FCC to Propose $1.7B Subsidized Internet Access for the Poor

Scythe

Gawd
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
546
I don't think anyone here is against giving someone a leg up, but there HAS to be limits.

Currently the welfare system is DESIGNED to keep people on it. There has to be a path to get off. If you are able bodied, and able to work....you could be cleaning streets, parks, etc. (Doing something for the people supporting you). Example....work with a city road crew. Yeah, you are getting less than those around you, but....you are giving something back to the taxpayer feeding/housing you AND you are learning a skill that can get you OFF of the dole.

In other words....do what everyone else did to become successful....work at it. Sitting on your ass and taking things should be demeaning. It's an incentive for you to get off your ass.
 

madcap magician

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 12, 2003
Messages
328
There's no such thing as free. Tax payers are paying in some form or fashion for these free phones.

I have to admit, if I could get a free phone i would, but since i make 20 times more I guess i'll have to pay for my own phone with this company that I own that I didn't build.
 

Jehuty

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
430
Reminds me of the guy with a $300,000 that refused to get Obamcare and said "I rather go blind"..

...Guy is now going blind, and is begging people for money to cover the medical costs that would have been covered under Obamacare. Oh and get this, most of the people who did give, were liberals, and not conservatives.

My point is, conservatives are all about the bootstraps until it happens to them. Then they become the hurt puppy that is all about appealing to people's kindness, and find themselves alone when the very people they used to support leaves them to hang. One of the best comments though was "I want to donate enough to really help you out, but I can't figure out how to get GoFundMe to accept bootstraps" which made me laugh heartily.

It's OK to accept a handout. Whether it be a phone, internet, or healthcare. We're one of the richest countries in the world, but we are way, way behind in quality of life compared to other countries.
 

Scythe

Gawd
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
546
Reminds me of the guy with a $300,000 that refused to get Obamcare and said "I rather go blind"..

...Guy is now going blind, and is begging people for money to cover the medical costs that would have been covered under Obamacare. Oh and get this, most of the people who did give, were liberals, and not conservatives.

My point is, conservatives are all about the bootstraps until it happens to them. Then they become the hurt puppy that is all about appealing to people's kindness, and find themselves alone when the very people they used to support leaves them to hang. One of the best comments though was "I want to donate enough to really help you out, but I can't figure out how to get GoFundMe to accept bootstraps" which made me laugh heartily.

It's OK to accept a handout. Whether it be a phone, internet, or healthcare. We're one of the richest countries in the world, but we are way, way behind in quality of life compared to other countries.

Nice story. Now...try posting facts. There's a whole lot of opinion in your post. :rolleyes:
 

{NG}Fidel

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
6,286
Wow..The misguided hate is strong.
You realize corporations take more taxpayer money.
 

Ducman69

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
10,542
Wow..The misguided hate is strong.
You realize corporations take more taxpayer money.
I don't agree, but lets say I do. That is the equivalent to a kid saying "Dad, stop wasting your money on prostitutes" and then the dad saying, "You know your Mom spent money on 23 pairs of shoes".

Even if its true, how exactly is that supposed to make someone say ohhhhhh, OK, well it all balances out then. *bangs head on table*

A wrong is a wrong, and pointing out some other wrong (real or imagined) doesn't somehow cancel out the other waste of taxpayer money.
 

tetris42

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
4,518
I don't agree, but lets say I do. That is the equivalent to a kid saying "Dad, stop wasting your money on prostitutes" and then the dad saying, "You know your Mom spent money on 23 pairs of shoes".

Even if its true, how exactly is that supposed to make someone say ohhhhhh, OK, well it all balances out then. *bangs head on table*

A wrong is a wrong, and pointing out some other wrong (real or imagined) doesn't somehow cancel out the other waste of taxpayer money.
Here you go:

http://thinkbynumbers.org/governmen...fare-statistics-vs-social-welfare-statistics/

Also I don't think he's saying that corporate spending makes everything okay, he's saying the scope of it dwarfs even the most antagonistic view of welfare spending. Plus, it somehow just doesn't feel right paying millions of tax dollars to corporations to literal millionaire CEOs and shareholders? Maybe that's just me, but I'd rather see my tax money go to some homeless guy, working or not, then someone who is literally a millionaire.
 

Semantics

2[H]4U
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
2,811
Point is, if I can get to a point where I am financially comfortable, so can other underprivileged people.
Man if I.T. was only that simple, "I'm sorry I can't seem to create the problem on my end thus it doesn't exist it must be your own fault *hang up*"
 

nilepez

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
11,821
No, most people are poor because they made bad choices: i.e. dropping out of school, using drugs (yes that includes pot), drinking heavily, having kids when they are young and unmarried, etc.

