🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <BtyytA.DLs@news.cso.uiuc.edu> tmkk@uiuc.edu (Khan) writes:


>  I don't know where you live, but around here the over-the-air channels
>  come in fuzzy, snowy, and ghosty. Basically, it's a choice between
>  rapacious cable fees or nothing to watch. That's why many people bite
>  the bullet and subscribe to cable, myself included. Believe me, if I had
>  room for a dish, I would dump cable in a second. At present, however, I
>  have no real alternative. :-(

Even worse, modern TV's are designed to work with a much cleaner signal.
i.e. You could get more channels and a clearer signal with manual tunning
than electronic tunning...  Next time I need to by a TV, I'm going to insist
on trying it with rabbit ears in the store.  (Unfortunately, last time I didn't
relize how important that is.)

>  In article <1992Sep2.170848.10491@mcc.com> amck@mcc.com (Alan McKendree) writes:

>  >Your position is self-contradictory.  If having cable on more than one
>  >TV _weren't_ an additional benefit (i.e., service), there would be no
>  >reason for you to desire it.  And yet you complain about having to pay
>  >for it.  Do you think you should get free rugs in all your rooms after
>  >paying for the first one, too?

I suppose the electric company should charge an additional charge for each
outlet.  The water company should charge per faucet, and the sewer for each
toilet...  Cable companies are more than welcome to meter the cable, but any-
thing else is simply unfair.  (Why should I have install an extra long cable
and move my TV into the bedroom each night rather than simply having a second
set?)  Cable companies already get unfair advantages against home satilite 
dishes with lower rates on descrambling.  Worse, you can't share your satilite
dish with your neighbors and split the costs?  Why?  In such case cable 
companies have been known to sue.  (Who cares who wins, an individual normally
can't afford the legal costs...  But, I do know of a case where the cable 
company did win.  Probably because the guy couldn't afford a decent lawyer.)

Also, tell me why does the Grand Forks cable company charge individuals
$26 for cable, but landlords $4 per apartment if they wish to provide
cable as part of the utilities?  (No, you don't have to have too
many apartments for this special rate.  I believe the minimum is 8 apartment
units (which can be different buildings).)

At least I haven't heard of any communities with zoning laws prohibiting
satilite dishs (yet).

                                            Bill