<h5><span style="letter-spacing:-.02em;">About</span>
<a href="http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/hud/public-housing-and-rental-subsidies" style="letter-spacing:-.02em;" target="_blank">$59</a>
<span style="letter-spacing:-.02em;">billion is spent on traditional social welfare programs.</span>
<a href="http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=8230" style="letter-spacing:-.02em;" target="_blank">$92</a>
<span style="letter-spacing:-.02em;">billion is spent on corporate subsidies. So, the government spent 50% more on corporate welfare than it did on food stamps and housing assistance in 2006.</span>
</h5>
ALL of those subsidies and market corruptions should be ended immediately.
Look, genius-stein, you have no clue what you are talking about. Did you fail economics 101? Just arbitrarily set a price and speed because it seems fair? No consideration for cost, profit, maintenance, supply or demand? All that counts is “fairness”? Unbelievable naiveté and part of the reason these scatterbrain ideas gain traction.
Verizon stole money from PA for expanding fiber in PA. Its PA's fault for leaving that loophole, but still Verizon has stopped expanding and is just keeping all the money they make without any improvements for its customers! They are making a killing and gouging its customers like the rest of the industry! No reason for 15/15 internet to be $74.99 a month especially with other countries having alot faster internet for more than half the price!
ALL of those subsidies and market corruptions should be ended immediately.
Rright because ending all social services will make everyone's life better. /s Personally, I would rather my tax dollars go to helping to house the poor rather than having to step over dozens of homeless people sleeping on the sidewalks who use our public parks as a bathroom.
The libraries close pretty early in the evening in most places. A single mom who wants to take online education has to wait until the kids are in bed to have some time to study. With the transition of many government services to online only, internet access is almost required to be a citizen. I think the goal of everyone having access to the internet is a good thing. The US should be able to afford that. The government could certainly cut some unnecessary expenditures, but caring for the citizens shouldn't be one of them. I agree the cable companies totally suck.
These "single mom" BS stories are growing tiresome. First, why did she decide to have kids with someone who wasn't going to stick around or have them out of wedlock? Seems like a poor decision on her part so I shouldn't have to help pay for her mistakes. Second, where is her family that they can't watch the kids while she takes online education? Just because she's a "single mom" doesn't mean jack to me and hardly pulls at my heartstrings. It's such an old and tired argument made by liberals.
These "single mom" BS stories are growing tiresome. First, why did she decide to have kids with someone who wasn't going to stick around or have them out of wedlock?
Not unusual at all unfortunately. Divorce or out-of-wedlock births even among the wealthy and/or highly educated is pretty darn common. Having a doctorate won't prevent poor judgment. But telling that single mom she made a mistake at one time in her life and will forever be treated as a second class person hardly seems fair. Believe it or not some folks make serious mistakes in their lives but learn from them and actually try to improve their lot because of it . Not referring to you of course. You've always had good judgement and made the right choices haven't you? I could never reach that level of perfection myself.
Net Neutrality was cute little baby sold to the public. Reclassification was the goal. That’s not a conspiracy theory as we can now see with this proposal to add subsidy fees to everyone’s Internet bill. Broadband will probably wind up like the wireline business, stagnant, burdened with every possible government fee (federal, state, county, municipality, village, town) they can think of. Ever look at a wireline bill lately? 30% of it is now fees and taxes. My wireline service costs $20/mo with unlimited domestic long distance. My BILL is $27.43/mo. That’s $7.43 in taxes and fees, and that adds up to 37% of the total.
Again, a post that just conflates two completely different issues.
To suggest that regulation that attempts to rein in monopolists' ability to control pipes mutates into 37% in taxes is just silly.
Rright because ending all social services will make everyone's life better. /s Personally, I would rather my tax dollars go to helping to house the poor rather than having to step over dozens of homeless people sleeping on the sidewalks who use our public parks as a bathroom.
The problem is the people abuse the programs! Wouldn't be bad if people actually needed help and applied, but when they have a cell phone and 12 kids I get upset along with many others!
Please, somebody STOP this entitlement mentality! The nation does not have a "right" to broadband -- there are different speeds and prices offered by companies for a reason! Big government types will stop at nothing to add more government intrusion into our lives and usurp our hard earned wages!
My political philosophy is Libertarian but with Investments. I don't believe in government charity, but I think social programs and infrastructure programs are ok if they produce a positive return for everyone.
Education is a classic case, it increases the earning power of everyone.
The Internet provides a colossal amount of free information and services. Those without access are only going to have worse prospects over time which hurts everyone. Education dollars spent on children will also be wasted if they don't have access to Wiki and Google.
I think the cost of Internet for the poorest will get paid back many times in increased upward mobility and higher income potential for children.
Government can screw up anything, but this looks like a legitimate investment to me.