Yes, not everyone can be rich and live in a huge home on the beach and drive fancy cars.
But, making it into the middle class, and living a decent, comfortable life if not that hard.

It does take some hard work and self responsibility. Simple stay in school and get an education, work hard, wait to get married, don't have kids until after you are married and can afford it, and then stay married.

If drugs were relevant, then the disparity between whites and people of color would be negligible, because they consume at least half the drugs. If that was a deal breaker, I'd be out on the street and poor, because I've done most of them (and enjoyed every minute of it). If heaving alcohol consumption was a deal breaker, Bush wouldn't have been president (and every frat member would be a total loser on welfare).
 

rat

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,915
One of the best comments though was "I want to donate enough to really help you out, but I can't figure out how to get GoFundMe to accept bootstraps" which made me laugh heartily.

It's OK to accept a handout. Whether it be a phone, internet, or healthcare. We're one of the richest countries in the world, but we are way, way behind in quality of life compared to other countries.

That bootstraps remark is still the top comments on his GoFundMe page. As much as it can be seen to be a remark to the effect of kicking a man when he's down, I'm glad it was said.

As for the guy himself...

http://freakoutnation.com/2015/05/o...blind-is-done-with-the-gop-hindsight-is-2020/

He says he now no longer identifies with the GOP.

It's like how a friend told me: Everyone's a Republican until they need help.
 

nilepez

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
11,821

Aspendancer

Weaksauce
Joined
Aug 24, 2014
Messages
110
Hey Obama, I'm poor, please give me more free bandwith. Where do I sign up. I signed up[ for Obamacare for health insurance. Where is the government website to sign up for the free internet?
 

kac77

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
2,721
He no longer identifies as a republican and has stated that his main problem with the AHCA is that the SCOTUS allowed states to opt out (http://thinkprogress.org/health/2015/05/19/3660701/luis-lang-obamacare/)

Yeah but it's kind of late to switch political leanings after you go blind. The schadenfreude is too great to ignore.

At which point he tried to buy him some "Obamacare" only to discover that he was outside the open enrollment period and that with zero income, he makes too little to get a federal subsidy that would help him buy a private policy. "Obamacare" offers expanded Medicaid coverage to help people like him, but South Carolina is one of 21 Republican-led states that have refused to participate in that program.
http://www.freep.com/story/opinion/contributors/2015/05/18/obamacare-luis-lang-gofundme/27522079/

LOL
 

Jehuty

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
430
He says he now no longer identifies with the GOP.

It's like how a friend told me: Everyone's a Republican until they need help.

Yep! The thing is, the guy has a home valued at 300k. If he really was all about personal responsibility, he would sell his home and buy one valued at 200k or less so he could afford the treatment.

In one of his updates at the GoFundMe page, he talks about how nice liberals are for pitching in, and complained about republicans not doing the same. Dude was bitching and not just asking, but expecting, for people in 'his' party to contribute. He may no longer identify with the GOP, but that's only due to his selfishness.
 

rat

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,915
Hey Obama, I'm poor, please give me more free bandwith. Where do I sign up. I signed up[ for Obamacare for health insurance. Where is the government website to sign up for the free internet?

While it's not providing free internet, the program for telephone subsidy or free service is called the Lifeline Program.

To qualify, you have to be below 135% of the poverty line.

The rest of you bitching about poor people getting free cellphones... The program only gives about 120-200 free minutes per month. Feel free to drastically reduce your standard of living so you'd qualify for such of plan. It's not a luxury.
 
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Messages
806
If drugs were relevant, then the disparity between whites and people of color
We are ALL "people of color". If we did not have any sort of skin color, we'd be transparent. So this idiotic "people of color" moniker as applied to non-whites is just that: idiotic. "White" is NOT not a color.

Please stop continuing to promulgate the stupidity embodied in "people of color" as you had meant it.
 

tetris42

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
4,518
That's true. But it's not ok to force someone else to give that "handout" any more than it is to force a woman to have sex against her will.
It's relative. If one party or class is hoarding so much to the point that it's causing the majority of society to collapsing with people dying because of lack of resources, then forcing that "handout" becomes pretty damn justified. I mean that's the whole cause of the French Revolution.
 

rat

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,915
It's relative. If one party or class is hoarding so much to the point that it's causing the majority of society to collapsing with people dying because of lack of resources, then forcing that "handout" becomes pretty damn justified. I mean that's the whole cause of the French Revolution.

"Let them eat cake!"
 

Ticker305

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 25, 2011
Messages
1,077
Man what happened to us? The crooks in wall street gambled with other peoples money and brought the world to the brink of a catastrophic meltdown and here we are scapegoating the poor, working longer hours fighting for scraps. Open your eyes and direct your anger to the ones responsible for this because most of us are only one misfortune away from the welfare line.
 

