|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 17 2012 @ 04:20 PM EST |
Cell phones aren't perfect either. Satellite coverage exceeds cell phone
coverage. http://www.globalcomsatphone.com/support7.html
It is morally right that the rich have cutting edge technology. In the history
of new technology coming to market, the rich are the ones to first have open
heart surgery, MRIs, cars, cell phones, air conditioning, internet, televisions,
air travel, and hundreds if not thousands and thousands of other
products/services that the general population can now afford because the rich
first made it economically viable to bring the product to market. In the short
run it may appear to be immoral, but over the long run it has greatly benefited
us all.
If 30 years ago everyone in the area where Sandy hit had been given a cell
phone, they would have no doubt have done the same thing. I am not advocating
everyone having a satellite phone or even a cell phone. What I am saying that
if you as an individual think it is important to have super reliable
communication, it is your responsibility to pay for it. Businesses exist to
make money, but they do it by meeting your needs. With demand, the service
comes into existence. This is the magic of markets.
No cell phone service company guarantees no service outages in normal times much
less in times like Sandy. (No doctor guarantees that either, for that matter).
If the lack of cell phone service in the aftermath of Sandy is a concern of the
consumer now, then business(es) will see that a demand for more reliable service
during emergencies exists and the businesses will themselves put in the
infrastructure to provide that service and will tout that ability in
advertisements to potential cell phone customers. Cell phone companies are
always competing on quality of service. My guess is despite all the hand
ringing in the article, that there is not really that much demand for bullet
proof cell service. The government doesn't depend on cell service during times
of emergency. They rightly have their other more reliable systems. As I stated
in another response, I think you'd be hard pressed to show even one death due to
lack of cell phone service. In my opinion, you would do better to look at the
extended time that power was out. There is all sorts of competition in cell
service, and non in power distribution. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Satelite phone - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 19 2012 @ 07:17 AM EST
- Satelite phone - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 20 2012 @ 12:21 AM EST
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 17 2012 @ 04:22 PM EST |
"Finally just because there is an alternative (which in this case there
wasn't
but in the theoretical) doesn't mean you have no responsibility. Imagine a
situation where a doctor guranteed his services to a family for a year. Then
when there was a large scale virus outbreak that he COULD cure (and he knew he
could) he left the city and abandoned the family who preceded to die. He would
be in trouble. This is the same, though a less sensationalist
sitatuation."
This is an absolutely silly comparison. A proper comparison woudld be that both
of the hospitals that the doctor had privliges at were wiped out by the storm. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
