• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should the Government Pay for Cell Phones?

Should the Government Pay for Cell Phones?

  • Total voters
    40
Alex

Alex

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,963
Reaction score
855
Location
Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
"Thousands of low-income Coloradans reliant on public assistance could get a free cellphone under a plan before the state Public Utilities Commission."

This is along the lines of the federal government program called Lifeline. Just about anyone on government assistance gets a free phone, and/or a reduction in their phone bill.

Is this something the government should be subsidizing? Is this something our tax dollars should go to?

Will people take advantage of this like some do every other government program?

Poor in Colorado may get free phones - The Denver Post
 
Alex said:
"Thousands of low-income Coloradans reliant on public assistance could get a free cellphone under a plan before the state Public Utilities Commission."

This is along the lines of the federal government program called Lifeline. Just about anyone on government assistance gets a free phone, and/or a reduction in their phone bill.

Is this something the government should be subsidizing? Is this something our tax dollars should go to?

Will people take advantage of this like some do every other government program?

Poor in Colorado may get free phones - The Denver Post
Click to expand...

Even though they only get a small amount of minutes, hell no, no ****ing way.

Not a ****ing chance, this **** is totally unnecessary.
 
A cellphone is not a necessity, so I'm not paying for someone else to have one.

And if you can't afford one, not my problem. It may take longer, but stamps are still relatively cheap (I think they're at $0.44 right now). So mail a friggin' letter.
 
Last edited:
Absolutely not. Talk about promoting dependence on government.
 
If you have a right to something, then you obvioulsy have the right to have it without paying for it.
 
Well I'll take the other side just for the sake of argument:

First, you're already paying for poor people to get cell phones.
I drove relative to the free clinic a while back, everyone in there was talking on cell phones.

Two, if the company in question is giving a *huge discount to the state, well that is more money that can be spent on needed items.

*the article didn't give a individual breakdown per person, but the discount must be pretty good if fifteen states have already approved it.

--
I can certainly understand those saying no, but practically, the costs are relatively low, and for those who are attempting to remain in the workforce, a phone is a must have.
 
Joe1991 said:
Well I'll take the other side just for the sake of argument:

First, you're already paying for poor people to get cell phones.
Click to expand...

In what world is this an argument in favor of expanding such a program?
 
Same thing is going on in Florida.

Hell no.
 
Absolutely not. This country ran just fine prior to cell phones, so those "poor" folks can use landlines. A cell phone is hardly a necessity.
 
Lakryte said:
Absolutely not. Talk about promoting dependence on government.
Click to expand...

Adds a new spin on it I never even considered.

Definitely something to think about.
 
I am reminded of the saying "A government big enough to give you everything, is big enough to tak it all away".

Based on this principle, I support the government handing out cell phones, in the hopes that they will one day take them all away. :2razz:
 
Government should not pay for anything, especially for cell phones.
 
rivrrat said:
Absolutely not. This country ran just fine prior to cell phones, so those "poor" folks can use landlines. A cell phone is hardly a necessity.
Click to expand...

Except that a landline is more expensive.

and you're assuming they have a home to have one installed.

These people are getting 60 minutes a month, that's what, $10 bucks at most?

As I said for someone trying to hold or get a job, a phone is a huge plus.


If they were giving away iphones with unlimited minutes, I'd be the first to complain, but to me this is the equivelent to giving them a bus pass to go to a job.
 
Joe1991 said:
Except that a landline is more expensive.
Click to expand...
How ya figure? And if that's true, then they can pay for their own damn cellphone and forgo the landline.

and you're assuming they have a home to have one installed.
Click to expand...
You're assuming I give a crap.

These people are getting 60 minutes a month, that's what, $10 bucks at most?
Click to expand...
$10/month multiplied by how many people and for how many months?

The government needs to be cutting their socialized spending, not increasing it.

As I said for someone trying to hold or get a job, a phone is a huge plus.
Click to expand...
Still not a necessity.
 
Joe1991 said:
Except that a landline is more expensive.

and you're assuming they have a home to have one installed.

These people are getting 60 minutes a month, that's what, $10 bucks at most?

As I said for someone trying to hold or get a job, a phone is a huge plus.


If they were giving away iphones with unlimited minutes, I'd be the first to complain, but to me this is the equivelent to giving them a bus pass to go to a job.
Click to expand...


Look anyone can go out and buy a minute phone for 20$ and pay 10$ for 60 minutes, why should the government give the people anything.

First it is a cell phone
then it is food, oops to late they already do that "food stamps".
then a house etc.
The U.S will slowly become china or N. Korea I know that is extreme but it will slowly lead to other things. My theory is people like to have the government take care of them because it make them feel safe, We need to get off. We are on a very slippery slope.
 
As Ross Perot said, "I didn't know I was poor until the government told me I was."

Government funding is government control, by that turn of the phrase I mean to say that including the government in the market of buying cellphones is directly horrible for everyone else except these "poor" people, for them it is indirectly horrible.

Asking the government to get into any market is to add unnecessary static to the economic equilibrium, handing out cellphones for free destroys electronic retailer's sales in that department and the added cost of buying cellphones at inflated prices will then, of course, raise prices for everyone.
 
Metternich said:
As Ross Perot said, "I didn't know I was poor until the government told me I was."

Government funding is government control, by that turn of the phrase I mean to say that including the government in the market of buying cellphones is directly horrible for everyone else except these "poor" people, for them it is indirectly horrible.

Asking the government to get into any market is to add unnecessary static to the economic equilibrium, handing out cellphones for free destroys electronic retailer's sales in that department and the added cost of buying cellphones at inflated prices will then, of course, raise prices for everyone.
Click to expand...