Semantics

2[H]4U
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
2,811
We are ALL "people of color". If we did not have any sort of skin color, we'd be transparent. So this idiotic "people of color" moniker as applied to non-whites is just that: idiotic. "White" is NOT not a color.

Please stop continuing to promulgate the stupidity embodied in "people of color" as you had meant it.
Transparent isn't a color black is the absence of the radiation we perceive as color.
"Let them eat cake!"
Never proven to be said by her. Just more of a juxtaposition of the ruling class and the peasantry.
 

rat

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,915
Never proven to be said by her. Just more of a juxtaposition of the ruling class and the peasantry.

Historical (in)accuracy aside, the saying still remains a good indicator of the lesson to be learned from the event.

Man what happened to us? The crooks in wall street gambled with other peoples money and brought the world to the brink of a catastrophic meltdown and here we are scapegoating the poor, working longer hours fighting for scraps. Open your eyes and direct your anger to the ones responsible for this because most of us are only one misfortune away from the welfare line.

"Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires." - (Unconfirmed to be said by) John Steinbeck

"This country will not be a good place for any of us to live in unless we make it a good place for all of us to live in." - Theodore Roosevelt
 
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
531
Protip. It was Reagan who pushed for telecom deregulation and George HW Bush who signed the "Obamaphone" bill into law.

And it's an entirely self funded program. No taxes are used for the Lifeline Service. Less than 2 Billion is spent on this program yearly. As opposed to 6 Trillion (and counting) funneled to war profiteers like Haliburton and wasted on the mid east.

But hey, any excuse to froth at the mouth and be angry, facts be damned...

Reagan and Bush were either more moderate than they were conservative, or had to work and compromise with a Congress that was either dominated by Democrats (Bush, Reagan's final 2 years) or had a significant Democrat majority in the House of Representatives (Reagan's first 6 years).

$6 trillion (and counting) spent on defense since 9/11 is a lot, but pales in contrast to the money spent on another failed war: LBJ's War on Poverty, on which the government has wasted $22 trillion (and counting).
 
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
531
Reminds me of the guy with a $300,000 that refused to get Obamcare and said "I rather go blind"..

...Guy is now going blind, and is begging people for money to cover the medical costs that would have been covered under Obamacare. Oh and get this, most of the people who did give, were liberals, and not conservatives.

However, conservatives tend to donate a greater percentage of their income to charity than do liberals.

Overall, the states in which people gave the highest percentage of their adjusted gross incomes were also states that voted for Romney, while states in which people gave the lowest percentage of their adjusted gross income went for Obama. The top 17 states for rate of giving all went for Romney.
 

Phoenix333

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 27, 2009
Messages
3,510
They weren't wrong, keep Obama in president, they not just gunna get you an Obamaphone, they gunna do MORE!

We already have free public libraries, how about instead we get, *gasp*, JOBS for the poor. The poorest neighborhoods are usually the dirties too, so how about instead of paying for their internet, allow them to make money to buy internet by giving them plastic bags and letting them pick up trash? Something like the public works program, have them build some parks, man soup kitchens, and so forth. Anything to change the mindset of "gimmeegimmeegimee" entitlement to actually contributing to society. Otherwise we end up with a non-ending cycle of this bullcrap.

Because this is the reaction you'll always get when you try to get lazy-assed welfare sponges off their couches:

http://i2.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/002/135/sw50sw8sw578.gif
 

tetris42

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
4,518
Because this is the reaction you'll always get when you try to get lazy-assed welfare sponges off their couches:[/url]
Actually not really, that's an idea that has pretty good support of the people on both sides. On the left, having the government provide jobs to people who need them does WONDERS for labor practices of companies and fair wages, since they can't treat people like cattle so much if you can always go work for the government. People get an honest wage, infrastructure work gets done, everybody wins. On the right, this means nobody is being lazy, they still have to earn their living. Since this concept has potentially such huge support, of course we'll never implement it; because it's not in big money's interest.
 

Semantics

2[H]4U
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
2,811
http://www.theguardian.com/money/us-money-blog/2014/oct/09/wealthy-give-less-back-society
It was the rich. Americans making more than $100,000 a year cut the percentage of their income they gave to philanthropy by 3.3% between 2006 and 2012.

Those who earned less in salary actually gave more to the poor. In fact, according to a recent study by the Chronicle of Philanthropy, based on IRS data, those earning $25,000 or less donated an average of 16.6% of their adjusted gross income. By comparison, high-earning citizens gave only 4.6% of their incomes.
People give about the same and that doesn't adjust with income, it could just be our perception of generosity is more about how much you give not of how much of how capable you are to give. The article should point out that conservative states tend to have lower gross incomes than liberal states.
 

