White House Unveils ConnectHome For Low-Income Households

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
While broadband for low-income households is fine and dandy, how are these people going to get online without a computer or other internet connected device?

Dubbed ConnectHome, the new initiative will bring high-speed broadband access to over 275,000 low-income households across the US. According to the White House, the pilot program will launch in 27 cities including New York, Boston and Seattle, as well as the Choctaw Tribal Nation in Oklahoma. The effort will initially connect nearly 200,000 children to the Web, according to the White House.
Click to expand...
 
I'm sorry but I do not think my tax dollars should be needed for this. If said people need internet access there are things called Libraries! Go there as I used to do that when I was in high school in the late 90's. My parents could not afford a computer so I had to use what I could then.
 
ManofGod said:
Well, of course we are going to be buying computers for said low income households of course. :D:(
Click to expand...
Truancy is a big issue among some low income people. I can see the federal government encourage some to sign up for online learning schools which provide a computer for the student to take classes from home.
 
I'm curious as to how this will be rolled out and what change it might have for other than these specific people to get access to things. Rural growth is important as much as it is for specifically low income. If someone's laying new fiber, I would certainly hope it's not 'poor people only' fiber.
 
Wow looks like you've worked really hard to buy all this neat stuff. Now lets give half of it to someone who wont work for it.
 
AthlonXP said:
I'm sorry but I do not think my tax dollars should be needed for this. If said people need internet access there are things called Libraries! Go there as I used to do that when I was in high school in the late 90's. My parents could not afford a computer so I had to use what I could then.
Click to expand...
In the 90's, computer use in schools was nowhere near as prevalent as it is today, and the libraries would be completely overloaded if all those kids showed up.
When you see what kids do online for school these days, it's pretty crazy.

And you know what, I'd much rather pay tax towards education in this fashion, directly benefiting those kids or learning adults. It's a good leg up to give.
 
Steve said:
While broadband for low-income households is fine and dandy, how are these people going to get online without a computer or other internet connected device?
Click to expand...
With their Obama phones and school provided Obama iPads of course.

We need programs to help people in need get back on their feet so they can support themselves and contribute to society, but I fear that Democrats have learned that they can buy voters for life by essentially distributing cheap hammocks... here, lie back, your life will be sucky and mediocre, but comfortable.
 
Ducman69 said:
With their Obama phones[...]
Click to expand...
Another idiot.

The president has no direct impact on the program, and one could hardly call these devices "Obama Phones,". This specific program, SafeLink, started under President George Bush, with grants from an independent company created under President Bill Clinton, which was a legacy of an act passed under President Franklin Roosevelt, which was influenced by an agreement reached between telecommunications companies and the administration of President Woodrow Wilson.
 
Steve said:
While broadband for low-income households is fine and dandy, how are these people going to get online without a computer or other internet connected device?
Click to expand...
The lifeline (obamaphone) program already gives away wifi capable phones, they just don't come with any cellular data service.

I picked up a Lumia 635 for $1 from bestbuy.
You can get a quad core tablet at microcenter or walmart for $30-$50.
Options abound.
 
Keep in mind this is the 2010s where everything is going mobile. Sure, you and I still use computers, but even in 2nd (eg. China) and 3rd (eg. Haiti) world countries - let alone the States - EVERYONE has a cell phone. So, as long as they've got internet to connect to, they can still get online, communicate, read, check Facebook, job search, etc. So, we the tax payers will likely be supplying them with modem/wireless-router combo boxes, but we don't need to provide them with actual computers.

What is interesting to me is the word "broadband" that keeps getting thrown around here, that was redefined earlier this year as 25 Mbps. I can't even get "broadband" under this definition in my town of 30,000+ people that is 15 miles away from a city of 250,000 people!
 
AthlonXP said:
I'm sorry but I do not think my tax dollars should be needed for this. If said people need internet access there are things called Libraries! Go there as I used to do that when I was in high school in the late 90's. My parents could not afford a computer so I had to use what I could then.
Click to expand...

Our tax dollars already go to supplying that Internet access at the libraries. Mine has WiFi available 24/7 and it is not uncommon to see people sitting in the parking lot on their laptops/tablets. Our school buildings have unsecured WiFi networks as well and the scene is very similar to the library. The park in the middle of town has WiFi. Some of the people living adjacent to the park don't have their own Internet connections because the free one is available to them.

Between the infrastructure subsidization, proliferation of free public/municipal WiFi, and now the free hookup in the home, we might as well just socialize the entire ISP system. I'm not against providing assistance to the poor. Providing for necessities like food and healthcare make sense. I'm not sure that Internet access is on that same level (not to mention that with all of the money constantly funneled into infrastructure, we still have large swaths of countryside without high-speed Internet access).

