Does anyone know how much does T-Mobile have to pay carriers in other countries for the service? I know many countries don't even offer "unlimited data" plans, so it seems weird that t-mobile can afford to do this, unless it's expecting the positive sentiment in the country to compensate for the losses from this deal.
Lately there has been a long list of articles on excessive punishment for kids that seem to be just messing around. A few days ago The Economist ran an article in one of its blogs where they mention that only three countries haven't ratified the UN Convention on children's rights: South Sudan, Somalia, and the US. If you are like me and you are not sure what ratifying means, a treaty is not legally binding until it's ratified by a country's government.
One of the key aspects of the treaty is that it forbids "cruel and degrading punishment". The article proposes that the Government (particularly the republican side) has rejected to ratify this because they see it as a way to interfere in how the country's citizens handle and educate their kids.
Seeing articles like this makes you wonder if such an interference would really be such a bad thing.
You can find the article here: http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/10/economist-explains-2
BestNetTech has not posted any stories submitted by Mauricio.
Question on profit margin
Does anyone know how much does T-Mobile have to pay carriers in other countries for the service? I know many countries don't even offer "unlimited data" plans, so it seems weird that t-mobile can afford to do this, unless it's expecting the positive sentiment in the country to compensate for the losses from this deal.
UN Children Rights
Lately there has been a long list of articles on excessive punishment for kids that seem to be just messing around. A few days ago The Economist ran an article in one of its blogs where they mention that only three countries haven't ratified the UN Convention on children's rights: South Sudan, Somalia, and the US. If you are like me and you are not sure what ratifying means, a treaty is not legally binding until it's ratified by a country's government.
One of the key aspects of the treaty is that it forbids "cruel and degrading punishment". The article proposes that the Government (particularly the republican side) has rejected to ratify this because they see it as a way to interfere in how the country's citizens handle and educate their kids.
Seeing articles like this makes you wonder if such an interference would really be such a bad thing.
You can find the article here: http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/10/economist-explains-2