So if you just substitute earnings for bandwidth, is ATT saying a progressive tax is fair?

[TalkingDog]

http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/13/atandt-will-cap-dsl-u-verse-internet-and-impose-overage-fees/


The top 2 percent of residential subscribers uses about 20 percent of the bandwidth on our network. Just one of these high-traffic users can utilize the same amount of data capacity as 19 typical households. Lopsided usage patterns can cause congestion at certain points in the network, which can slow Internet speeds and interfere with other customers' access to and use of the network. Our new plan addresses another concern: customers strongly believe that only those who use the most bandwidth should pay more than those who don't use as much. That's exactly what this does – and again, 98% of our customers will not be impacted by this.

[FBaggins]

1. That's not really progressive.

It's just less regressive (if you're defining usage as income and the monthly fee as the tax).

Even at higher rates, they'll still be paying less per MB (i.e., a lower tax rate) than the lower-use (i.e., poorer) customers.

[TalkingDog]

2. Agree... It's just interesting to see how they find that idea equitable

as long as they are the ones profiting from it.