I see the shopping carts of fat people with children in tow who pay with their items using foodstamps, and their carts are filled with items like ice cream, potato chips, sodas. These people are not in need, and if they need a phone or the internet, then they can easily scrape together the money if it was important to them. Let them go without buying a $200 pair of sneakers, I'm sure that they can make that sacrifice.
ZOMG!!1! Welfare queens in cadillacs, dogs and cats living together, mass pandamonium.
I am against this. Broadband internet is not a human right.
Well neither is Health Care a human right!!! Sure it's nice to have, but why should I help pay for you? Free Cars, Free Babysitting service, Free to cheap help care, it goes on and on and on and you know what in the end happens. Services get worse and more expensive for those that pay!!! Every time you hear how the Government is cracking down on all the fraud and yet it continues!!! If you are using a Welfare card to go gamble or or Strip Bar like they have been doing, You sure as hell don't need Welfare!!!! We have more people on Government programs then during the great depression, by far under OBAMA. Where's the recovery or it's just more free stuff. This is how Democrats get elected, just give out more free stuff. We're trillions in debt, borrowing form China, but so what, more free stuff.
The whole Lifeline crap that pays for this is really a TAX!!! The Government can call it whatever they want, but it's just yet another TAX of of a zillion the taxpayers pay out every month. Where you just about half to work for free for the first 6 months to pay for all the Taxes. You start adding up State taxes, Federal Taxes, Property taxes, This type of Lifeline things which are Taxes, and on and on. There's so many hidden taxes you are paying for in the price of everything you buy on top of more taxes. We fought a Revolutionary War mostly because of Taxes!!! The whole Boston Tea party thing was abut TAXES and back then it was like 2%.
At some point you run out of other people's money to steal!!! The poor was helped by the Churches and then Government got involved.
Before the telcos came out with the 'all you can eat' plans they charged by usage on a 'per call' basis not 'per minute' the way long distance calls were billed. Fixed and low income people were allowed to stay on that billing style after the unlimited plans were introduced because their usage was so low. Having that phone line has saved countless lives because people were able to make emergency calls.
In terms of communication the Internet has surpassed dial tone. A child that's born into a low income family didn't choose that life but he/she should have a chance to get work him or herself out of it. Every year that becomes increasingly harder without Internet access at home.
There's not many of us that has at least one family member, a grandparent or great grandparent, that didn't benefit greatly from some sort of government plan and helped them better their lives and in turn bettered yours.
I see the shopping carts of fat people with children in tow who pay with their items using foodstamps, and their carts are filled with items like ice cream, potato chips, sodas. These people are not in need, and if they need a phone or the internet, then they can easily scrape together the money if it was important to them. Let them go without buying a $200 pair of sneakers, I'm sure that they can make that sacrifice.
ZOMG!!1! Welfare queens in cadillacs, dogs and cats living together, mass pandamonium.
Cadillacs? The welfare queens in Brooklyn drive Benzs
This program has been around for a long time, but it's exploded under Obama and has gotten out of control, with massive fraud and people cheating the system. Just say no to Obamaphones and also no to any Obamabroadband! I don't care about poor people or fraudsters! There's too many of them now.
Pai said the Lifeline program grew by nearly 102 percent since January 2009, compared to the program’s 3 percent growth during former President George W. Bush’s administration.
Before the telcos came out with the 'all you can eat' plans they charged by usage on a 'per call' basis not 'per minute' the way long distance calls were billed. Fixed and low income people were allowed to stay on that billing style after the unlimited plans were introduced because their usage was so low. Having that phone line has saved countless lives because people were able to make emergency calls.
In terms of communication the Internet has surpassed dial tone. A child that's born into a low income family didn't choose that life but he/she should have a chance to get work him or herself out of it. Every year that becomes increasingly harder without Internet access at home.
There's not many of us that has at least one family member, a grandparent or great grandparent, that didn't benefit greatly from some sort of government plan and helped them better their lives and in turn bettered yours.
There is almost nothing under the sun the government does that cannot be done better and for less money by private industry. Dependencies and fraud are created under these programs and the "benefits" are really all corruptions of markets.
Some subscribers may notice a “Universal Service” line item on their telephone bills. This line item appears when a company chooses to recover its USF contributions directly from its customers by billing them this charge. The FCC does not require this charge to be passed on to customers. Each company makes a business decision about whether and how to assess charges to recover its Universal Service costs.
Is there any company that does not pass on this "Universal Service" charge to their customers?
Before the telcos came out with the 'all you can eat' plans they charged by usage on a 'per call' basis not 'per minute' the way long distance calls were billed. Fixed and low income people were allowed to stay on that billing style after the unlimited plans were introduced because their usage was so low. Having that phone line has saved countless lives because people were able to make emergency calls.
In terms of communication the Internet has surpassed dial tone. A child that's born into a low income family didn't choose that life but he/she should have a chance to get work him or herself out of it. Every year that becomes increasingly harder without Internet access at home.
There's not many of us that has at least one family member, a grandparent or great grandparent, that didn't benefit greatly from some sort of government plan and helped them better their lives and in turn bettered yours.
There is almost nothing under the sun the government does that cannot be done better and for less money by private industry. Dependencies and fraud are created under these programs and the "benefits" are really all corruptions of markets.
Except that telcos have never been a 'private industry'. They were given a natural monopoly with tons of governmental regulations so that they couldn't abuse that power. The cost of doing this is miniscule compared to all the corporate welfare the government doles out.
Except that telcos have never been a 'private industry'. They were given a natural monopoly with tons of governmental regulations so that they couldn't abuse that power. The cost of doing this is miniscule compared to all the corporate welfare the government doles out.
The idea of "natural monopolies" exists, but I've found its actually just an excuse to maintain a pro-government point of view. For example, the idea that electric utilities are a "natural monopoly" is easily knocked down when one considers all of the myriad ways electricity is generated. A government controlled monopoly is only "essesntial" to maintain control over lucrative markets in which actual competition would provide innovation and squeeze out inefficiencies that lead to enormous public works projects instead of things such as Elon Musk's recently revealed solar, plus home battery system which would enable people to get off the grid.
You're right about the origins of AT&T. It WAS a monopoly and that ONLY happened because of the collusion between government and industry...NOT a "natural monopoly" at all.
All these pass thru fees, instead of Federal Income Tax, are corruption at it's finest. If the Feds pass the law, it should be a Federal Income Tax; States pass the law, it should be a State Income Tax.
All of the government Aid programs are pretty much a failure. They may start off with good intentions, but it does not take long for corruption to be rampant.
I sometimes stand in Awe at the Food Stamp or Government Aid Credit Card program. What abuse there is. While there are limitations set, the abuse is rampant. People actually swap food credits for tobacco and alcohol, etc. The basic premise of helping the needy has been compromised.
The Lifeline Program is no different. This should be a Federal Income Tax, not a "Fee Added" to my cell phone bill. I would question how many people who have LifeLine limit their calls , data, & internet usage to dealing with medical care, job searches, calls for help, etc. i.e., the purposes or needs for which the program was intended. No doubt there is no desire for this or any Administration to reduce benefits or beneficiaries - when has government put themselves out of a job - no reason to do so. Building Bureaucracies is how they are promoted.
I hope this situation does not extend to Tablets & Computers. Voice Calls are all that are needed and perhaps not that. They can just give those on welfare or unemployment an extra 10$ or so per month and stop this program. Same for other programs that are nothing more than subsidized programs.
I am all for helping those in need, but not for blatant fraud.
The reason people are dependent on government programs is because the private sector believes profits for stock holders comes first and the poor should not even make a living wage.
Yeah, it's all the fault of the private sector...the ones who actually create jobs. Got it.
(The poor are increasingly made from lower middle class people which have lost employment and lack higher education and the skills they need to be part of modern day (post industrial) America. I know many people that have sunken into this category, they have worked hard all their lives and are not lazy but if you need to see them as the villains to make sense of the world then I guess there is nothing I can say to change your mind.
Spare me your third grade understanding of economics and strawman arguments. Try actually reading and learning to reason.
Except that telcos have never been a 'private industry'. They were given a natural monopoly with tons of governmental regulations so that they couldn't abuse that power. The cost of doing this is miniscule compared to all the corporate welfare the government doles out.
The idea of "natural monopolies" exists, but I've found its actually just an excuse to maintain a pro-government point of view. For example, the idea that electric utilities are a "natural monopoly" is easily knocked down when one considers all of the myriad ways electricity is generated. A government controlled monopoly is only "essesntial" to maintain control over lucrative markets in which actual competition would provide innovation and squeeze out inefficiencies that lead to enormous public works projects instead of things such as Elon Musk's recently revealed solar, plus home battery system which would enable people to get off the grid.
You're right about the origins of AT&T. It WAS a monopoly and that ONLY happened because of the collusion between government and industry...NOT a "natural monopoly" at all.
Your utopian business world will never exist. When companies can't differentiate their product nobody wins. We're seeing that right now with the Android manufacturers, they'd all be dead if they didn't have other sources of revenue.
Your utopian business world will never exist. When companies can't differentiate their product nobody wins. We're seeing that right now with the Android manufacturers, they'd all be dead if they didn't have other sources of revenue.
I don't understand what you're saying here. Is this an argument in favor of IP theft?
I don't understand what you're saying here. Is this an argument in favor of IP theft?
This seems to be the ultimate strawman thread, wouldn't you agree? Every time either one of us posts about passing on costs and how business operates, someone shelves another argument into our mouths.
Your utopian business world will never exist. When companies can't differentiate their product nobody wins. We're seeing that right now with the Android manufacturers, they'd all be dead if they didn't have other sources of revenue.
I don't understand what you're saying here. Is this an argument in favor of IP theft?
I don’t think for a second that Samsung's success came because they copied Apple. A lot of their success was because the other manufacturers weren't making any compelling devices. The other OEMs were making too many models and still making exclusive deals with certain carriers.
As many have pointed out that access to the Internet has become a necessity. The actual cost to each tax paying American is miniscule and not really worth complaining about. I am always amused how people use things like this to point out the failings of the government or a particular political party or politician. To point out a real economic problem, a couple of years ago I had major surgery and just the hospital bill for 5 days was $198,000. Who would have thought 5 days in the hospital would cost more than a 4 year degree at Stanford. God forbid we subsidize broadband. It is not economically sustainable. This should get the anti ACA people all lathered up.
But this "fee" is not paid for by all the tax paying Americans from their federal income taxes. It is paid for by all the Americans with cell phones and data plans. And it's a percentage of the cost of their plans. For Americans with a $150 family plan (with data) they may be paying $8.00 a month for this "fee", the cost is not minuscule. It is only minuscule for the Americans that are on one of these subsidized plan, as they don't have to pay the "fee" at all.
What the Feds should do is mandate that all carrier service providers must provide low income Americans with an affordable plan and then give the carrier providers a tax break for maintaining such a plan. Then we would see these carrier providers competing to get as many low income people on these plans just to get the tax break for using up some of the extra bandwidth they have. But giving corporations a tax break, for any reason, is not part of the Liberal agenda. They think giving any tax breaks to corporations and the rich is the same as robbing from the poor.
I don’t think for a second that Samsung's success came because they copied Apple. A lot of their success was because the other manufacturers weren't making any compelling devices. The other OEMs were making too many models and still making exclusive deals with certain carriers.
Well, one can argue that the reason the other manufacturers weren't making any compelling devices was because their phones didn't resemble an iPhone. After all, they all had access to the same Android. But you still got to give Samsung credit for not thinking like Microsoft, Nokia and Blackberry in thinking early on that the iPhone was only a fad and by the time they realized it wasn't, it was too late.
I don’t think for a second that Samsung's success came because they copied Apple. A lot of their success was because the other manufacturers weren't making any compelling devices. The other OEMs were making too many models and still making exclusive deals with certain carriers.
Are you kidding me? Their success ONLY came as a result of blatantly copying Apple, who was the obvious market leader in multi-touch phones.
Comments
So who should get health care? We all pay for other people's health care either through taxes or when we pay for a company's products and/or services.
I am against this. Broadband internet is not a human right.
Human rights are what we decide they are.
I see the shopping carts of fat people with children in tow who pay with their items using foodstamps, and their carts are filled with items like ice cream, potato chips, sodas. These people are not in need, and if they need a phone or the internet, then they can easily scrape together the money if it was important to them. Let them go without buying a $200 pair of sneakers, I'm sure that they can make that sacrifice.
ZOMG!!1! Welfare queens in cadillacs, dogs and cats living together, mass pandamonium.
Before the telcos came out with the 'all you can eat' plans they charged by usage on a 'per call' basis not 'per minute' the way long distance calls were billed. Fixed and low income people were allowed to stay on that billing style after the unlimited plans were introduced because their usage was so low. Having that phone line has saved countless lives because people were able to make emergency calls.
In terms of communication the Internet has surpassed dial tone. A child that's born into a low income family didn't choose that life but he/she should have a chance to get work him or herself out of it. Every year that becomes increasingly harder without Internet access at home.
There's not many of us that has at least one family member, a grandparent or great grandparent, that didn't benefit greatly from some sort of government plan and helped them better their lives and in turn bettered yours.
Cadillacs? The welfare queens in Brooklyn drive Benzs
"ObamaFraud: Everyone's doin' it!"
There is almost nothing under the sun the government does that cannot be done better and for less money by private industry. Dependencies and fraud are created under these programs and the "benefits" are really all corruptions of markets.
Some subscribers may notice a “Universal Service” line item on their telephone bills. This line item appears when a company chooses to recover its USF contributions directly from its customers by billing them this charge. The FCC does not require this charge to be passed on to customers. Each company makes a business decision about whether and how to assess charges to recover its Universal Service costs.
Is there any company that does not pass on this "Universal Service" charge to their customers?
Basic economics...
Except that telcos have never been a 'private industry'. They were given a natural monopoly with tons of governmental regulations so that they couldn't abuse that power. The cost of doing this is miniscule compared to all the corporate welfare the government doles out.
The idea of "natural monopolies" exists, but I've found its actually just an excuse to maintain a pro-government point of view. For example, the idea that electric utilities are a "natural monopoly" is easily knocked down when one considers all of the myriad ways electricity is generated. A government controlled monopoly is only "essesntial" to maintain control over lucrative markets in which actual competition would provide innovation and squeeze out inefficiencies that lead to enormous public works projects instead of things such as Elon Musk's recently revealed solar, plus home battery system which would enable people to get off the grid.
You're right about the origins of AT&T. It WAS a monopoly and that ONLY happened because of the collusion between government and industry...NOT a "natural monopoly" at all.
Cadillacs? The welfare queens in Brooklyn drive Benzs
I think those are called "mob wives"
All of the government Aid programs are pretty much a failure. They may start off with good intentions, but it does not take long for corruption to be rampant.
I sometimes stand in Awe at the Food Stamp or Government Aid Credit Card program. What abuse there is. While there are limitations set, the abuse is rampant. People actually swap food credits for tobacco and alcohol, etc. The basic premise of helping the needy has been compromised.
The Lifeline Program is no different. This should be a Federal Income Tax, not a "Fee Added" to my cell phone bill. I would question how many people who have LifeLine limit their calls , data, & internet usage to dealing with medical care, job searches, calls for help, etc. i.e., the purposes or needs for which the program was intended. No doubt there is no desire for this or any Administration to reduce benefits or beneficiaries - when has government put themselves out of a job - no reason to do so. Building Bureaucracies is how they are promoted.
I hope this situation does not extend to Tablets & Computers. Voice Calls are all that are needed and perhaps not that. They can just give those on welfare or unemployment an extra 10$ or so per month and stop this program. Same for other programs that are nothing more than subsidized programs.
I am all for helping those in need, but not for blatant fraud.
Yeah, it's all the fault of the private sector...the ones who actually create jobs. Got it.
Spare me your third grade understanding of economics and strawman arguments. Try actually reading and learning to reason.
Your utopian business world will never exist. When companies can't differentiate their product nobody wins. We're seeing that right now with the Android manufacturers, they'd all be dead if they didn't have other sources of revenue.
I don't understand what you're saying here. Is this an argument in favor of IP theft?
This seems to be the ultimate strawman thread, wouldn't you agree? Every time either one of us posts about passing on costs and how business operates, someone shelves another argument into our mouths.
I don’t think for a second that Samsung's success came because they copied Apple. A lot of their success was because the other manufacturers weren't making any compelling devices. The other OEMs were making too many models and still making exclusive deals with certain carriers.
As many have pointed out that access to the Internet has become a necessity. The actual cost to each tax paying American is miniscule and not really worth complaining about. I am always amused how people use things like this to point out the failings of the government or a particular political party or politician. To point out a real economic problem, a couple of years ago I had major surgery and just the hospital bill for 5 days was $198,000. Who would have thought 5 days in the hospital would cost more than a 4 year degree at Stanford. God forbid we subsidize broadband. It is not economically sustainable. This should get the anti ACA people all lathered up.
But this "fee" is not paid for by all the tax paying Americans from their federal income taxes. It is paid for by all the Americans with cell phones and data plans. And it's a percentage of the cost of their plans. For Americans with a $150 family plan (with data) they may be paying $8.00 a month for this "fee", the cost is not minuscule. It is only minuscule for the Americans that are on one of these subsidized plan, as they don't have to pay the "fee" at all.
What the Feds should do is mandate that all carrier service providers must provide low income Americans with an affordable plan and then give the carrier providers a tax break for maintaining such a plan. Then we would see these carrier providers competing to get as many low income people on these plans just to get the tax break for using up some of the extra bandwidth they have. But giving corporations a tax break, for any reason, is not part of the Liberal agenda. They think giving any tax breaks to corporations and the rich is the same as robbing from the poor.
I don’t think for a second that Samsung's success came because they copied Apple. A lot of their success was because the other manufacturers weren't making any compelling devices. The other OEMs were making too many models and still making exclusive deals with certain carriers.
Well, one can argue that the reason the other manufacturers weren't making any compelling devices was because their phones didn't resemble an iPhone. After all, they all had access to the same Android. But you still got to give Samsung credit for not thinking like Microsoft, Nokia and Blackberry in thinking early on that the iPhone was only a fad and by the time they realized it wasn't, it was too late.
I don’t think for a second that Samsung's success came because they copied Apple. A lot of their success was because the other manufacturers weren't making any compelling devices. The other OEMs were making too many models and still making exclusive deals with certain carriers.
Are you kidding me? Their success ONLY came as a result of blatantly copying Apple, who was the obvious market leader in multi-touch phones.