I listened to the news of the announcement on NPR yesterday. They followed up by interviewing several important people who all justified the expenditure by saying that a lack of high-speed Internet access was preventing poor people from getting good jobs and not being poor anymore. I see it as more of a minor inconvenience and I seriously question our government's motivations. We aren't creating enough good jobs for those that are already engaged in the workforce...
 
kingsleytim said:
Wow looks like you've worked really hard to buy all this neat stuff. Now lets give half of it to someone who wont work for it.
Click to expand...

There is nothing more annoying in todays world than this ignorant notion that low income = refuse to work. It really shows where you get your news (propaganda) from.

You know that person working at walmart, the gas station, restaraunt etc. All these people you deal with every damn day... They are working and are still low income.

I would rather see my tax dollars going to help some kids have internet access at home that otherwise wouldnt than see another fucking tank get bought for 10x what it cost to make just to sit in a fucking parking lot and get sold off to an "Ally" in a few years for a massive loss. Or another corporate tax break for some fuck that just lives to see another digit next to his net worth.

You guys that get mad at your tax dollars going to some poor people are utterly disgusting human beings. You run around justifying it by pretending everyone poor is a degenerate criminal when you are the degenerates. We spend a tiny fraction of our taxes on welfare and programs like this. We give more in tax breaks to already rich corporations and we have a defense budget that is out of control yet we cant even afford things to protect our fucking soldiers... We could use better body armor but its too expensive instead we buy tanks and jets that sit in lots until they are sold at a loss to so called allies.

If you are mad at the poor you are completely and utterly clueless to the world around you. :rolleyes:
 
The internet is now a human right?
What's next? Govt. funded cars? If anything transportation to your job is more important than checking your FB status.
 
AthlonXP said:
I'm sorry but I do not think my tax dollars should be needed for this. If said people need internet access there are things called Libraries! Go there as I used to do that when I was in high school in the late 90's. My parents could not afford a computer so I had to use what I could then.
Click to expand...

Pretty much this. So sick of free hand outs most go to scum of the earth abusing or taking advantage of these programs designed for those that need them. I spent many a hour at the public library using g Netscape, even, lol
 
So, people who do not qualify yet can't afford internet will still have to pay taxes into the program, making their ability to eventually get access even harder.

Smart plan.
 
I can tell a few people commenting have not bothered reading the article yet. The only anticipated government spending on this project is $50,000 from the Department of Agriculture to the Choctaw Nation for broadband equipment. The Choctaw Nation covers something like 14 counties in southeast Oklahoma, which are very rural and have some the highest rates of unemployment in the state. So hopefully the money is being spent to help deploy broadband in those areas. The overwhelming majority of the money has been committed by companies and foundations.
 
Disposed said:
There is nothing more annoying in todays world than this ignorant notion that low income = refuse to work. It really shows where you get your news (propaganda) from.

You know that person working at walmart, the gas station, restaraunt etc. All these people you deal with every damn day... They are working and are still low income.

I would rather see my tax dollars going to help some kids have internet access at home that otherwise wouldnt than see another fucking tank get bought for 10x what it cost to make just to sit in a fucking parking lot and get sold off to an "Ally" in a few years for a massive loss. Or another corporate tax break for some fuck that just lives to see another digit next to his net worth.

You guys that get mad at your tax dollars going to some poor people are utterly disgusting human beings. You run around justifying it by pretending everyone poor is a degenerate criminal when you are the degenerates. We spend a tiny fraction of our taxes on welfare and programs like this. We give more in tax breaks to already rich corporations and we have a defense budget that is out of control yet we cant even afford things to protect our fucking soldiers... We could use better body armor but its too expensive instead we buy tanks and jets that sit in lots until they are sold at a loss to so called allies.

If you are mad at the poor you are completely and utterly clueless to the world around you. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Firstly you want to downplay the sizes of our welfare state and pretend its all 'working poor'. That's crock.

But in reference to the jobs you mentioned, No one ever expected the jobs you just rattle off to take someone from cradle to grave in comfort with or without a family. Those are part time, teenager, 2nd earner jobs. The problem is an unrealistic expectation those jobs ever would provide that. Those are stepping stone jobs to get to better jobs.

But it requires work to get better work, but when there's less and less realized gain in getting better work that kills that. It also requires a good economy so those better jobs exist and we know the socialism do anything but that.

So you want to use the socialisms to make crap jobs good jobs and believe that doesn't have any adverse side effects. Good fucking luck with that.
 
