Replies

ldish wrote: "and your point is??? life is life and things are sometimes bad...maybe a bad decision to choose and big your multi millions dollar hause there...but why should i as a stockholder of ATT foot the bill for that? too many “it’s not my fault someone else should pay or it is their fault” of a mindset has set in in the USA today..."

Lol! Relax a little, ya know? Did you happen to watch the video?

And don't take your personal portfolio problems out on me, I just linked the video and story.

Besides, it looks like your stock is doing quite okay.

So what is your point? The stock is doing OK so the company can “afford” to pay for the box? What’s the limit on the number of boxes it should be responsible for across the country, or is this just a “one time” special for CA.?

You sound like a lib who claims people(companies) who have lots of money don’t “need” all of it so they should give some away to help others.

BTW, I think you would be amazed at the amount of money BIG BUSINESS donates to charities in the form of cash and services. If you haven’t heard about this then blame the liberal media who has a vested interest in not disseminating this information.

BTW - This is the way it has always worked for me when I had home ownership losses…

I make the decision of where I live, what I buy…I take the risk…

I pay to have insurance cover my losses…how much I want to cover is up to me but I have choices on insurance company and what I pay…and oh yes I take the risk…

If I have an acceptable loss the insurance company takes a look at my loss to see if I am cover and cuts me a check on what I am covered for and then I have to pay all the bills whether the insurance check covers it or not…I took the risk…

In the end all of our insurance rates will likely go up for my loss and if it was a case like these fires all of our bills will go up…

I am sure that ATT has insurance to cover all of the common equipment not associated with one specific home or insures themselves for those losses…they took the risk

If you want ATT to also cover all of the specific equipment that each house may or may not order for service then they would if the CA utility commission dictates it and write in the extra monthly cost to now insure the individual equipment for the service and make more money…

Why because they would likely charge me and you and everyone else more than if we got insurance on our own to do it in the first place…kinda like what government does to us all on every single issue you and so many others want to do when you turn over to the federal government to do for you when you could do it cheaper individually for yourself…AREN’T YOU GLAD YOU ASKED FOR OPINIONS?