Scythe

Gawd
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
546
Funny thing about welare. Liberals say the folks are not lazy....conservatives think they are (stereotype).

Maine now requires people that receive food stamps to actually work. "able-bodied adults without dependents have to work 20 hours a week, volunteer, or be part of a work-training program to receive benefits after three months."

Amazingly enough....the food stamp rolls have dropped significantly. Liberals will say the governor of Maine is taking food out of peoples mouths when the truth is more akin to taking people who can, and should work off the rolls. In other words....it limits the abuse.
 
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Messages
806
It's relative.
So too then would be forcing a woman to have sex against her will.


If one party or class is hoarding so much to the point that it's causing the majority of society to collapsing with people dying because of lack of resources, then forcing that "handout" becomes pretty damn justified. I mean that's the whole cause of the French Revolution.
So it would be ok to force women to have sex against their will if they aren't "putting out"?
 
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Messages
806
Actually not really, that's an idea that has pretty good support of the people on both sides. On the left, having the government provide jobs to people who need them does WONDERS for labor practices of companies and fair wages, since they can't treat people like cattle so much if you can always go work for the government.
....where they get treated like cattle. And where they have to be paid somehow. Which means others have their property stolen from them to pay for the "government workers".
 

kac77

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
2,721
So it would be ok to force women to have sex against their will if they aren't "putting out"?

Nice hypothetical. Let us know when the outbreak of people not having sex becomes a problem. However, income disparities IS a problem now. It's not a hypothetical. Consolidation of resources in the few is something we have seen and understand.
 

kac77

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
2,721
....where they get treated like cattle. And where they have to be paid somehow. Which means others have their property stolen from them to pay for the "government workers".

Not really since they are actually getting something for it. If all state, local and federal services stopped what you would have is this...



I'm sure all of us would like to be Superman and impervious to the need for fresh water, medical services, or uncontaminated food. However, in our non-fiction based society a person actually needs all of these things. Despite the invention of the Internet you cannot be specialize as engineer, a surgeon specializing in heart transplants, a computer scientist, and a construction worker all at the same time. Furthermore, some services are so expensive they need to be done as a collective. Roads are a good example. Healthcare is another.

This notion that someone's wealth pays for every single need in full isn't just fanciful, it's an unmitigated steaming pile of bullshit on an hallucinogenic level. There's a big difference between thinking everything about you is awesome, and quite another to actually believe you are Superman.

Roads? Why do we need those since you can fly? Fresh water? Who needs that shit, since our skin provides all of the cultivated sustenance one would need to survive? Need a Doctor? What the hell is a doctor? The only thing that makes us sick is Kryptonite. If that sounds crazy to you, then congratulations you are not suffering from schizophrenia, however, if that all sounds plausible ( flying around the Earth in a blue suit) then seek medical care immediately.
 
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Messages
806
Nice hypothetical. Let us know when the outbreak of people not having sex becomes a problem. However, income disparities IS a problem now. It's not a hypothetical. Consolidation of resources in the few is something we have seen and understand.
So it's ok to force a woman to have sex against her will? If that makes you uncomfortable, perhaps you should consider your hypocrisy in thinking it's ok to steal from others just because you might think they have a penny more than you do.
 
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Messages
806
Not really since they are actually getting something for it.
When you pay protection money to the mafia, you are getting protection from them. So you're getting something for it.

If all state, local and federal services stopped what you would have is this...
{citation needed}

I'm sure all of us would like to be Superman and impervious to the need for fresh water, medical services, or uncontaminated food.
And I'm sure you're going to now show that those things can only be provided by government.

I'll wait.

However, in our non-fiction based society a person actually needs all of these things. Despite the invention of the Internet you cannot be specialize as engineer, a surgeon specializing in heart transplants, a computer scientist, and a construction worker all at the same time. Furthermore, some services are so expensive they need to be done as a collective. Roads are a good example. Healthcare is another.
{citation needed}
 

Retronym

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
13,608
FCC has yet to initialize over one third of the reforms they promised three years ago.

Maybe complete all your obligations and eliminate corruption before starting new programs?
 

nilepez

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
11,821
While it's not providing free internet, the program for telephone subsidy or free service is called the Lifeline Program.

To qualify, you have to be below 135% of the poverty line.

The rest of you bitching about poor people getting free cellphones... The program only gives about 120-200 free minutes per month. Feel free to drastically reduce your standard of living so you'd qualify for such of plan. It's not a luxury.

And last time I checked, we charged 10 bucks a month for that free service.
 
Top