You must know that the ICE will *HAVE* to lease its (or Costa Ricans) infrastructure by force, which has cost billions to us and lot of effort to build during decades. Do you really find the sense for any company in leasing its own infrastructure to the competitors ? Think in Intel leasing its plants to AMD for life for
example. It's just insane !!!!

I understand your complains and people are conscious about the need of improving that area but it's way easy to blame ICE. You must know that all projects about telecommunications and electricity must go through an endless bureaucratic process and contests which usually delay everything for months or even years. A private company don't have to face such inconveniences so there wouldn't be a fair competition, starting by leasing and maintain its own infraestructure for others. Nobody won't be able to condemn any U.S. company for monopolistic practices because the "agreement" protect them.
But anyway with all those obstacles the ICE is a model in Latin America and many other countries.
Just I will tell you that Intel chose Costa Rica because its telecommunications infraestructure too and we competed against really big countries. We are a country with one of the lowest fees in mobil telephony and internet plans in the world. We are in second place in the world in cellular usage per inhabitant and usage of text messages even with all those complains. I think I don't have to explain more since the facts speak by themselves.

You must know too that telecommunications represent a subsidy for fix telephony and electricity, that's why we have cheap electricity too and public phones everywhere with one of the most extended coverage in L.A.
So the consequences of sharing the telecommunications market will be very prejudicial for the rest of things.
ICE was conceived as a social organization and has been successful. A private one will not invest in areas of the country where it won't get a gain, the ICE did, does and will. In other countries rural phones were removed by the private companies which controlled the market because of that reason. Even in other countries
of L.A. people have had to organize boycotts to make companies to reduce fees since they became unpayable. You can't compare the US and Costa Rica in any area, there is an universe of differences. Compare us with countries similar to ours.

A very dangerous one: our laws are under the TLC, but only ours. In the US the 'agreement' is a peanut worth. If eventually there is a conflict between our government and any U.S. company, the fight must be seen in an international court BUT if it happens in the U.S. the thing is seen in the U.S. And anyway such fights would take probably years and would cost $ millions, which we don't have, no matter if we win or lose.

But really this is just one of the many inconveniences of the TLC. Where the US imposed very hard conditions for a small country like ours. I'll comment the case of medicines, we have a medical institution or CCSS which works under the concept of social security where a insurance is obligatory. So all workers pay a small percentage of their salary to it. It has lots of financial difficulties too but it works. Well, the CCSS buys the most of the medicines of generic brands and the rest of original brands which are very expensive. With the TLC it would have to buy the all new formulas of original brands for a period of 20 years paying the high prices even if there are generic ones in the market. In other words if today appears a medicine which cures the cancer or AIDS and it costs whatever the pharmaceutical companies want to charge, the CCSS will have to buy only to those companies, EVEN if there are generic ones 10,20 or whatever times cheaper, during 20 years.
Or it buys them or not, there is no more choices. CCSS wouldn't stand such pressure and people would pay the consequences.

The first reason which comes to mind to doubt about such "agreements" (which really it's not since US wrote the rules and we have just a translation) is the case of Mexico. Have really things changed positively for Mexico during 12 years of NAFTA ? Trade has grown enormously in Mexico, but all that richness reaches the people or only some ? Why illegal immigration has grown as well ? so much, that the US will build a wall to stop Mexican immigrants.

There are many more objections to the TLC, much more than I can recall or suspect now, much more to lose. So as you can see David, it's much more than a Customer Service complain.

Jose

Really good comments Jose, but until people stand up and insist on better service from ICE, there will be no improvements. I have many horror stories about dealing with them.

The TLC (CAFTA) for Costa Rica is not good. Some will make money, a few will make even more money, and the rest will sit scratching their b@ll5. However, ICE, INS, AyA, CNFL, CableTica, Amnet, Banco Nacional, Banco de Costa Rica, and the Costa Rica Government and its institutions are in need of dire improvement. It is sad that the Costa Ricans have to be proud to be the best country in Central America. It is like Somalia and Zimbabwe saying that we are the best country in the "this" part of Africa. Costa Rica should be a good country in the world.

I came to this country 6 years ago because my family is Costa Rican. I liked the country so I stayed. There are ups and down here, like any other country in the world, even the US. But if you are looking for a consumer-based society, a customer-based lifestyle, etc. this is not the place for you to live.

All that said, I can well say that Costa Rica will vote in favor of the TLC. They are just too dependent on the US and not patriotic enough to stand up for the sacrifices that not signing the pact will cost. So, until they tie up with the EU, China, India, or other such markets, Uncle Sam will call the shots.

The original poster has this issue pretty much nailed. These unions are terrified that they will have to compete. I am a tico who studied business and economics at an elite private university in the U.S. and am baffled at how poorly most Costa Ricans understand basic economics.

Jose is so backward, that if he represents the general consensus of Ticos, then I fear for the future of our nation. His argument was basically that since ICE is a mire of innefficiency they will essentially be unable to compete if we introduce competition. Why is he defending ICE's mistakes so much? He sounds like the spokesperson for Socialism... and experience tells us where that will lead.

Competition is good for society, and it is the people who benefit. They will benefit through a higher quality of goods and services provided at better prices. And don't even get me started on what the tariffs are doing to the Tico economy. Just visit Office Depot or GNC and check the price tags. Goods cost nearly double what they are in the U.S. It's like the government doesn't understand by lowering tariffs they will promote more consumption, effectively creating more jobs, more tax revenue through higher volume, as well as a higher standard of living. This alone is madness to me.

I beg the Ticos to educate themselves a bit more and pray that enough of them understand economics to see why this is good for Costa Rica.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Subscribe to this comment thread.

Comments: