09-defense-contractor_x.htm
There is also the case of the $10 BILLION in reconstruction funds that are missing (unaccounted for). No big deal right? $10b here, another $10m there, a few hundred thousand dead, another great victory for "Democracy"! - motbob, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9AT&T also did this when American troops were fighting in Yugoslavia. My father was a SSG over there and ever since 1997 my family and I have been boycotting them.
- Nesh, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11Am I out of line to think that the US Government should pick up the tabs for these calls? Political issues aside, international calling is an expensive business. By all rights, AT&T deserves to receive a fair price for these calls. Granted, it would be "honorable" of them to waive fees for stationed soldiers, but that's not their responsibility. While I don't think "gouging" is the correct term, I still don't feel that the soldiers should have to bear this cost. A small act of kindness on the part of those that sign the checks could go a long way.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10"Why the hell this isn't free? They're a goverment employee! "
Are you ***** high?
So what, if you're a government employee, you shouldn't have to buy groceries or gas or clothing or anything else, either? Man.. You must really want to live in a dictatorship or a monarchy. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -24/+30So what? Cheney's company Haliburton is gouging American taxpayers to rebuild Iraq, and selling overpriced weapons and equipment to the military.
AT&T is the last thing on anyone's mind - Th3_anOmoLy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6VOIP was the primary source of phone access that we had when I was over there last year. You had to deal with the delay from the satalite uplink, but other than that it worked fine. And it was much cheaper than the other methods that were being used (read: AT&T calling cards, which cost a hell of a lot more than 21 cents a minute)
- Alaerus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6When I served in Kuwait last year as a soldier in the National Guard, we did have access to phones but the calls were so expensive that most of us avoided them. Fortunately for me I worked in an office. In the office we had DSN lines, which we could use to call our state's switchboard back home. They would transfer the call to our families then. It was good of them to take care of us like that. But as cadam stated above, the phones were pretty limited.
Now I'm not saying that companies like AT&T should just give away their service, but the unavailability of telephones and the high price of using them was certainly a discourage. And trust me, when you are "out there" that little five minute call to your family means more than most of you will ever know... - Ribald_Jester, on 10/12/2007, -9/+15The AT&T execs should be sent over there to serve a tour of duty (on soldiers pay). See how they like being hit with IEDs, sniper fire and the like. Then when they try to call home to a loved one, get raped out of their combat pay for some monopolistic ***** company like at&t. Business as usual. I hope this gets covered by cnn.
- KissTheRing, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7That's right snowbooch, my understanding is that what the American tax payer is being overcharged for is meals and equipment.
- rye425, on 10/12/2007, -23/+29That's not the point. Even if the calls are a good deal don't you think that if you were fighting for your country then you should get free calls home. Anyways calls are not about 21 cents they are actually 45 cents per minute. Don't you dare give me that bull about how they should pay. You sit on your ass and type on your computer while people fight for your country and you have the balls to say they should pay. Don't be such a fing *****.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8You can give them your tax refund if you want. I'll keep mine, thanks. :P
If you join the military and then are shocked that it's not a ***** cakewalk once you're in it, that's your own dumbass fault. Most don't complain. We don't have a draft. Nobody forces you to be sitting over in the hot desert defending oil wells any more than you're forced to pump slurpees at the 7-11 for a living.
Not that I don't respect and admire the career choice, but don't pick a ***** career and then cry to me about how tough it is like you're some sort of martyr.
I know people in the military and I know life is hard for them - but I also know that they CHOSE to be in it.
Further, there are more drastic things going on with the military than this. You think their biggest concern is a few cents on a phone bill? Try their living conditions. A lot of their families live in "military" provided housing that is sub-par. Often unhealthy and even dangerous. You wouldn't allow HOMELESS people to be moved into some of these places - and it's kept quiet because nobody wants to rock the boat and if you're living in one of these places, the last thing you can afford to do is become a whistle-blower or a squeeky wheel. - spectre, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7From Wikipedia on the Clayton Anti-Trust Act of 1890:
'The United States, the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914, Act of Oct. 15, 1914, ch. 323, 38 Stat. 730, codified at 15 U.S.C. § 12 through 15 U.S.C. § 27 and 29 U.S.C. § 52 and 29 U.S.C. § 53, was enacted to remedy deficiencies in antitrust law created under the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 that allowed corporations to dissolve labor unions. The Clayton Act prohibits:
* price discrimination between different purchasers if such discrimination substantially lessens competition or tends to create a monopoly in any line of commerce (Act Section 2, codified at 15 U.S.C. § 13);
* sales on the condition that the buyer not deal with the seller's competitors (Act Section 3, codified at 15 U.S.C. § 14);
* mergers and acquisitions where the effect may substantially lessen competition (Act Section 7, codified at 15 U.S.C. § 18);
* any person from being a director of two or more competing corporations (Act Section 8; codified at 15 U.S.C. § 19).
