U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-25-2009, 01:16 PM
 
32,052 posts, read 16,485,651 times
Reputation: 17185

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
There's a program to provide phone service for low income people also, but that one expects that you have a landline. Perhaps they're just updating it for the 21st century, where people are moving away from having landlines.
Landlines are expensive and maintenance-intensive. Wireless infrastructure, in particular in urban areas, is already established. Cheap handsets with limited airtime and no bandwidth-consuming applications enabled makes a heckuva lot of economic sense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-25-2009, 01:19 PM
 
Location: San Josť, CA
3,244 posts, read 5,758,051 times
Reputation: 3113
Thread: FAIL

Talk about a thread rant backfiring.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2009, 01:23 PM
 
Location: Some Beach... Somewhere...
4,755 posts, read 4,013,844 times
Reputation: 4899
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
That'd be me, and I have no issue.

So you are against rural areas having affordable phones. Glad we cleared that up.
If you have no issue, then why not agree to adopt a poor person and provide for their communications needs? If enough feel like you do, then everyone everywhere will have phones. Once we run out of the poor in this country, people can start adopting poor Chinese or Russian. Maybe Angelina Jolie and Madonna can make it fashionable to provide phones for poor Sudanese or Malawi.

So, you're in favor of the Socialist model of "from each according to his ability and to each accordign to his need"? Well, your guy is in the White House so such ideas will continue to be in vogue for at least another three years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2009, 01:26 PM
 
Location: San Antonio Texas
11,435 posts, read 16,424,207 times
Reputation: 5224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Workin_Hard View Post
If you have no issue, then why not agree to adopt a poor person and provide for their communications needs? If enough feel like you do, then everyone everywhere will have phones. Once we run out of the poor in this country, people can start adopting poor Chinese or Russian. Maybe Angelina Jolie and Madonna can make it fashionable to provide phones for poor Sudanese or Malawi.

So, you're in favor of the Socialist model of "from each according to his ability and to each accordign to his need"? Well, your guy is in the White House so such ideas will continue to be in vogue for at least another three years.
this is not an Obama thing. It is corporate welfare, pure and simple. it is big companies using the taxpayer windfall that the gov't willingly provides to the companies' benefit. the companies are doing this b/c THEY CAN. It has nothing to do with Obama and everything to do with the lobbyists and their stranglehold on Congress.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2009, 01:27 PM
 
Location: West Michigan
12,359 posts, read 7,717,390 times
Reputation: 7213
Quote:
Originally Posted by wehotex View Post
I'm sure that the gov will subsidize only up to so much, and then the rest is up to the cell phone subscriber himself. some of those ghetto rats will pony up the extra $$ to have fancy features that previous generations with scruples would have "done without". One year when I was on state disablity (just for fun), I applied for the low income subsidy for telephone service that I have been extorted for all of my working years. to my shock, i actually qualified based on $0 income (state disabilty does not count in their formula) and lied about my savings. I was able to qualify for about 1 year and a half where I did not have to pay the USF and the basic fee for my phone service, which halved my monthly bill!

You have to understand that I lived in an entitlement state (calif) where everyday I was subjected to seeing ppl on state and fed assistance (many of them not even legal american citizens). I reached a point where I was tired of seeing these ppl get a free ride and I didn't.
No, I don't have to understand how you could apply for a state program and LIE about your savings so that you'd qualify for a benefit you obviously didn't deserve, given your lie. That makes you no better than the so-called "ghetto rats" that you are complaining about. I also see no appreciation in attitude for the government helping you out when you were on state disability. That is really sad.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2009, 01:30 PM
 
9,807 posts, read 13,405,375 times
Reputation: 8158
---------free cellphones--

There is no " free lunch"

There was none years ago, there is none today, there will be no free lunch tomorrow.

( just someone else mandated to do the paying )
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2009, 01:33 PM
 
Location: San Antonio Texas
11,435 posts, read 16,424,207 times
Reputation: 5224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayland Woman View Post
No, I don't have to understand how you could apply for a state program and LIE about your savings so that you'd qualify for a benefit you obviously didn't deserve, given your lie. That makes you no better than the so-called "ghetto rats" that you are complaining about. I also see no appreciation in attitude for the government helping you out when you were on state disability. That is really sad.
I challenge any of you to live in welfare-ridden so calif and tell me the same thing. Taxpayers are nickled and dimed to death every day. I am a single man with 0 dependents who pays a big portion of his taxes while ppl with families pay little to nothing. Ppl in other states tend not to believe how bad it is until they come to so calif and witness it for themselves. Why shouldn't I have been on state disability? they were deducting that from my paychecks and I certainly met the definition. I was paying for that. CA has an employee funded state mandated Disability Fund that i contributed into.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2009, 01:38 PM
 
Location: West Michigan
12,359 posts, read 7,717,390 times
Reputation: 7213
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
I agree it seems like the least of the worries for LOW income people, but a cell phone is useful if you happen to be homeless. You can't have a landline if you have no home to put it in. And they don't seem to put the number of the payphone you're calling from on the payphones any longer.

There's a program to provide phone service for low income people also, but that one expects that you have a landline. Perhaps they're just updating it for the 21st century, where people are moving away from having landlines. (Myself, I don't want to give up having a landline.) Telephones would seem to be necessary for work purposes or emergency services. Work can't call you to come in--or not come in--if you don't have a phone. And you can't call 911 if you don't have a phone. While I can't think of any reason I'd be willing to call 911, that doesn't mean other people do not call for help.

What's your alternative? Emergency services given only if you have the means to pay for them? Up front?
Great points you're making above. People are forgetting that there has been a program in place for years and years for low cost, basic land line services for the poor. The cell phone program is really just an extension of that and a real asset to the homeless who are looking for jobs or who might need 911.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2009, 01:43 PM
 
Location: Some Beach... Somewhere...
4,755 posts, read 4,013,844 times
Reputation: 4899
Quote:
Originally Posted by wehotex View Post
Why shouldn't I have been on state disability? they were deducting that from my paychecks and I certainly met the definition. I was paying for that. CA has an employee funded state mandated Disability Fund that i contributed into.
If you met the definition of disabled, why would you not qualify? Or are you simply unable to lie your way into it? You admitted to lying to qualify for other benefits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2009, 01:49 PM
 
Location: West Michigan
12,359 posts, read 7,717,390 times
Reputation: 7213
Quote:
Originally Posted by wehotex View Post
I challenge any of you to live in welfare-ridden so calif and tell me the same thing. Taxpayers are nickled and dimed to death every day. I am a single man with 0 dependents who pays a big portion of his taxes while ppl with families pay little to nothing. Ppl in other states tend not to believe how bad it is until they come to so calif and witness it for themselves. Why shouldn't I have been on state disability? they were deducting that from my paychecks and I certainly met the definition. I was paying for that. CA has an employee funded state mandated Disability Fund that i contributed into.
I'm not question your right to be on state disability. I am assuming that if you didn't qualify then you wouldn't have made it through the application process to get on it. What I'm question is you LYING about your savings account to get additional free services such as the free cell phone.

As for paying lots of taxes while people with kids don't pay as much, I'm elderly and was "reproductively challenge" in my younger years so I understand what you are saying. HOWEVER, I look at all the extra taxes I've paid, including schools taxes I've never needed for the children I didn't have, etc., as an investment in our country's future. It's all in the attitude i.e. those kids are going to grow up and be the ones the elderly and disabled people have to depend on to show empathy in their time of need. Someone in the state of CA cared about your disability for you to get a helping hand when you needed it. But all is see is your resentment because you perceive someone else getting a little more.

Last edited by Wayland Woman; 12-25-2009 at 02:10 PM.. Reason: added last sentence
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:07 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top