Americans Lag Behind Other Countries -- and Pay More for Their Cellphone Service (nytimes.com) 144
"American consumers pay significantly more for cellphone service than people in many other countries," reports the New York Times.
It's in an article headlined "The U.S. Is Lagging Behind Many Rich Countries. These Charts Show Why." Although executives' salaries have risen in most countries, relative to those of workers, in recent decades, the trend is more extreme in the U.S... The minimum wage is higher in other countries than it is in much of the United States... In addition to minimum wage, the United States has done less to combat rising corporate concentration. Large U.S. companies are better able to hold down the wages of workers, who don't always have good employment options, and are also able to charge higher prices because of less competition...
Arguably the biggest outlier is the American health care system. Prices for drugs, medical procedures and doctors' visits are all substantially higher in the United States than in other countries... In all, Americans pay almost twice as much on average for medical care as citizens of other rich countries. And as you may remember from the opening chart in this article, Americans are far from the world's healthiest people...
The middle class and poor receive a smaller share of national income in the U.S. than in much of Europe, while the rich receive a greater share. If anything, these statistics understate American exceptionalism on inequality, because Americans also work longer hours for their pay than workers in many other places.
It's in an article headlined "The U.S. Is Lagging Behind Many Rich Countries. These Charts Show Why." Although executives' salaries have risen in most countries, relative to those of workers, in recent decades, the trend is more extreme in the U.S... The minimum wage is higher in other countries than it is in much of the United States... In addition to minimum wage, the United States has done less to combat rising corporate concentration. Large U.S. companies are better able to hold down the wages of workers, who don't always have good employment options, and are also able to charge higher prices because of less competition...
Arguably the biggest outlier is the American health care system. Prices for drugs, medical procedures and doctors' visits are all substantially higher in the United States than in other countries... In all, Americans pay almost twice as much on average for medical care as citizens of other rich countries. And as you may remember from the opening chart in this article, Americans are far from the world's healthiest people...
The middle class and poor receive a smaller share of national income in the U.S. than in much of Europe, while the rich receive a greater share. If anything, these statistics understate American exceptionalism on inequality, because Americans also work longer hours for their pay than workers in many other places.
Freudian slip or bad editing? (Score:2)
I'm guessing the intended headline was something like:
"Americans Lag Behind Other Countries With -- and Pay More for -- Their Cellphone Service"
But the current version made me chuckle.
Re: (Score:3)
Replying to myself: a mixed bag! The article was about the U.S. lagging generally and then /. editors singled out cell phone service costs. LOL. Of all the things mentioned in the article, that's the one that makes the headline. Wow.
Re: (Score:2)
Cell service is singled out to address the complaints that /. editors choose to post articles with little "news for nerds" value.
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently so. Maybe they should have written an intro like "In an article on nytime.COM - yes, DOT COM, folks! - ..."
The article talks about so many important things (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for the laugh!
FCC - bandwidth (Score:2)
Remember that radio has a limited bandwidth and that has to be managed / regulated to share public airwaves.
There are other ways to manage it and also less corrupt management...
Including ideas like a national protocol standard and a national grid network where level 1 is all government provided and higher levels of the network stack are handled by 3rd parties... like multiple trucking companies competing on the national roadways...
Not that a transition would be easy; but this nation can't function for simpl
Re: (Score:1)
If the government controls everything, then [obviously] you're going to suffer from government control instead of corporate control.
What we need is a system where no single party is in a position to control everything.
For all their complexities and currently unsolved problems, that means mesh networks.
Re: FCC - bandwidth (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
That's what it looks like anyway, except logically instead of topologically (although topology figures into the "shape" of the network in many ways.) I'm already trusting in crypto to keep my communications secure, not the supposed integrity of the network which I know is nonexistent. The only difference with a mesh network is whether my packets are more or less likely to arrive out of order.
The system should have in it some kind of mechanism for brokering routing agreements beyond "hopes and prayers". You
No, it works better (Score:2)
In a few decades, today's rubes will be arguing for the benefits of privatizing the air like it's the only good solution. I've seen it happen to the rubes on water.
We are WASTING our limited bandwidth on competing monopolies; that is, they are given a monopoly on their radio bandwidth and it's by nature a limited size market with limited competition and a history of some collusion. They suck for a reason.
THINK:
Ultrawide bandwidth capable of MANY applications instead of solely TV, radio, etc. A government p
Re: (Score:1)
If the government controls everything...
Ah, but you control the government. Your vote is worth more than your dollar, makes you just as rich (or poor) as everybody else.
Re: (Score:1)
Ah, but you control the government. Your vote is worth more than your dollar, makes you just as rich (or poor) as everybody else.
