iPads and Internet for the Poor

[tskeeter]

Now that the FCC has decided that the internet needs to be regulated like a public utility, how long do you think it is going to take before your ISP is requried to collect taxes on your internet service in order to provide iPads/smart phones and internet service to those "who can't afford it" on their own?  The same way our cell phone service is taxed to provide free cells phones and cell phone service to the poor?  Is this just another move by the government to make everything "equal", regardless of how much effort you put into providing for yourself?  

[justme]

They're already getting the money from somewhere as I recall articles a while of the government bringing high speed internet to rural areas like they did land lines back in the day.

I have a bundle so I can't check, but aren't there already several government taxes on it?

[Cookies Galore]

Feb 26, 2015 17:01:21 GMT -5 justme said:

They're already getting the money from somewhere as I recall articles a while of the government bringing high speed internet to rural areas like they did land lines back in the day.

I have a bundle so I can't check, but aren't there already several government taxes on it?

On internet? I have FIOS internet only and there aren't taxes listed on my monthly bill.

[justme]

Feb 26, 2015 17:13:02 GMT -5 Cookies Galore said:

Feb 26, 2015 17:01:21 GMT -5 justme said:

They're already getting the money from somewhere as I recall articles a while of the government bringing high speed internet to rural areas like they did land lines back in the day.

I have a bundle so I can't check, but aren't there already several government taxes on it?

On internet? I have FIOS internet only and there aren't taxes listed on my monthly bill.

All my taxes are for my damn tv?!?!?!?! :mad:

[Cookies Galore]

Feb 26, 2015 17:14:36 GMT -5 justme said:

Feb 26, 2015 17:13:02 GMT -5 Cookies Galore said:

On internet? I have FIOS internet only and there aren't taxes listed on my monthly bill.

All my taxes are for my damn tv?!?!?!?! :mad:

Taxes and fees are why I've been resistant to adding cable!

[The Captain]

In my mind there is a huge difference between the government requiring a franchise to provide equal service (even in areas where it may not be technically profitable) and providing free service to someone.

In the first case, both customers pay the same for the service, the company is just required to provide the infrastructure to all customers equally. 

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

Feb 26, 2015 16:14:39 GMT -5 tskeeter said:

Now that the FCC has decided that the internet needs to be regulated like a public utility, how long do you think it is going to take before your ISP is requried to collect taxes on your internet service in order to provide iPads/smart phones and internet service to those "who can't afford it" on their own?  The same way our cell phone service is taxed to provide free cells phones and cell phone service to the poor?  Is this just another move by the government to make everything "equal", regardless of how much effort you put into providing for yourself?  

Don't they already do it?  

I seem to remember seeing a buttload of taxes added to the end of my cable/internet statement that I paid each month.

[jkapp]

This whole issue is another example of government creating a problem and then having to "solve" the problem they created.

ISP's wouldn't have so much power if the government hadn't allowed them to have regional monopolies. If the cable companies were actually competing against each other, then they would be too worried about losing customers to enact unfair policies. But since they know customers have no other alternatives to their service (a Time Warner customer cant just jump to Charter, and vice versa), then they feel they can do whatever they want.  And then the sheep call on government to enact more regulation and gain even more power.

Again, too much government is causing so many unintended (or maybe they are intended?) consequences...and the resolution (again, more government) will cause even further unintended (intended?) consequences.  This is why I hate people so much

[Deleted]

So we dislike net neutrality then?

[Formerly SK]

No kidding.  I had no idea a consumer could dislike net neutrality. 

[Deleted]

Im guessing Fox News doesn't like it....

[Deleted]

Bash the poor for wanting stuff.  The poor don't have the power to make the government give them Ipads or cell phones or anything.  It is a government handout to cell phone companies.  If they start giving away ipads it will be welfare to Apple.  But go ahead and blame the poor for wanting something and taking it when it is offered for free.

[jkapp]

Feb 26, 2015 19:44:55 GMT -5 oped said:

So we dislike net neutrality then?

I dislike further government regulation on an issue it created with regulation. I want both the power-hungry ISP's AND government the hell out of the internet.  The more control government has over the internet, the less neutral it will be...that's just how government works and why this legislation is so ironic.

The funny thing about this issue is that I saw one of the protaganists for net neutrality wearing a Guy Fawkes mask, probably because of the movie V for Vendetta.  Yet ironically the character V was an anarchist fighting AGAINST a tyranical, overly-controlling, manipulative government.  So this protestor was wearing a Guy Fawkes mask while calling for government to be more controlling and manipulative.  Again...why I hate people so much

[Deleted]

Lol

[Baby Fawkes]

He was probably wearing the mask to align with the hacker group Anonymous as that is their 'face' of anonymity.

[jackb1117]

[justme]

I'm spilt. On one hand I think it's crap for say Amazon to come in and say I'll give you x dollars to move us into the highest speed and you need to keep Netflix at last 10mbps slower than us. On the other hand government fucks up more things than they do right.

