21% of Americans Aren't Using the Internet

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Guide community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Sidebar Sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]itpro[/nom]Services provided by the government are not free!I am sorry for stating the obvious, but after reading the comments from the Progressives among us I just had to get that off my chest. Whether it is health care, or internet, or roads, or whatever, the government has to pay for whatever services they provide just like everyone else. Where does the government get the money to provide these services? TAXES! The difference between government provided services and private company provided services is that with the private sector the user of the service pays for it, and with government provided services everyone pays for it whether they use it or not. Well, not everyone, as in the US now half the people no longer pay any taxes at all, so the pool of us productive members of society who still pay taxes is shrinking, and we are getting fed up with providing a free ride to all those shirkers who keep thinking up more and more things that we should buy for them. And you pinheads talk about how ignorant the Tea Party members are! At least Tea Party people understand that there is no such thing as a free ride![/citation]
Socialism works until you run out of other peoples money. -Margaret Thatcher
Keep the government out of the internet!
 
Re: sirmorluk

"Socialism works until you run out of other peoples money"

How true! We saw that back in the 80s with the collapse of the former Soviet Union. At that time, a friend of mine who was the president of a small bank commented that the only difference between the USSR and the US was that we had better credit. Some day, he said, our credit will run out and we will face the same scenario. That day is now upon us.
 
[citation][nom]hixbot[/nom]21% of americans are far below the poverty line. so is this any surprise to anyone?[/citation]
The "poverty line" in the US is ridiculously high. Most of the people below the "poverty line" in the US still pay for cable and cell phone service. There is nothing but desire and owning a PC that would stop them from getting internet.
 
I say we make them get internet access. We allow the government to force the providers to build the infrastructure, then we mandate that individual homes MUST have access within 3 months. If they can't afford we simply tax those that already have broadband to pay for those that don't want it. I won't be paying though...I don't think.
 
[citation][nom]sirmorluk[/nom]Socialism works until you run out of other peoples money. -Margaret ThatcherKeep the government out of the internet![/citation]

Too bad she never said that, quotemining ftl.

Also, you do realize she was prime minister of a country with UHC right?

You know the things you free-market retards call socialism. I find it hilarious you would use someone that you would call a socialist, to fight against it.

This is why the tea party is filled with idiots, and BS about Tea Party idiots knowing the Constitution. Huge amount of them are fundies that want to inject their religion into government.
 
Also to those that want our internet to continue to be shit, good job at making the country the laughing stock of the world.

We are and will continue to be beat by other countries in the technology field. We will continue to have companies hire outside the USA for jobs as people simply can't afford the higher education costs.
 
Elistist much? Or is it projection? Most TEA party members can recite the Constitution clause for clause, amendment for amendment. You do realize that many groups have Constitutional/BoR/American History study sessions. Many could also recite just about every Federalist paper along with much of the Founding Father's correspondence.
Polls by the NYT, Gallup and other pollsters statistically state that TEA party members have a higher than average education, tend to be middle/ middle upper class, and are more informed than the average voter on world affairs.
The also tend to ve fiscally conservative but socailly moderates who want the Constitution followed to the letter.
Click to expand...

No, I'm not elitist much. I grew up poor with parents who pulled themselves up by their bootstraps so that their children could have a better life than they did.

Maybe you are correct that they have meetings to read and discuss the constitution. Unfortunately for me, and maybe it's the area I live in, that just doesn't seem to be the case. I see very angry people that when confronted with why they are angry, seem to not understand how the system works and are channeling their anger in ways that seem to be counterproductive to their own stated goals.

I've reread my original comment and I now see how many of you could mistake it for a snarky, trollish comment. I'm very sorry for not being more sensitive to your feelings and more attentive to my writing style to avoid misrepresenting myself.

I am pro education for everyone, and think that having basic internet access available for everyone who wants it at a basic functional speed is very important, so that our dialogues as a nation include more honesty and less baseless scare tactics.

So here is a better question. I wonder the political and socio-economical breakdown of the 21% who do not have internet connections available?
 
[citation][nom]Kami3k[/nom]Too bad she never said that, quotemining ftl.[/citation]

So? He paraphrased her instead of quoted her. Big deal. It doesnt make his point any less valid.

Margaret Thatcher, in a television interview for Thames TV This Week on February 5, 1976. Prime Minister Thatcher said, "...and Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They always run out of other people's money. It's quite a characteristic of them."
 
Honestly speaking i dont understand why we had to get off dial-up. Mean, highspeed has its advantages , but most arent worth it. And i dont get the perfect condition thing either, if all is good enough and configered right, perfect should yeild more. Not what you just pay for. Given the idea of DSL over dial-up anyways. Its all a ripoff in some form of another. Just depends what you feel like getting ripped off of to better find a place in the interwebs.

