Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 15 submissions in the queue.

FCC Tells US Telcos: Buy Chinese Kit And You Won't See Another Dime From Us

posted by janrinok on Sunday November 24 2019, @04:08AM   Printer-friendly
from the can-we-can't-we? dept.

Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:

America's broadband watchdog has told telcos they cannot use government subsidies to buy any more Huawei or ZTE equipment.

The FCC is also mulling extending this ultimatum to include the continued use of the Chinese manufacturers' gear, meaning cellular and internet providers will have to replace their installed Huawei and ZTE boxes, as well as vow not to purchase any of the kit, if they wish to receive funding from the US government.

Specifically, the five-member commission voted unanimously on Friday to bar US telcos from using cash from the Universal Service Fund to purchase stuff made by either of the Chinese telecoms giants.

The USF is an $8.5bn nationwide fund that subsidizes telcos that provide service in rural and poor areas, schools, and libraries. Even the larger network providers tap into this piggy bank, so the crackdown on Huawei and ZTE purchasing reaches right across the market.

[...] The decision comes on the heels of what was seen as a reprieve of sorts for Huawei when, earlier this week, the FTC granted a third extension on the trade ban on the switch slinger, letting certain US companies continue to do business with the biz. One of those corporations, Microsoft, just announced it was going to be able to continue selling its software to Huawei.

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
FCC Tells US Telcos: Buy Chinese Kit And You Won't See Another Dime From Us | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 41 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 25 2019, @04:41PM (7 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday November 25 2019, @04:41PM (#924566) Journal
    It's only a factor of four. By the end of the century it'll probably be a factor of three.

  • (Score: 2) by ilPapa on Tuesday November 26 2019, @03:34AM (1 child)

    by ilPapa (2366) on Tuesday November 26 2019, @03:34AM (#924779) Journal

    It's only a factor of four. By the end of the century it'll probably be a factor of three.

    Not if we keep anti-immigration as an official policy it won't be.

    --
    You are still welcome on my lawn.

    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday November 26 2019, @01:14PM

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday November 26 2019, @01:14PM (#924896) Journal

      Not if we keep anti-immigration as an official policy it won't be.

      How anti-immigration is that official policy?

  • (Score: 2) by ilPapa on Wednesday November 27 2019, @05:52AM (4 children)

    by ilPapa (2366) on Wednesday November 27 2019, @05:52AM (#925270) Journal

    It's only a factor of four. By the end of the century it'll probably be a factor of three.

    I thought of your comment when I saw this story today:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/27/us/us-birth-fertility-rate.html?smtyp=cur&smid=tw-nytimes [nytimes.com]

    (Note: The story is about how the US fertility rate has been in decline for 4 years and has hit a new low.)

    --
    You are still welcome on my lawn.

    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday November 27 2019, @02:39PM (3 children)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday November 27 2019, @02:39PM (#925341) Journal
      Not much point to talking about US fertility in a vacuum rather than comparing it to Chinese fertility [nationalinterest.org].

      China now has the lowest fertility rate in the world—1.05 according to China’s 2016 State Statistical Bureau data and reported by Liang Jianzhang and Huang Wenzheng in a recent Caixin article.

      Sounds like Chinese fertility has hit a "new low" too and that low is lower than the US one. On this Wikipedia list [wikipedia.org], US fertility is 1.8 births per woman, Chinese fertility is 1.6 births per woman.

      • (Score: 2) by ilPapa on Wednesday November 27 2019, @03:16PM (2 children)

        by ilPapa (2366) on Wednesday November 27 2019, @03:16PM (#925352) Journal

        Sounds like Chinese fertility has hit a "new low" too and that low is lower than the US one. On this Wikipedia list [wikipedia.org], US fertility is 1.8 births per woman, Chinese fertility is 1.6 births per woman.

        Good point. At that rate, China will only have three times as many people as the US as soon as say, the year 2400.

        --
        You are still welcome on my lawn.

        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday November 28 2019, @12:07AM (1 child)

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday November 28 2019, @12:07AM (#925490) Journal
          You're forgetting immigration. It'll be by 2100.

          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday November 28 2019, @12:17AM

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday November 28 2019, @12:17AM (#925493) Journal
            I might add that I don't think the current anti-immigration surge is going to last. The real problem is whether the US can maintain its economic and societal edge over the countries where immigrants come from.