[Deleted]

I live a pretty damn cushy life cause of government. Id like a tally of how they fuck up more than do right...

[Opti]

Feb 27, 2015 9:17:23 GMT -5 oped said:

I live a pretty damn cushy life cause of government. Id like a tally of how they fuck up more than do right...

I'll wait with you. I'm glad our pollution is not as bad as China and India. Kids

are wearing face masks in big cities in China.

[justme]

There plenty of examples of the government mucking things up more than helping even if they get things done. They are stuck in their ways and don't follow the best business practices. A lot of decisions made are based on lobbyists and representatives pet projects even though it could be fine cheaper in other circumstances. Cost benefit analysis are words that don't exist.

[jkapp]

Feb 27, 2015 9:23:33 GMT -5 Opti said:

Feb 27, 2015 9:17:23 GMT -5 oped said:

I live a pretty damn cushy life cause of government. Id like a tally of how they fuck up more than do right...

I'll wait with you. I'm glad our pollution is not as bad as China and India. Kids

are wearing face masks in big cities in China.

Yet look how "free" and "neutral" China's internet is...because of government regulation.

[Opti]

Feb 27, 2015 10:48:02 GMT -5 jkapp said:

Feb 27, 2015 9:23:33 GMT -5 Opti said:

I'll wait with you. I'm glad our pollution is not as bad as China and India. Kids

are wearing face masks in big cities in China.

Yet look how "free" and "neutral" China's internet is...because of government regulation.

OK, I used China as a bad example. Your point? The US isn't China so we aren't going to

emulate their policies. Perhaps the internet in Nigeria is open given all the scammers. IDK.

[HoneyBBQ]

Feb 26, 2015 22:05:11 GMT -5 jkapp said:

Feb 26, 2015 19:44:55 GMT -5 oped said:

So we dislike net neutrality then?

I dislike further government regulation on an issue it created with regulation. I want both the power-hungry ISP's AND government the hell out of the internet.  The more control government has over the internet, the less neutral it will be...that's just how government works and why this legislation is so ironic.

The funny thing about this issue is that I saw one of the protaganists for net neutrality wearing a Guy Fawkes mask, probably because of the movie V for Vendetta.  Yet ironically the character V was an anarchist fighting AGAINST a tyranical, overly-controlling, manipulative government.  So this protestor was wearing a Guy Fawkes mask while calling for government to be more controlling and manipulative.  Again...why I hate people so much

For shame, he should have at least read the graphic novel!

[tskeeter]

Feb 26, 2015 17:14:36 GMT -5 justme said:

Feb 26, 2015 17:13:02 GMT -5 Cookies Galore said:

On internet? I have FIOS internet only and there aren't taxes listed on my monthly bill.

All my taxes are for my damn tv?!?!?!?! :mad:

Your cable bill may have a separately identified fee to cover the franchise fees the cable company pays your city.  Most regulated utilities pay a franchise fee to the city for the privledge of providing services to residents of the city.  Kind of a hidden tax.  (Twenty years ago ConEd was paying $50 million a year in franchise fees to the city of Chicago.)  These usually apply to the electric company, any private water companies, any trash hauling provided by a private company, and your cable service.  Supposedly the franchise fee is to compensate the government entity for the government providing a monopoly for the service involved, or for use of public rights of way, such as being able to bury cables or pipes in the street right of way.  In realitiy, the governments create these monopolies because that makes it possible for them to extract franchise fees from the businesses.  Most cities restrict their trash hauling license to just one company.  If any trash hauling company that wanted was allowed to do business in the city, none of the trash haulers would be willing to pay a franchise fee to the city.  So it really comes down to governments using a middle man to impose additional taxes on the public.

  

[Opti]

Trash is very different than monopolies running wires above and below ground though.

Some of the phone taxes are in part because the infrastructure is shared not run by

every company.

I did live in a town where I had to find and pay my own trash pickup company.

Not sure if it was that much a plus although I finally found a smaller reasonable

company to deal with.

[tskeeter]

Feb 26, 2015 21:26:36 GMT -5 @hickle said:

Bash the poor for wanting stuff.  The poor don't have the power to make the government give them Ipads or cell phones or anything.  It is a government handout to cell phone companies.  If they start giving away ipads it will be welfare to Apple.  But go ahead and blame the poor for wanting something and taking it when it is offered for free.

I dispute your contention that the poor don't have the power to make the government do anything.  Remember, the poor, or other net consumers of government benefits, have the same vote that a net provider of government benefits has.  The poor have exactly the same power of the ballot as people who are not poor.  A vote represents a lot of power.  If a politician promises me that he's going to give me more benefits and services for free, he can easily buy my vote.  And that is exactly what politicians have been doing for generations.  Promising people, usually the poor, something for nothing in order to buy their vote.  The opportunity to regulate and tax ISP services gives politicians yet another way to pander to the wants of some who expend little effort to meet their own wants and needs.   