'
The source you're citing has nothing to do with an overseas, exclusive (therefore no competition) government contract. Please don't spout nonsense and expect us to be dim enough to just swallow it.
That said, I think 21 cents/min for a call, spanning a quarter of the globe, is as fair as any reasonable person can expect from a company who won an exclusive contract from the government for international phone service. You didn't really expect them to offer this at cost, did you? Every American company that can figure out how to cash in on this war, will probably do so. Capitalism certainly doesn't encourage charity and sacrifice, that kind of nonsense hurts the bottom line. - mlsj1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Here is the problem, i'm in iraq right now. If you use the phone, you have to used AT&T. There is no choice in the matter. Some large Camps(like the one I'm on) have a VOIP Alternative, but they too are over price. I use e-mail from my work computer, and I pay for internet in my room, so i can use e-mail there, IM, and VOIP if not too many people are on the network. Not everybody has as good as i do. Plus there a lot more companies than AT&T ripping soldiers off.
- JeroenR, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10I'm not shocked, this is capitalism at work. Demand is high, AT&T controls the market, they can demand a premium price (and 21 cents/minute doesn't seem that high from a European perspective).
- cadam, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5When I was "over there", the ATT cards sold through AAFES (Army AirForce Exchange Service) cost more to purchase, refill, and ultimately used. Instead of using those, I would get one from SAM'S CLUB. It was still ATT, but ended up being much cheaper that way. I usually used DSN (which was perfectly legit), fortunately I was also in charge of the Communications coming and going from the Base I was out of, so I rarely needed to use ATT Cards...
Most bases allow DSN calls, so long as the system isn't overwhelmed. The reason Kuwait is the biggest problem is because that's the rally point before heading into Iraq. You get 10 thousand soldiers, and only have 10 phone lines capable of calling the US, the Commercial Service is about it.
VOIP COULD be a solution, however the DoD, chiefly the Army, isn't looking into that as a Cost Effective Solution. VOIP tends to work like crap anyways when you go over a Satellite connection (which alot of locaitons do because of remoteness).
The biggest crooks int he Middle East is Halliburton and then AAFES. - Jeebugorn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I'm in the army (well, for the next few days). I was in Bosnia from 1999-2000. As someone stated earlier, it cost $0.21 a min back then too....when everyone in the military wasnt making as much as they are now. I might have called home every couple of weeks. But we had 2 options. Pay for AT&T or wait in line at the military call center and use a DSN line to call the closest military base/national guard armory/recruiting station to wherever it is you want to call. Then tell whoever picks up the phone that you are deployed and to patch you through to mom/girlfriend/etc. The cost to use that service.....FREE. so yeah, there are free alternatives using actual phones.
- butchcassidy503, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7AT&T is gouging everyone, soldiers are just getting equal treatment.
- EnsErmac, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4When I was in Kuwait, I sent one of the workers we hired out into town to get me a Kuwaiti Cell Phone, called the DSN loop number at Camp Doha, called Camp Pendleton from there, then used a phone card at 4 cents a minute. Not as much work as it seems really.A few organizations sent us phone cards while we were over there, Lowe's & Wal-Mart were two of the larger companies who did nice things. The WWE also gave us a few when they visited.
- stupidclese, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Almost all bases in Iraq, even the most remote, are equipped with Internet connections soon after being constructed. Some of the bases over there are nicer than some of the ones I've trained at in the states. I'm talking burger kings, subways, pizza huts , free gyms, you name it.