While you make some good points and I do think that many of the broadband providers gouge people, programs like this are generally inefficient and filled with fraud.
And if it doesn't limit prices, the vendors will take the subsidy and then raise prices anyway.
I'd rather see the Government put people to work and raise the minimum wage. Then those people can pay for their own access. Or, the government can support public Wi-Fi (although much of the public WiFi I've tried is slower than a 4G or LTE connection).
Anecdotally, I see plenty of people on the NYC subways with smartphones who appear to be very low income people. While their level of poverty is not as bad as someone who lives in a shack outside of New Orleans or who lives in worst part of Detroit, before I'd support direct subsidies, I'd want to see research on how many people have a device, but not broadband access, and want it in a region where broadband is available.
If there is any subsidy at all, it should be for companies to provide broadband to low-population areas where it doesn't currently exist and is unlikely to in the next 10 years and that can be a break on taxes paid rather than direct payment.
These "single mom" BS stories are growing tiresome. First, why did she decide to have kids with someone who wasn't going to stick around or have them out of wedlock? Seems like a poor decision on her part so I shouldn't have to help pay for her mistakes. Second, where is her family that they can't watch the kids while she takes online education? Just because she's a "single mom" doesn't mean jack to me and hardly pulls at my heartstrings. It's such an old and tired argument made by liberals.
I'd like to live in a society where everyone is healthy, educated and employed. Of course that is probably not attainable in the near future but taking away opportunities is not the direction that will get us there.
Not unusual at all unfortunately. Divorce or out-of-wedlock births even among the wealthy and/or highly educated is pretty darn common. Having a doctorate won't prevent poor judgment. But telling that single mom she made a mistake at one time in her life and will forever be treated as a second class person hardly seems fair. Believe it or not some folks make serious mistakes in their lives but learn from them and actually try to improve their lot because of it . Not referring to you of course. You've always had good judgement and made the right choices haven't you? I could never reach that level of perfection myself.
Again, rewarding poor judgment is not beneficial for anyone.
Rright because ending all social services will make everyone's life better. /s Personally, I would rather my tax dollars go to helping to house the poor rather than having to step over dozens of homeless people sleeping on the sidewalks who use our public parks as a bathroom.
There's nothing wrong with you as an individual contributing to others. Why must everyone be forced to "help"?
There's nothing wrong with you as an individual contributing to others. Why must everyone be forced to "help"?
The obvious answer is for the good of society. The only way you are going to avoid paying taxes is to stop earning money or find someplace that does not belong to any country because they all charge taxes. Didn't you want to do some ocean homesteading?
Great, more tax money burdening the middle class for a pointless governmental cause.
Besides, if you want computer and our internet access, that's what the public library is for that we already pay for!!!. The corner is already trillions in debt and what to they want to do? More freebies of course. Anything to buy more votes. Like everything else fraud will be rampant no matter what b.s. they say. Anyone with half a brain knows what's going on.
Where I live, Comcast's regular $80 non-special internet price gets you 150 mbps. If I just wanted 50mbps, it would cost about $50 or cheaper if I went on a limited term "special deal".
About $59 billion is spent on traditional social welfare programs. $92 billion is spent on corporate subsidies. So, the government spent 50% more on corporate welfare than it did on food stamps and housing assistance in 2006.
More liberal propaganda. Liberals want us to believe that tax breaks to corporations or the rich is the same as "spending" or "robbing from the poor". It cost the government nothing to take in less in taxes. A tax break or tax refund is not government spending. Letting people keep more of the money that they earn is not an expense. While social programs to people who receives more in government subsidies than they pay in taxes actually cost the government something. Liberals some how thinks that the poor is entitle to all the money that corporations and the rich makes. Therefore, tax breaks or tax refunds is the same as the government robbing from the poor.
I'm sure Google would be interested in funding a program like this. The only problem is that this program is for the poor and Google has no interest in data mining the personal information of people that have no money to spend. Not too many advertisers are going to pay Google to advertise to people that don't have the money to buy the products they're advertising.
Comments
ALL of those subsidies and market corruptions should be ended immediately.
Look, genius-stein, you have no clue what you are talking about. Did you fail economics 101? Just arbitrarily set a price and speed because it seems fair? No consideration for cost, profit, maintenance, supply or demand? All that counts is “fairness”? Unbelievable naiveté and part of the reason these scatterbrain ideas gain traction.
Verizon stole money from PA for expanding fiber in PA. Its PA's fault for leaving that loophole, but still Verizon has stopped expanding and is just keeping all the money they make without any improvements for its customers! They are making a killing and gouging its customers like the rest of the industry! No reason for 15/15 internet to be $74.99 a month especially with other countries having alot faster internet for more than half the price!
ALL of those subsidies and market corruptions should be ended immediately.