[midjd]

Feb 27, 2015 11:54:50 GMT -5 tskeeter said:

Feb 26, 2015 21:26:36 GMT -5 @hickle said:

Bash the poor for wanting stuff.  The poor don't have the power to make the government give them Ipads or cell phones or anything.  It is a government handout to cell phone companies.  If they start giving away ipads it will be welfare to Apple.  But go ahead and blame the poor for wanting something and taking it when it is offered for free.

I dispute your contention that the poor don't have the power to make the government do anything.  Remember, the poor, or other net consumers of government benefits, have the same vote that a net provider of government benefits has.  The poor have exactly the same power of the ballot as people who are not poor.  A vote represents a lot of power.  If a politician promises me that he's going to give me more benefits and services for free, he can easily buy my vote.  And that is exactly what politicians have been doing for generations.  Promising people, usually the poor, something for nothing in order to buy their vote.  The opportunity to regulate and tax ISP services gives politicians yet another way to pander to the wants of some who expend little effort to meet their own wants and needs.   

Does the data on voter turnout among the poor support that hypothesis? It was my understanding that those below poverty level have the lowest voter turnout of all economic groups.

[Opti]

Feb 27, 2015 11:54:50 GMT -5 tskeeter said:

Feb 26, 2015 21:26:36 GMT -5 @hickle said:

Bash the poor for wanting stuff.  The poor don't have the power to make the government give them Ipads or cell phones or anything.  It is a government handout to cell phone companies.  If they start giving away ipads it will be welfare to Apple.  But go ahead and blame the poor for wanting something and taking it when it is offered for free.

I dispute your contention that the poor don't have the power to make the government do anything.  Remember, the poor, or other net consumers of government benefits, have the same vote that a net provider of government benefits has.  The poor have exactly the same power of the ballot as people who are not poor.  A vote represents a lot of power.  If a politician promises me that he's going to give me more benefits and services for free, he can easily buy my vote.  And that is exactly what politicians have been doing for generations.  Promising people, usually the poor, something for nothing in order to buy their vote.  The opportunity to regulate and tax ISP services gives politicians yet another way to pander to the wants of some who expend little effort to meet their own wants and needs.   

I'm surprised to hear your vote can be bought that way. I'm not aware of what politician

is promising what, to even vote for free stuff if I wanted to. And that's not how I vote, well off

or not.

Programs are basically in place now. If I want that free Ipad/ Apple corporate welfare ...

who exactly am I voting for and when?

[Opti]

Feb 27, 2015 11:58:37 GMT -5 midjd said:

Feb 27, 2015 11:54:50 GMT -5 tskeeter said:

I dispute your contention that the poor don't have the power to make the government do anything.  Remember, the poor, or other net consumers of government benefits, have the same vote that a net provider of government benefits has.  The poor have exactly the same power of the ballot as people who are not poor.  A vote represents a lot of power.  If a politician promises me that he's going to give me more benefits and services for free, he can easily buy my vote.  And that is exactly what politicians have been doing for generations.  Promising people, usually the poor, something for nothing in order to buy their vote.  The opportunity to regulate and tax ISP services gives politicians yet another way to pander to the wants of some who expend little effort to meet their own wants and needs.   

Does the data on voter turnout among the poor support that hypothesis? It was my understanding that those below poverty level have the lowest voter turnout of all economic groups.

Yeah, I think it is a belief with no actual data to back it up. I think many of these programs

are passed because of impacts to other parties involved such as phone companies, etc.

[tskeeter]

Feb 27, 2015 10:58:48 GMT -5 midjd said:

Regarding current taxes on internet/cable -- 

Most of the fees listed at the end of your bill are specifically worded to LOOK like taxes ("FCC Franchise Regulatory Fee," etc.) but are actually just the cable/internet company's own fees. I'm not sure there are any taxes other than sales tax on either cable or internet. So I don't think there's any cause to get too outraged yet (except maybe at the cable companies for trying to throw the government under the bus while lining their own pockets )

midjd, it is the exact opposite of your contention.  Cable companies aren't throwing the government under the bus.  The goverments are throwing the cable companies under the bus.  Things like public utility franchise fees are money collected by businesses that are paid to governments.  A way for governments to get more money without including that money in the taxes that government collects directly from the taxpayers.  It's a way to disguise government revenue (taxes) from the taxpayers.  Decades ago, these fees were just included in the business's cost of doing business.  But they have become so onerous that businesses often make public that a portion of your monthly bill is actually revenue collected on behalf of some government entity.  The same way that other types of businesses inform you that a portion of your purchase price is actually sales taxes that are remitted to the government.  Are all retailers throwing the government under the bus for telling you how much of your purchase price is taxes that they are collecting for the state, country, city, etc.?