Kueller said:
The lifeline (obamaphone) program already gives away wifi capable phones, they just don't come with any cellular data service.

I picked up a Lumia 635 for $1 from bestbuy.
You can get a quad core tablet at microcenter or walmart for $30-$50.
Options abound.
Click to expand...

Certainly. Options also abound for people to prioritize their expenditures. I grew up on welfare. I experienced it first hand. My mom made sure that we had the necessities. We didn't have a hell of a lot else.

Assuming that Internet access at home is now a necessity (because we can't have kids today reading encyclopedias, going to the public library, or staying after school to do research for their homework like I had to when I was in grade school) then their parents can factor it into their monthly budgets.

Time Warner offers a basic service of 1Mbps down, 768Kbps up for $14.95/month in my area. It isn't the greatest service in the world, but it is enough to get homework done or submit online job applications (the two largest justifications parroted so far). Given that we are in a rural area with a higher ratio of infrastructure costs per subscriber (not my words, it is literally what Time Warner argued in order to get additional subsidies out of Cuomo) I can only imagine that it must be available elsewhere for an equally modest fee.

Being poor sucks. Being a member of the middle class and footing the bill for all of these government programs sucks too. Helping out those that are less fortunate is honorable, but there has to be a limit, otherwise you run the risk of alienating the people that are picking up the tab.
 
You really think govt spending will be kept at $50,000? This is just the beginning of the program. Remember the initial cost of Obamacare vs reality?
 
We'll buy them the computers. Cause everyone should have one. Then we'll buy them sports cars. Cause everyone should have one. Then we'll buy them large houses and designers clothes. Cause everyone should have them. etc.
 
jpm100 said:
Firstly you want to downplay the sizes of our welfare state and pretend its all 'working poor'. That's crock.

But in reference to the jobs you mentioned, No one ever expected the jobs you just rattle off to take someone from cradle to grave in comfort with or without a family. Those are part time, teenager, 2nd earner jobs. The problem is an unrealistic expectation those jobs ever would provide that. Those are stepping stone jobs to get to better jobs.

But it requires work to get better work, but when there's less and less realized gain in getting better work that kills that. It also requires a good economy so those better jobs exist and we know the socialism do anything but that.

So you want to use the socialisms to make crap jobs good jobs and believe that doesn't have any adverse side effects. Good fucking luck with that.
Click to expand...

More ignorant bullshit for the manipulated masses. "The jobs are intended for teenagers or part time" is the stupidest fucking thing i have ever heard in defense of this shit.

Socialisms? You are still on that ignorant socialism shit? It just shows how completely disconnected you are from reality.

Im not downplaying welfare im simply stating facts. If you are mad about where your tax dollars are going and you are blaming welfare you are flat out retarded and should pull your head from your ass and see where your taxes are actually going. Not even 10% of the federal budget and you idiots still want to blame the poor for your taxes being taken.
 
lollerwaffle said:
Another idiot.

The president has no direct impact on the program, and one could hardly call these devices "Obama Phones,". This specific program, SafeLink, started under President George Bush, with grants from an independent company created under President Bill Clinton, which was a legacy of an act passed under President Franklin Roosevelt, which was influenced by an agreement reached between telecommunications companies and the administration of President Woodrow Wilson.
Click to expand...

It was a joke. Humor. Which apparently Democrats do not have. And, like a true Obama zealot, you always end up somehow bringing in previous administrations as an example of re-direction and justification of his (Obaaaama's) actions...You sir, are the idiot.
 
lollerwaffle said:
Another idiot.

The president has no direct impact on the program, and one could hardly call these devices "Obama Phones,". This specific program, SafeLink, started under President George Bush, with grants from an independent company created under President Bill Clinton, which was a legacy of an act passed under President Franklin Roosevelt, which was influenced by an agreement reached between telecommunications companies and the administration of President Woodrow Wilson.
Click to expand...

Who the hell is Woodrow Wilson I didn't vote for that communist.
 
This will be a really good thing for the poor people. Think of all the money they will save on their cable and satellite TV services when they cut the cord and just torrent all their TV shows!
 
Disposed said:
There is nothing more annoying in todays world than this ignorant notion that low income = refuse to work. It really shows where you get your news (propaganda) from.

You know that person working at walmart, the gas station, restaraunt etc. All these people you deal with every damn day... They are working and are still low income.

I would rather see my tax dollars going to help some kids have internet access at home that otherwise wouldnt than see another fucking tank get bought for 10x what it cost to make just to sit in a fucking parking lot and get sold off to an "Ally" in a few years for a massive loss. Or another corporate tax break for some fuck that just lives to see another digit next to his net worth.

You guys that get mad at your tax dollars going to some poor people are utterly disgusting human beings. You run around justifying it by pretending everyone poor is a degenerate criminal when you are the degenerates. We spend a tiny fraction of our taxes on welfare and programs like this. We give more in tax breaks to already rich corporations and we have a defense budget that is out of control yet we cant even afford things to protect our fucking soldiers... We could use better body armor but its too expensive instead we buy tanks and jets that sit in lots until they are sold at a loss to so called allies.

If you are mad at the poor you are completely and utterly clueless to the world around you. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Nobody said REFUSE to work. Get your facts straight. I used to work at walmart and lived within my means. Then I worked harder and got a full time career and can now afford the luxuries and other items. You earn it, not get it with handouts. There are plenty of programs available for low income families to move forward and make a better life for themselves. And most of my check goes into welfare and these other services that a lot of other states have no conception of. A lot of us already feel the burden of these govt programs and another adding on to the camels back will eventually break it.
 
*checks for knee jerk reactions from goobers that are mad that some people might get something they need

Leaves satisfied
 
The only thing this "free internet" will be used for is WorldStarHipHop and porn.
 
The poorest people in the US are the ones with the most up-to-date smartphones with data plans and everything it seems.... Yet the business people I work with that make a decent paycheck are still using flip phones.

Go figure. It's just like every other government program - prime for abuse and 90%+ abused. I always feel for the 10% that use things legitimately, but overall it is completely unnecessary. Last I heard, libraries have computers. Libraries have internet. This will just be porn for low income housing.
 
Steve said:
While broadband for low-income households is fine and dandy, how are these people going to get online without a computer or other internet connected device?
Click to expand...

Did you read the article? There were also provisions listed for supplying people with computers. Also there were mention to a stat that claims a large percentage of the low income households do have a computer but not signed up for broadband service.
 
Disposed said:
More ignorant bullshit for the manipulated masses. "The jobs are intended for teenagers or part time" is the stupidest fucking thing i have ever heard in defense of this shit.

Socialisms? You are still on that ignorant socialism shit? It just shows how completely disconnected you are from reality.

Im not downplaying welfare im simply stating facts. If you are mad about where your tax dollars are going and you are blaming welfare you are flat out retarded and should pull your head from your ass and see where your taxes are actually going. Not even 10% of the federal budget and you idiots still want to blame the poor for your taxes being taken.
Click to expand...

You need a Snickers?! :D
 
Lollipop said:
Need?
Click to expand...

Literally everything is done online now
Applying for jobs
Accessing medical information
Interacting with state and local governments
Applying for snap or tanf

Our society has become so dependant on and integrated with internet access that it is basically a human right at this point.
 
maverikv said:
Literally everything is done online now
Applying for jobs
Accessing medical information
Interacting with state and local governments
Applying for snap or tanf

Our society has become so dependant on and integrated with internet access that it is basically a human right at this point.
Click to expand...

So why can't the poor be expected to learn to budget more wisely? I do! I make low 6 figures as a Piper and live more frugal than those on Gov’t assistance. I see poor folks with fancy rims and stereo systems in their cars that I MUST compensate for. Nothing should be a guaranteed human right. You get what you earn in life. Or that’s how it was before the entitled took over. One day it’ll crumble…and I’ll be a GAWD! LOL
 
bigdogchris said:
Truancy is a big issue among some low income people. I can see the federal government encourage some to sign up for online learning schools which provide a computer for the student to take classes from home.
Click to expand...

You think that a household with people that are too lazy or too drunk/stoned to get their kids to school would be a good candidate for home schooling?

You have no idea how much work proper home schooling is.
 
rbarr110 said:
Did you read the article? There were also provisions listed for supplying people with computers. Also there were mention to a stat that claims a large percentage of the low income households do have a computer but not signed up for broadband service.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of places that will refurb old computers (not too old, either) and give to low income people, which includes a lot of retired or disabled seniors. I used to do this before I got my current job. I still would, but I got my used computers from people that did upgrades and such when I was doing that as a side job. We all have old computers when we upgrade. Some end up being recycled, some end up on Craigslist. Most sit in a closet until it's too old to even donate.

I don't like my taxes going to folks that don't work, either. It sucks. But, it helps out a lot of people, too. It's all or none, no middle ground. Same with defense. We're paying out the ass for shit that sits and depreciates that was built by a company that is invested in by politicians. They make money by us footing the bill. It's a dirty game.

Internet is becoming a need, probably moreso than a cheap phone. Looking for work, medical stuff, and yes - porn and playing games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top