Your dollar is the most important vote you have. Dollars make it possible to run campaigns... or influence them.
Re: (Score:1)
Nope, dollars buy propaganda, nothing more. The vote is still entirely a personal decision.
Re: (Score:2)
You are forgetting about stupid people...less dollars and easy to influence for their votes,
Thanks for that, AC. GP forgot about low-information voters. Bigger campaign spending doesn't guarantee victory, but it does make it much more likely. And a certain minimum has to be spent, or it's entirely unlikely.
Re: (Score:2)
None of that is the money's fault.
No one said otherwise. HTH, HAND
Re: (Score:2)
Public education in 'merica is more about indoctrination than thinking. I think the average person could do more with their brains than they do if they had been encouraged to think logically, rather than to recite. Don't mistake my love of free thinking for a lack of respect for knowledge, which is fundamentally useful. It would be nice if people's parents would teach these things, but not all of them are good at critical thinking either, and it's critical that the education system impart them to those who
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Ugh. The U.S. saved the world from the terrible government-mandated GSM standard that Europe and much of Asia foolishly adopted. GSM was originally based on TDMA - the phones take turns talking to the tower. That worked fine for voice service, but turned out to be terrible for data because the phones were taking a fixed ch
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
CDMA (the air interface technology) was a mistake.
I always thought this was a shame. CDMA is just cool! Inventing space using high dimensional orthogonal codes is just nifty, especially as you automatically get spread spectrum. Frequency hopping in time always felt hacky. This is purely a personal feeling, I just like the CDMA technique in general (how it's used in GPS is even cooler).
Re: (Score:2)
You think the US' is bad. Try Canada. (Score:3)
Ours are insanely high, for poor coverage, not great data. The US cellphone plans look like a dream to Canadians cell bills.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, maybe not dreams, but lesser hell.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL, yeah
Re:You think the US' is bad. Try Canada. (Score:5, Informative)
It's actually cheaper in Canada to buy a US plan and use it there.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It's actually cheaper in Canada to buy a US plan and use it there.
Canada and the USA are both big countries with lots of states and based on TFA they are very similar in cell service costs. I'm willing to bet your statement doesn't hold universally true.
Re: (Score:1)
We think the US is ok. There's just a plague of middle-school mean girl pettiness from the news media recently.
Sigh (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Contrary to whom? Trump and the #MAGA crowd? The only people who really think that the USA are number 1 are those who can't identify any other country on a map.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Feel free to call someone else for marintime security!
data (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I couldn't care less (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:1)
My cell phone service costs about a tenth of what I pay for my health insurance.
Yeah, what's up with that? Why do you let them charge so much?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Heh, that's it in a nutshell, huh? I guess people shouldn't complain then
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry. This is news? (Score:1)
It has been that way since the beginning. How dumb can it be to buy a phone where you pay to receive calls? Americans pay more because they are a soft target for advertising propaganda
Re: (Score:2)
Just remember: this is Slashdot. Home of news that doesn't matter, isn't interesting, and is just not interesting.
How did this make the front page? (Score:2)
Did the editor throw in the "cellphone" part just to make it "tech"? And it's not any kind of news -- Yeah, the U.S. is a harsher economic environment, with greater valleys and greater peaks. Fewer and bigger winners. That's the bargain.
No shit, Euro-Sherlock (Score:1)
The middle class and poor receive a smaller share of national income in the U.S. than in much of Europe, while the rich receive a greater share.
Gee Mister, we didn't know that! Thanks so much for point that out to us! We'll get right on fixing that problem!
We goddamned well know that we're price-gouged for cel service, Internet service, and shitloads of other things. We goddamned well know that The Rich keep getting more and more of a Free Ride from the federal government, and who's doing anything about that? Nobody, because Congress is chock full of The Rich and they want to hang on to their money and power. Yeah, sure thing Euro, we'll get rig
NYTimes is going to NYTime (Score:2)
Curious, they are no longer mentioning, that "women and children" — as well as "minorities" — are hit the worst. Must've realized, how worn-out that particular cliche is by now. The other cliches are thin-bare too, so, to keep you from rolling your eyes, the headline had to mention cellphone service.
NYTimes is going to NYTime — this is nothing, but
Re: (Score:2)
Whut (Score:2)
I fail to see where American CEO pay and healthcare factor into this equation other than yet another fine example of what Capitalism does to the consumers.
We pay more because there aren't all that many independent cellular providers in the United States. In addition, the backbones ( optic systems that connect the towers ) are owned by even fewer Telecoms and not only is it unreasonably expensive to put up your own towers and backbone network, but the regulatory and differing laws ( depending on what State
Re: (Score:2)
So, no free market here, just a captive one with no regulations to level it out.