At one time i had cable, but couldnt use it for nothing more then just music and a few videos online, dail-up served then same purpose. So of those who are using high-speed internet who reallys uses it for the availibilty of it? that your prior services couldnt do? And the time thats ive had high-speed internet over dail-up, i should have like 200 movies, thousands upon thousands of songs. Be able to use and manage regularaly without time interval issues of access and uploading downloading, giving the higher speed. Basically less restrictive giving more room. But its basically the same.

Leaving even faster internet as a solution. Which you shouldnt need speeds that fast. Even though i dont pay for mine, and believe me i know i dont pay for mine, dont think it changes much of anything but what can and cannot be said on problems with it.

SO saying 21% of Americans arent using the internet, is like saying 40-60 % of internet users are still at a lack of proper or decent access, to include the 21% who dont would add like another 10% on top of the 40-60% who has issues and problems with the internet they have. Might be able to reduce that down by about 5-15% in some places.

Rather they dont use is a blessing in some senses to know some part of America isnt so high-tech.
 
[citation][nom]dragonsqrrl[/nom]... it's a very sufficient sample size, and considering the source this survey is probably pretty legit. Have either of you ever taken a stats class?[/citation]

too bad there's no class where you might be able to learn humor.
 
[citation][nom]hixbot[/nom]21% of americans are far below the poverty line. so is this any surprise to anyone?[/citation]

Part of your comment I do have to agree that we do have at least 1 in 3 here that are that poor. the Middle and upper classes refuse to admit it.
 
[citation][nom]blackened144[/nom]So? He paraphrased her instead of quoted her. Big deal. It doesnt make his point any less valid.[/citation]

Again, she was in charge of a country with UHC, the same thing you retards call socialist.

But the irony of using someone who was in charged of what you call a socialistic country against socialism is too much for your type to handle.
 
Re: anaxanemes

Yes, your original comment did come across as elitist, but your last response was more moderate and worthy of reply.

Are there idiots at Tea Party rallies? Of course there are! The Tea Party draws a broad spectrum of people, so you get all types. Are they representative of all Tea Partiers? Of course not, anymore than the idiots that inhabit MoveOn.org, the dailykos, or some of the people posting nonsense here. Read Kami3k's posts above, for example.

The notion that viable internet access should be available for all is worth discussing. We already have pretty much universal phone coverage, availability of power, etc, and I can see the argument that internet access should be considered as a basic utility. Where we would probably disagree is on the concept that it should be free. Electricity is a basic necessity, yet I still have to pay for it. Same for my phone, cable TV, etc. Why should internet access be any different? Besides, its not like there aren't libraries and others available that provide free access for those "less fortunate".

The Tea Parties main principals are very simple: Limited government, limited taxes, and fiscal responsibility. I find it interesting that these arguments always break down into Liberal vs Conservative when the Tea Parties principals serve both equally. Yes, I know, the modern Progressive movement is all about government being the solution to every problem, but that is a subset of Liberalism. If our government spends itself into collapse like the USSR of the 80s, just how will that impact the Liberal agenda? Will the poor be fed and provided with health care, education, or free internet? Fiscal responsibility should cross all political boundaries, should it not? Likewise, out of control and unresponsive government, like we have now, does not serve the people regardless of your political affiliation. When government gets too large, people exist only to serve the government, and that is as much a threat to Liberal causes as Conservative. Finally, lower taxes benefit everyone, not just the rich or Conservatives. If you keep more of what you make, you can do what you want with the balance, including funding Liberal causes. I am old enough to remember the old days, when people's tax burden was light and money was freely donated to charities, churches, schools, etc. Today, most of us are simply trying to get by and have little left over after paying for our necessities. When I look at my total tax burden, with income, sales, excise, consumption, and all of the other taxes that we all pay, I am more than ready to stand up and say ENOUGH, and that has nothing to do with me being Liberal or Conservative.
 
[citation][nom]drutort[/nom]thats a very small sample to draw a conclusion for whole America LOL really? only 2.2k adults? and its done over phone and cell phone... ok why not like public survey or other none tech surveying... how about asking others who have Internet if they have adults who never connect on the net.. that might work for an online study lol though not very accurate[/citation]
you are an idiot and know nothing about statistics
2.2 k is plenty if they're selected randomly
 
[citation][nom]nsquid[/nom]i asked 20 of my friends if they have an iphone, 18 said yes. therefore i can say that 90 percent of america has an iphone.[/citation]
I can say with 100% certainly you're another idiot who knows nothing about statistics
 
[citation][nom]jsc[/nom]shaun_shaun:If you are going to cherry-pick quotes, how about Obama's "57 states"?[/citation]
he had been to 57 states
jesus, how difficult is that to figure out ?
If I go to California, then to Texas, then to New York, then back to California, it makes sense to say "I've been back and forth to 4 states" instead of "I've been back and forth to 3 states"

and Palin is
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom