FCC Calls for Huge Changes To Federal Phone Subsidies

[TwoDigital]

@jacekring - or MagicJack and a refurb computer in the $100 price range.

 

[mayne92]

[citation][nom]dealcorn[/nom]A safety net for low income taxpayers makes sense. Any government involvement beyond that is nonsense. Government market leadership means they take your money through taxes and give it to their friends while saying it is for da peoples (i.e. as in "da Bears"). The art of how to take taxpayer money and give it to your friends while having a position that you should not go to jail is one are where Chicago politicians have provided national leadership. If there is no threat pf regulation, who is gonna hire da attorneys and who can be extorted for campaign contributions? Interest groups must be at risk or they will not pony up. There are priorities here, but they have nothing to do with communications.[/citation]

I say lets stop beating around the bush and just call it like it is...for the same level of service for all services in this country - there is your scumbag price and anybody who actually have done something with their life price.

 

[rosstradamus]

People who don't like regulation apparently love drinking polluted water and being able to be sexually harassed at work. The rest of us, however, like the idea that we don't live in a scary, mad max world.

 

[shloader]

Surprised ooma hasn't been mentioned. Granted you have to pay the local municipal tax monthly or yearly (when I bought mine I was grandfathered in tax free) but there's no fee for basic service. Just the upfront cost of the unit of about $180 to $250. As for concerns of power loss Comcast already figured this out; the Motorola modems they employ with their digital voice services have a battery backup inside. If a power loss is a major concern then you could simply connect all your communication devices (phone base, router, modem, VoIP unit) to a UPS and you can have service while you roast marsh-mellows in your stove/fireplace/candle.

Point is with the right equipment you can have all services with the same land-line reliability for momentary power outages. Unfortunately we need a thorough plan that keeps services available for any citizen in a circumstance where an interruption could be life threatening. We're just not there yet... not until maintaining the phone system becomes a burden beyond its worth and broadband maintenance is equal or less the cost.

 

[rosstradamus]

I think it's worth repeating that people reduced to taking the lifeline have to qualify for service based on income. I guarantee that if you qualify for lifeline phone service, you can't afford to drop a couple of hundred bucks for a computer. Maybe when internet capable tabs that also have VOIP enabled services drop below $100, that will change, but ti's not going to happen for a while.

 

[TwoDigital]

...we can bankroll the $100 computers for those who can't afford them with the $100s-of-millions that Warren Buffett things he should be paying (yet doesn't) in extra taxes.

 

[rosstradamus]

TwoDigital, I like the cut of your jib.

 

[gm0n3y]

I'm all for subsidies that help get phone/internet access to areas that would otherwise be prohibitively expensive. Investing in infrastructure benefits everyone. I'm not really in favor of providing monthly subsidies to low income earners though. Having a phone / internet connection is not a necessity.

 

[Guest]

Most of us already pay $30-$70 for internet content on our phones a month, we also pay for a home internet connection usually on top of that at $30-$75, so now we need to pay more for internet access so people who can't afford it, can use it. That's about $720 a year minimum if you have an older unlimited plan or new mid lvl plan for cell phone and a decent level DSL/Cable home connection. It's about $1,800 a year for the high end (honest) users out there. We already have to deal with tiered rates with phone and soon with home internet plans all because more users = more demand = network congestion. It make sense though, if they can push those 18 million users it won't make them a lot more money from them that but it will use more data and clog the network and then they can justify uping our rates some more. Imagine if even 3 million people in the US (about 1% of the populace) pay the $720 a year your looking at 2.2B a year... When you think of how much we all already pay and are going to have to start paying with the price increases for internet speed due to increased demand and the increase of HD content available it's going to get really ugly soon...

 

[dealcorn]

People who don't like regulation apparently love drinking polluted water and being able to be sexually harassed at work.

Somehow, I feel that drinkable water and freedom from sexual harassment at work are a higher priority that broadband Internet access. Anyone who fails to recognize this distinction demeans the importance of potable water and a harassment free work environment.