The cool aid the "Capitalists" in the U.S. drank must be electric cool aid considering the florid hallucinations they have.
Orange in Romania (Score:2)
And Internet services! (Score:2)
Slow and expensive in most places. Also, not many options for many. :(
Does the USA give value? (Score:3)
For 10euro I can get 80GB data on a 4G network, unlimited calls to landline/mobiles and unlimited texts in Ireland. Oh and its a 30 day rolling contract.
Ireland is a tiny mobile market population wise with only a population of 5million people or so.
Does the USA even offer a service like that for that low price?
ridiculous outrage (Score:2)
So the premise being that the US naturally should be the best in everything?
It's nice to see that the American Left hasn't really dispensed with the ethnochauvinism of the post war era; it also explains why they're angry all the time, measuring everything against some idealized utopia that never existed except in the minds of Leave it to Beaver script writers.
You guys know that we've long since left behind the 1950s, where the US was still really the only developed economy not wrecked by war, right?
Still pay less than Canada ... (Score:2)
.... just sayin'
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The size of area has less to do with it than the fact the companies want to invest as little as possible. Monopolies only make it worse. Has t
Re: (Score:1)
Please stop acting like all those companies actually put money in to the networks.
Verizon to spend $17 billion in 5G and fiber in 2020 [rcrwireless.com]. Yeah, they don't put anything into the networks.
They have lousy coverage and lousy service because they'd rather pay executive salaries than dumping money back in to the network. Imagine what it would be like if they weren't paying CEO's hundreds of millions of dollars and instead
Verizon's CEO made [salary.com] $1.5 million in salary; the rest was in stock - which is worthless unless he can grow the stock price itself which benefits the owners (probably includes you, if you have a DJIA or S&P 500 index fund in your IRA or 401K).
taking all that money and invest in the network.
Because an extra $1.5 million is such a massive increase on the $17 billion spend, right? That extra 0.008% spend would TOTALLY make the network awesome!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They've had 3 decades (and 3 decades of executive salaries, dividends, and money blown on lobbying) and plenty of government handouts and have yet to roll out that mythical network that covers the majority of the country.
Re: Shit US cell service (Score:4, Interesting)
I was involved in a project to improve cell reception in a large hotel. Repeaters were easy, and micro towers were easy. They insurmountable problem was the cell providers demanding a king's ransom for the 'privilege' of boosting their customer's reception INSIDE the hotel. The project was scrapped as a result.
So other than the power line part, yes it has been invented. The telcos won't let you deploy one even at your own expense. They demand to be paid in order to let you pay for equipment to help them reach their customers who must also pay.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's assume that it costs $250k per tower (I have no idea how realistic this number is). So for every $1mil less an executive gets in his bonus (they make enough in base pay for any sane person to live off of) you could buy 4 more cell towers.
I know, I know, 4 towers is nothing compared to the number needed to cover a country the size of the US. The thing is though that that would still be 4 towers more than they are currently building.
Example, T-mobile exec John J. Legere for 2018 had Bonus + Non-EquityIn
Re: (Score:3)
It has nothing to do with executive pay. *eye roll*. That's a completely separate issue. A large chunk of consumer's monthly cell service doesn't go to exec salaries. Math is hard!
True. A lot of it goes to share buybacks to increase stock prices.
Re:Shit US cell service (Score:4, Interesting)
The bulk of it is not going into executive pay or share buyback. AT&T and Verizon are using most of their profits to buy other companies -- for example Verizon's $120B purchase of Vodaphone. That's the largest acquisition ever done by any company. AT&T has bought a whole string of companies including AOL. These continuous, very expensive acquisitions chew up all of the money that should be going into building out the networks.
Re: (Score:1)
I meant DirectTV for AT&T.
Re: (Score:1)
"Only a huge corporation can afford real coverage," is a lie that the oligopoly players would like every one to believe, so that they can maintain their lucrative oligopoly market power.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
They can't, because the oligopolies don't play fair. The whole problem is that massive companies entrench themselves and make it impossible to break into the system and provide any competition. It's similar to how hard internet providers fight against municipal broadband, because when a city provides it it ends up being faster and cheaper.
Move to a Nordic country (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I get unlimited 4G LTE, nationwide in the US, for $45/month. With hotspot/data sharing, too. Not a 3rd tier provider, but Verizon. Lots of people pay more, but they just accept whatever plan they're handed, and they bundle in the cost of buying a phone as well (and paying it off over 24 months), so they end up with a bill of $120 and complain.
Spectrum Mobile will give you a GB of data for $14 per month. If you're not streaming lots of data/video - you could get 4G LTE across the nation for $0.46 per d
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I get unlimited 4G LTE, nationwide in the US, for $45/month.