Rright because ending all social services will make everyone's life better. /s Personally, I would rather my tax dollars go to helping to house the poor rather than having to step over dozens of homeless people sleeping on the sidewalks who use our public parks as a bathroom.
These "single mom" BS stories are growing tiresome. First, why did she decide to have kids with someone who wasn't going to stick around or have them out of wedlock? Seems like a poor decision on her part so I shouldn't have to help pay for her mistakes. Second, where is her family that they can't watch the kids while she takes online education? Just because she's a "single mom" doesn't mean jack to me and hardly pulls at my heartstrings. It's such an old and tired argument made by liberals.
Again, a post that just conflates two completely different issues.
To suggest that regulation that attempts to rein in monopolists' ability to control pipes mutates into 37% in taxes is just silly.
Rright because ending all social services will make everyone's life better. /s Personally, I would rather my tax dollars go to helping to house the poor rather than having to step over dozens of homeless people sleeping on the sidewalks who use our public parks as a bathroom.
The problem is the people abuse the programs! Wouldn't be bad if people actually needed help and applied, but when they have a cell phone and 12 kids I get upset along with many others!
Please, somebody STOP this entitlement mentality! The nation does not have a "right" to broadband -- there are different speeds and prices offered by companies for a reason! Big government types will stop at nothing to add more government intrusion into our lives and usurp our hard earned wages!
While you make some good points and I do think that many of the broadband providers gouge people, programs like this are generally inefficient and filled with fraud.
And if it doesn't limit prices, the vendors will take the subsidy and then raise prices anyway.
I'd rather see the Government put people to work and raise the minimum wage. Then those people can pay for their own access. Or, the government can support public Wi-Fi (although much of the public WiFi I've tried is slower than a 4G or LTE connection).
Anecdotally, I see plenty of people on the NYC subways with smartphones who appear to be very low income people. While their level of poverty is not as bad as someone who lives in a shack outside of New Orleans or who lives in worst part of Detroit, before I'd support direct subsidies, I'd want to see research on how many people have a device, but not broadband access, and want it in a region where broadband is available.
If there is any subsidy at all, it should be for companies to provide broadband to low-population areas where it doesn't currently exist and is unlikely to in the next 10 years and that can be a break on taxes paid rather than direct payment.
These "single mom" BS stories are growing tiresome. First, why did she decide to have kids with someone who wasn't going to stick around or have them out of wedlock? Seems like a poor decision on her part so I shouldn't have to help pay for her mistakes. Second, where is her family that they can't watch the kids while she takes online education? Just because she's a "single mom" doesn't mean jack to me and hardly pulls at my heartstrings. It's such an old and tired argument made by liberals.
I'd like to live in a society where everyone is healthy, educated and employed. Of course that is probably not attainable in the near future but taking away opportunities is not the direction that will get us there.
Again, rewarding poor judgment is not beneficial for anyone.
There's nothing wrong with you as an individual contributing to others. Why must everyone be forced to "help"?
Comcast is THE worst company I have ever dealt with!
There's nothing wrong with you as an individual contributing to others. Why must everyone be forced to "help"?
The obvious answer is for the good of society. The only way you are going to avoid paying taxes is to stop earning money or find someplace that does not belong to any country because they all charge taxes. Didn't you want to do some ocean homesteading?
Besides, if you want computer and our internet access, that's what the public library is for that we already pay for!!!. The corner is already trillions in debt and what to they want to do? More freebies of course. Anything to buy more votes. Like everything else fraud will be rampant no matter what b.s. they say. Anyone with half a brain knows what's going on.
Where I live, Comcast's regular $80 non-special internet price gets you 150 mbps. If I just wanted 50mbps, it would cost about $50 or cheaper if I went on a limited term "special deal".
http://thinkbynumbers.org/government-spending/corporate-welfare/corporate-welfare-statistics-vs-social-welfare-statistics/
About $59 billion is spent on traditional social welfare programs. $92 billion is spent on corporate subsidies. So, the government spent 50% more on corporate welfare than it did on food stamps and housing assistance in 2006.
More liberal propaganda. Liberals want us to believe that tax breaks to corporations or the rich is the same as "spending" or "robbing from the poor". It cost the government nothing to take in less in taxes. A tax break or tax refund is not government spending. Letting people keep more of the money that they earn is not an expense. While social programs to people who receives more in government subsidies than they pay in taxes actually cost the government something. Liberals some how thinks that the poor is entitle to all the money that corporations and the rich makes. Therefore, tax breaks or tax refunds is the same as the government robbing from the poor.
I'm sure Google would be interested in funding a program like this. The only problem is that this program is for the poor and Google has no interest in data mining the personal information of people that have no money to spend. Not too many advertisers are going to pay Google to advertise to people that don't have the money to buy the products they're advertising.