- LunchMoney, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I was stationed in Iraq and ran an internet cafe on LSA Anaconda. We had 7 phone lines that ran voip over satellite with cisco ip phones and cost ~4 cents per minute for a call to the states. These lines were prefered over the AT&T lines because of cost and quality. The connection was thru a commercial company (http://www.segoviaip.com) and also supported 20 internet terminals, but has since been switched to a different company. So all you people saying that we don't have voip in Iraq have no idea what you are talking about.
- stupidclese, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4This is bogus. I just got back from over there. I was stationed at three different bases at three separate times and each of them had a 4 cents a minute phone service. It was pretty much a standard for most of the country. Not only that , at nearly all bases there is FREE phone service via DSN phones, that operate over satellite. Naturally the lines can be long , but hey, it is free.
- thenativeraver, on 10/12/2007, -10/+14The solution?
VOIP - augustwest30, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4A friend of mine was in Iraq recently, and in the beginning he would use Skype to call home. Skype worked for a while until the higher ups figured out what the they were doing. Eventually, Skype would not work. I think they shut it down for security reasons because Skype is difficult to monitor.
- KissTheRing, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Lets quit wining and do something about it. This page from the DoD tells you how to buy phone minutes for them http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/2002/b12122002_bt632-02.html
- fifaigor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Hmm...21 cents a minute for an international call, especially from Iraq. Thats actually not that bad of a price.
- Joe_rigby, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6It's kind of like when the gold rush hit, people could get away with charging $100 for a glass of water because no one else had it and people needed water.
American soliders need to call home. Just like some merchant might have a $100 glass of water when no one else did, so does AT&T. - dBLiSS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I think the biggest complaint is, ATT were given the contract by the US government, and now they're turning around a gouging the people that allowed them to get this lucrative contract in the first place.
- stupidclese, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3It is gouging, because competition isn't allowed to exist. In certain parts of Iraq and almost all of Kuwait AT&T has an exclusive contract with the US government for these rip off phone centers, when nearly every other base has phone service for about 4 cents am minute. We are the customers though, not the US government. Competition is being stifled by a third party. Sounds like gouging to me.
- CompIsMyRx, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6To the people under the opion that long distance costs money: It costs so much only because the companies can charge nearly any price they want. The actual cost of sending a pulse of electricity over a copper wire underwater is essentially nil. Thus, since AT&T is running the service of U.S. soldiers from Iraq, which already had international calling infrastructure, to the U.S. over their own lines, charging 21cents per minute is clearly gouging and a direct violation of the Clayton Anti-Trust Act of 1890.
- beandog, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4What's up with all the unsympathetic "use voip" remarks? Get realistic, people. Theyre in a second world country, which has / is going through a war. They're lucky they can get a phonecall out at all, but some geeks think they should have a stable internet connection out there, too.
Has anyone here ever been to or lived in a second / third world country? The USA lifestyle is the *exception* not the rule. - TheKillDoctor, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Exactly!
Why the hell this isn't free?
They're a goverment employee! - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7Amen brother.
Lets all give back those stilly $400 tax refund checks GW gave us a few years back and use that to pay for their calls. On that note we should really thank these guys for what they have done. I vote we give them free housing (their families too) and free medical. But why stop there lets give them special stores where they can shop with inexpensive food and clothing and why not pay for them to go to college as well. In fact they do such a great job I think we should rig it so that after they have served they get a large portion of their pay for the rest of their lives.
I for one would be glad to pay a little extra in taxes each year to help fund these efforts. Especially since the government has been such good stewards of our defense money thus far. I am just glad we decided to go after Iraq with all of those threatening WMD's everywhere and not Iran and North Korea (I for one think that WMD's are a much larger threat than 5 confirmed nuclear devices and massive infrastructure ready at a moments notice to process and produce weapons grade Uranium).
Word to your mothers! - Nesh, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Well, I'm not saying they should get a 100% free ride from here on out. I do think that they should be able to call their wives, children, parents, and friends without having to worry about "I can spend 4 minutes on the phone with her before she's cutting into the rent money." Simplicities like this should be provided while they're stationed.
- CaptRR, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7Nice, so you decided to play the fascist card. That shows a great understanding of what a fascist really is, but don't let a little thing like facts get in the way of your childish thinking.
Look, I am not a big fan of Bush, but for other reasons, but calling your opponent names just makes you look stupid. How about you try to convince people of your point of view with facts. -
Show 51 - 100 of 173 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is