Here in the UK I can get unlimited 5G data, calls and texts with unlimited hotspot and roaming in 71 nations including the USA for the equivalent of $24.97 a month.
Re: (Score:2)
It has nothing to do with executive pay. *eye roll*.
Err indeed it doesn't. No one said it did Were you so desperate to get first post you didn't even read the summary?
Re: (Score:2)
It has nothing to do with executive pay. *eye roll*.
Err indeed it doesn't. No one said it did Were you so desperate to get first post you didn't even read the summary?
LOL! Here's the *very first sentence* of TFA quoted in the summary:
Although executives' salaries have risen in most countries, relative to those of workers, in recent decades, the trend is more extreme in the U.S.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed it is. Quite a fitting first line about an article that covers a lot of different points. But I'm curious why you think this has anything to do with cell phone service.
I mean we shit on EditorDavis a lot, but it sounds like you expect the Slashdot title to include every one of the conclusions from TFA. That would be a very long title. But hey at least if you read all of it, you wouldn't need to worry about not knowing what TFA is about.
Re: (Score:2)
But I'm curious why you think this has anything to do with cell phone service.
I'm curious why you think I believe anything of the sort.
but it sounds like you expect the Slashdot title to include every one of the conclusions from TFA. That would be a very long title. But hey at least if you read all of it, you wouldn't need to worry about not knowing what TFA is about.
WTF are you babbling about? All I did was point out to you that "executive pay" was in fact mentioned when you said it wasn't. Now you think I expect something of a slashdot title? I dunno, man. Sounds like you're having a bad day.
Re: (Score:1)
Only a huge corporation can afford real coverage.
Then we should make the government provide municipal services to compete with them.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, yes. The usual ladder of lies:
1. It is not true! We are the best country of the world! MAGA!
2. It is not really true. There is this where things are worse!
3. Well, it may be true, but it is not our fault! We are the victim here!
I really wonder why I have excellent coverage here with several providers in each location using different cell networks while the the population density is only about 2x that of the US.
Re:Shit US cell service (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem is this is a HUGE country
So why is it so much cheaper in Australia?
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is this is a HUGE country
So why is it so much cheaper in Australia?
A couple minutes looking at coverage maps makes it look like huge swathes of Australia basically have no signal, though they all say they cover like 99% of population.
Re: (Score:2)
Excuses excuses. They have received massive subsidies. Further, what's the excuse in metro areas?(I know there is one, telcos in America excel at making excuses).
Re: Shit US cell service (Score:2)
You have an flawed view of the US cellular market.
According to Wikipedia, the US has approximately 30 true carriers, and around 50 MVNOs.
As for a large country necessitating large cellular companies - BS. Before consolidation, the US used to be entirely regional cell providers with reciprocal roaming agreements, just like Europe.
Re: (Score:2)
Price gouging is a greed problem, not an economics problem.
Re: (Score:2)
EU laws require roaming at no extra cost within the entire EU, so your service from any member country will work across the entire of the EU.
Re: (Score:2)
The think this fails to mention is EU cell service only works within what the US considers a state. US cell coverage covers a much bigger area. On top of that many plans also cover Canada and Mexico.
If you're in an EU member state then you can use your service plan in any nation in the EU.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There the heads of state aren't narcissistic cry babies that will mostly just make a scene whenever someone criticized them, and perhaps try to make some stupid laws that get rejected by congress or the courts eventually.
No, in those other countries you're likely to be silenced forever for doing something like that and they can push through whatever laws they want.
That doesn't mean we shouldn't
Re:US (Score:4, Insightful)
If you compare yourself to a dictatorship, a human rights hellhole and a pseudo-democracy, if you're NOT coming out on top you're really, really fucked.
Re: (Score:2)
Geez, have some standards!
Re: US (Score:2)
What? I've been called a Russian shill by some deluded individuals here before, for simply pointing out that - in my experience - normal Russian people are pretty decent and likeable.
And I certainly would not say that sanctions have "helped" the economy.
You are right about the ladies, though...
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
go glad i live in a third-world european shitwhole.
Fixed that for you.
No you didn't, now go and learn to spell English
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
* Pub Landlord (Al Murray) reference, if you don't get it
Re: (Score:1)
Yeh it’s an uncivillised third world shithole, not even got universal health care. A primitive violent society. Sad.
Re: (Score:2)
That's why everyone's trying to get here
From Mexico maybe, from the EU, not so much.
Re: (Score:2)
What about the 100 of years the Democrats were in power?
88 years, not 100 or 100s. 84 for Republican. The Democratic Party existed earlier, so I am not sure whether you'd count Whigs in the Republican column, but it's basically been 50/50 over the last 170 years.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Just look on YouTube for why....
What an amazing citation.