Wealth and poverty, because I noticed in recent posts, not just income. They are also things like resources and health. Another increasingly important factor is communication.
Which brings us back to AT & T recently announced a plan to buy T-Mobile, which you can change the media landscape dramatically. Few of them have already been praised or condemned the proposed merger, but rather than rush to condemn (and federal regulators could take a year or more to accept or reject the offer), it might be wiser to take a deep breath, step back and see the big picture.
If it's a great picture of the main theme, it has links. Not so long ago, various communication technologies, lived in different bins: the phone was here, there was no computer, television was in an adjoining room, and so on. But the walls of these silos are breaking down. Phone, computer and TV are not only more connected, they become increasingly likely, the same device - and links devices and the world becomes increasingly wireless.
In fact, it is predicted that in 2020 the vast majority of Internet connections are wireless.
Since wireless communication is no longer a luxury, it is an economic necessity. It is becoming increasingly central to people's ability to access to jobs, education, health information and participation in public life. Access to this technology at an affordable price is very important for the welfare of citizens and communities, it is therefore proposed AT & T / T-Mobile merger raises many questions.
Much has been written in the so-called "digital divide" and the digital divide remains a serious problem. When the Greenlining Institute, reviewed the case in 2009, we found that Californians with incomes less than $ 80,000 were nearly twice as likely to use the Internet with an income of $ 40.000. California Hispanics are least likely to use the Internet or broadband connection. 2010 Georgetown University study found African Americans and Hispanics after a white broadband at the national level.
Cost is clearly a factor all of this, and continue as wireless broadband becomes more important. T-Mobile has had a reputation as a relatively low-cost supplier (for example, see this analysis, one consumer blog). What happens to low-cost services industry consolidates and competition drops? There is less choice means consumers pay more? There are T-Mobile customers, pushing the expensive plans? L. Randall Stephenson, AT & T, General Director, said that the concentration does not lead to an increase in accounts.
Perhaps not surprisingly, Sprint CEO Dan Hesse, has stated emphatically that the proposed merger threatens one of the types of competition. But in fact there is no competition in the wireless industry? In any case, the cost of services is essential.
Plus is that there will be more Americans have broadband service through a merger? This is a promise and hope, but it's true?
And what about work? Mergers usually means a significant loss of jobs and companies merge to strengthen the staff. What happens to classes AT & T and T-Mobile, and that the combined company to mitigate the impact of any layoffs?
California, at least AT & T has an excellent reputation for developing minority-owned small businesses, but most of the largest suppliers of Silicon Valley. With AT & T to do to change this? Perhaps a similar effort at the national level to help communities fight to overcome the effects of job cuts at the combined company?
