Thank you Rick.  And on a smaller scale, in this neck of
the woods where I have lived for 24 years I've known
this business.  This corporation in particular goes "out
of business" on a regular basis, and then reconstitutes
with the same owners under a different name.

Rudy
.
.
.
> Perhaps an overview might reveal that the ideal state of affairs is
> simply that access is a "cost of doing business", the position taken by
> the Canadian government.
>
> A company which cannot cover its costs of doing business goes out of
> business, that is the influence of the market.  It does not necessarily
> go bankrupt, although that might be a legal dodge used in the process.
> Most sell out to their competition, and major shareholders land quite
> comfortably on their feet.
>
> The distinction between the two, business and government, is that the
> former has no "moral sense", except in a very tangential way.  The
> purpose of a corporation is to make a profit for its shareholders. The
> CEO who thinks or does otherwise, is simply not doing his job.
>
> Governments, however, are supposed to be the custodian of the collective
> "moral sense".  That is what we elect them for.  They impose rules on
> business organizations, including safety and labour regulations, taxes,
> and other measures for the good of society, as part of their job.
> Corporations, and other business ventures, are not "citizens" per se,
> and have no say where it counts - they cannot vote.
>
> In the normal order of things, activists who want changes made for the
> benefit of the disabled would lobby government for laws, and sue
> corporations, where necessary, for compliance.
>
> Awareness doesn't have too much to do with it, beyond awareness of the
> law.  Most corporations have legal staff to keep them informed.
>
> Rick Sinclair
> SNA
>
>
>
> Rudy Caris wrote:
> >
> > Hello Kelly,
> >
> > Happy New Year, and I appreciate your candid point of
> > view.  What we are talking about here is accessibility
> > access to the web, aren’t we?
> >
> > George Orwell quite appropriately examined the delicate
> > balance of economic power that “the elitist classes
> > wield for control” in his 1984, where their sole desire
> > is to maintain the existing status quo, versus the
> > deplorable plight of the oppressed [disabled] poor.
> > Under that scrutinizing light then, it is free Internet
> > Service that provides that reasonable access to web
> > technology that is the only option open to millions of
> > disabled people.  These are people whose income is only
> > about $500.- to $800.- per month to survive on.
> > Charging these people $21.95 a month or thereabouts for
> > this service, means they don’t eat for two or three
> > days.  And viewing the article on an interlinear basis,
> > and as “reasoning” from the tumultuous frontlines may
> > permit:  The ISPs referenced “are going out of business
> > as much as PG&E (Pacific Gas & Electric) on the west
> > coast is going out of business.”
> >
> > Hitting these poverty stricken disabled hard by coercing
> > an up to an estimated 20% hike in their utility fees by
> > claiming a “trumped up power shortage”, as well as
> > jacking up web access service because of “loosing
> > profits”, is pure bunk.  And is this the understanding
> > of the facts, and the reason why advocates are now
> > calling for governmental intervention and having the PGE
> > books audited to ascertain the factuality of their
> > claims?  And in the wake of the recent Federal ruling
> > of “Guidelines Set for Web Accessibility”, should these
> > Advocates now call on Mr. Goldstein and his associate
> > CEOs as well, to make available and open up for
> > inspection their corporate Books of Account to ascertain
> > the factuality of their claims?  And after these facts,
> > when we check the ownership of those consolidated ISPs,
> > will we find the same names on the roster.  Including
> > Mr. Goldstein?
> >
> > We are all caught up in the loop of corporations
> > merging.  And as some “reasoning” from the tumultuous
> > front lines may again permit me, we need to and we have
> > to fully consider those disabled persons who are trying
> > to survive day-by-day, and whose only means of access to
> > Technology is a free ISP with their 75 Mhz 486, or lower
> > grade Pentium.  These people don’t have any free choice
> > or option of access to “super technology” as some of
> > their disabled counterparts who may have fortune smile
> > on them, and who possibly work for institutions and
> > other such corporate entities that provides the
> > Technology.  A valid question should arise in the minds
> > of all logical minded persons because of this corporate
> > decision.  And that is:  Will Mr. Goldstein comply with
> > Federal Accessibility Guidelines and accommodate these
> > disenfranchised individuals?
> >
> > >From this perspective and point of view
> > then, “...corporations [and ISP (Internet Service
> > Providers)] merge, not because they are going out of
> > business.”  These “Corporations merge because it is more
> > profitable for them.”  [Economics 1A – The Corporate
> > Strategy] [The Global Business]
> >
> >