Totally Agree!
 
Joe1991 said:
Except that a landline is more expensive.

and you're assuming they have a home to have one installed.

These people are getting 60 minutes a month, that's what, $10 bucks at most?

As I said for someone trying to hold or get a job, a phone is a huge plus.
Click to expand...

Yea, because I'm sure most of these people are just desperately trying to get jobs, but can't find them because they can't scrounge up the $10/month to buy their own ****ing cell phones.
 
Then again, look at things this way.

The government issues everyone that doesn't have one a cell phone.

Now, every legal person in the US has in their pockets a device that can triangulate their location and tell anyone with the ability to ask where the telephone is, and hence presumably the person it's assigned to.

Given the fact that the above scenario is 100% feasible, let's see the reaction of the flaming libtards wanting to rob the taxpayers to pay for these phones who were also completely aghast at the thought of GW Bush tapping cell phone communications without warrants.



I bet they say, "oh, but the Messiah just LOOOVES us and that will never happen now...":2wave:


I can imagine a future where people can be stopped on the streets and given tickets or even get arrested for not carrying an active telephone, all in the name of "public safety".

No, better let the poor pay for their own damn phones. They're not necessary to life.
 
Last edited:
Joe1991 said:
Well I'll take the other side just for the sake of argument:

First, you're already paying for poor people to get cell phones.
I drove relative to the free clinic a while back, everyone in there was talking on cell phones.

Two, if the company in question is giving a *huge discount to the state, well that is more money that can be spent on needed items.

*the article didn't give a individual breakdown per person, but the discount must be pretty good if fifteen states have already approved it.

--
I can certainly understand those saying no, but practically, the costs are relatively low, and for those who are attempting to remain in the workforce, a phone is a must have.
Click to expand...

For one they are over paying on the phones.

$50 for a supposedly rarely used phone, give me a break.
You can go to the local gas station get one for $20 and it comes with minutes.

This is a bull**** attempt at vote pandering and propping up a business.
 
Metternich said:
As Ross Perot said, "I didn't know I was poor until the government told me I was."

Government funding is government control, by that turn of the phrase I mean to say that including the government in the market of buying cellphones is directly horrible for everyone else except these "poor" people, for them it is indirectly horrible.

Asking the government to get into any market is to add unnecessary static to the economic equilibrium, handing out cellphones for free destroys electronic retailer's sales in that department and the added cost of buying cellphones at inflated prices will then, of course, raise prices for everyone.
Click to expand...

I love Ross Perot.

I wish he was more vocal in politics now.
 
This is bull****.

And apparently most people on this forum agree.
 
I agree, the government shouldn't be paying for these phones. Other than the admistrative cost of implementing the program, I don't get the impression that it is. The funding comes from the Universal Service Fund, which is a fund we are already paying into, generated from extra charges to our long-distance telephone calls.
 
What kind of country are we living in where we can't give people free cell phones? The founding fathers would be ashamed. The right to have free cell phone obviously falls within the bounds of the Right to Free Speech, as without a cell phone these people could not speak to people at a distance from anywhere they happened to be. Its irresponsable and greedy of conservatives to be saying that it is not the governments ability, nae duty, to provide free cell phone coverage for every American.

Indeed, look at the cell phone companies today. We have a near monopoly with only a few major conglomarte corporations. Look at the difference in price between AT&T and Sprint! Obviously, the cell phone execs in their greed and through the evils of capitalism have decided to swindle the American Public. Not to mention the costs ensued by employers who must provide cell phones to their employee's now, which is growing in number it seems. Just look at all the blackberries about. We should instead not just focus on providing cell phones for the poor, but for ALL Americans. Naturally, those that want to keep their own plans or be able to buy the newest phones possible will be allowed to....but paying a $1000 fine per year.

To your republicans saying this is wrong, for shame. The rich could survive the tax hike we'd undoubtably put on them to pay for this cell phone usage to everyone. I mean, they're rich! Its not like taking their money away will change that. Who cares about them. Meanwhile, all these people will be exercising their constitutional RIGHT to free cell service under the 1st amendment. Only greedy, constitution hating, religious zealot nutjobs would ever be against giving people their rights.
 
Zyphlin said:
What kind of country are we living in where we can't give people free cell phones? The founding fathers would be ashamed. The right to have free cell phone obviously falls within the bounds of the Right to Free Speech, as without a cell phone these people could not speak to people at a distance from anywhere they happened to be. Its irresponsable and greedy of conservatives to be saying that it is not the governments ability, nae duty, to provide free cell phone coverage for every American.

Indeed, look at the cell phone companies today. We have a near monopoly with only a few major conglomarte corporations. Look at the difference in price between AT&T and Sprint! Obviously, the cell phone execs in their greed and through the evils of capitalism have decided to swindle the American Public. Not to mention the costs ensued by employers who must provide cell phones to their employee's now, which is growing in number it seems. Just look at all the blackberries about. We should instead not just focus on providing cell phones for the poor, but for ALL Americans. Naturally, those that want to keep their own plans or be able to buy the newest phones possible will be allowed to....but paying a $1000 fine per year.

To your republicans saying this is wrong, for shame. The rich could survive the tax hike we'd undoubtably put on them to pay for this cell phone usage to everyone. I mean, they're rich! Its not like taking their money away will change that. Who cares about them. Meanwhile, all these people will be exercising their constitutional RIGHT to free cell service under the 1st amendment. Only greedy, constitution hating, religious zealot nutjobs would ever be against giving people their rights.
Click to expand...

Why do I get the feeling that this is a metaphor for some other issue that you also have a problem with (and I concur)?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom