FCC Unveiling $10 Broadband for Low-Income Households

[flugelhorn]

Wow... so many self proclaimed experts here on Toms. The reason other countries have better internet than we do are 1, we were first to market. By the time they got internet, there were newer, better technologies to implement for cheaper costs while we were still paying for the 1st generation technology. 2, England is the size of Iowa and France is the size of Texas. Japan is the Size of Montana, etc... They practically live on top of one another while the US spans a much larger area with sparsely populated areas between population centers. It is not cost affective to provide internet to 33% of the US because their nearest neighbors are 10 miles away.

All of this aside, we, the consumer, have been paying FCC charges for years now to subsidize these sparsely populated areas just so they can have phone lines, much less broadband. At least now we can see they are actually doing something with that revenue. On the other hand, Broadband is not a right. It is a privilege. You weigh your wants and needs. If broadband is that important for you, then move. Without Broadband, your kids will still grow up healthy and the sun will still rise in the morning.

 

[flugelhorn]

Wow... so many self proclaimed experts here on Toms. The reason other countries have better internet than we do are 1, we were first to market. By the time they got internet, there were newer, better technologies to implement for cheaper costs while we were still paying for the 1st generation technology. 2, England is the size of Iowa and France is the size of Texas. Japan is the Size of Montana, etc... They practically live on top of one another while the US spans a much larger area with sparsely populated areas between population centers. It is not cost affective to provide internet to 33% of the US because their nearest neighbors are 10 miles away.

All of this aside, we, the consumer, have been paying FCC charges for years now to subsidize these sparsely populated areas just so they can have phone lines, much less broadband. At least now we can see they are actually doing something with that revenue. On the other hand, Broadband is not a right. It is a privilege. You weigh your wants and needs. If broadband is that important for you, then move. Without Broadband, your kids will still grow up healthy and the sun will still rise in the morning.

 

[chrisjust98]

[citation][nom]acadia11[/nom]Ummm .. your taxes don't pay for the poor, they actually, pay for old white people who won't die, considering that 30%+ of our annual budget goes to MM and SS, how is that the poor you are subsidizing? ASDF (things that cover welfare like the "federal lunch program") accounts for less than .5% of the annual federal budget and that's including what states spend. So, the idea that your tax dollars is subsidizing the poor is the greatest myth in American politics. Thank You , Mr. Reagan for creating that image. But since when did politics have to do with truth?[/citation]


Really? Look up where welfare money comes from.

 

[guyjones]

Great; one more social welfare project for our already-bankrupt government to get involved in. For self-aggrandizing lib politicians, there is never a shortage of perceived social ills that require the benevolent hand of big government (paid for, of course, by the beleagured taxpayer) to intervene and allegedly remedy.

So, now broadband internet is an essential necessity? Food and shelter are on thing; this is absurdity.

 

[jonathan1683]

Great news. I don't understand why helping out the poor and helping kids get computers and internet connections that can help them succeed is such a bad thing. I was a foster kid and I was given a computer once I graduated from high school. Man it was the best gift I had ever been given in my life and I still own that IBM thinkpad and it still works since 2001. That was the gateway I needed to help me learn about computers and I would gladly shell out money to fund projects like this although I didn't read anywhere that we were? I just think people want something to be mad about all the time. I think some of you have just been so lucky in life you really have no idea how sh1tty being poor really is and how much something so small can make such a huge impact on peoples lives. Lighten up a bit guys.

 

[crewton]

That's nice that they are giving the poor internet access but it's just propaganda to tout it as an improvement. 1Mbps is terrible and I've had more since 2003...you are basically putting the poor a decade behind which is about where they are at now. If broadband doesn't cost the companies anything make it 5Mbps at least. I'd hate to be a young poor kid trying to stream "media" with 1Mbps. That would be a lot of frustration >.>

 

[slabbo]

i still don't see where they are providing low income people with cheap broadband. 1mbps? LOL

 

[izmanq]

Why the hell use microsoft for the OS,what's wrong with linux, this is just not make any sense. 10 USD for 1 mbps, and that's not a normal rate ? :| what's the normal rate for 1 mbps ? 20 USD, i guess internet providers in US are blood suckers

When i read this plan, sounds like a drug dealer operation, give them free first, than suck the blood dry.

I think some people in FCC need to be fired

 

[eddieroolz]

This is a nice idea, though the speeds are somewhat weak. Regardless, I'd love to have this kind of regulatory oversight in Canada...

 

[BulkZerker]

I'm all for this! 1mbs for $10 a month for anyone period! Though you don't' get a government subsidized computer. And the ISP can't force you into a higher teir speed, ever.

Though on the flipside there are massive areas in the US that need their lines replaced. My parents are still on phone lines that were burried back in the 50s!

[citation][nom]chrisjust98[/nom]Really? Look up where welfare money comes from.[/citation]


That's splitting hairs man. Comparing the money that goes to welfare and "helping the poor" projects as compared to SS and other retirement aid funds. ASDF (things that cover welfare like the "federal lunch program") accounts for less than .5% of the annual federal budget and that's including what states spend.

Lets say it's 5% hell. That's still trying to say a glass of water out of a 55gallon barrel is worth worth blaming the wrong person for drinking it. That's inane. And if your trying to be "correct" there's another term that better suits it. Anal.

 

[nottheking]

Naturally, when the federal government manages to convince some big businesses to offer something cheaper or free to the working poor, you can count on countless completely idiotic people to jump on it and assume that taxpayer dollars must be being funneled out here. Anyone who bothered to read the article (reading the original on NYT wasn't even necessary!) would see that what's gotten here are COMMITMENTS by the cable companies: the feds aren't giving them any money at all, and the CORPORATIONS are shouldering the whole burden. (which isn't really a burden, since the article noted that they'll still make a profit here, just a smaller one) And for those that refuse to go back and read it, here's something from the NYT article itself:
[citation][nom]The New York Times Article none of you bothered to read[/nom]Because no federal funds are being invested, the initiative relies in large part on the cooperation of private companies.[/citation]

And yes, apparently broadband access is considered a right in the United States; I distinctly recall BOTH presidents Bush and Obama pushing for universal access throughout their tenures in office: so it's a bipartisan issue here.

Anyone screaming "socialism" here doesn't understand what capitalism is, what a free market is, and sure as hell isn't a capitalist. An initiative like this is actually a clear example of a SUCCESS of capitalism, even if it demonstrates a drawback of the "invisible hand" of the free market. (free market and capitalism are HARDLY one and the same) With a little persuasion from the feds, these cable companies have broadened access in America: it's a win-win situation for those in the business, as these cable companies will surely add MILLIONS of subscribers in an era when big losses are the norm for major businesses, (Netflix, anyone?) earning them both volume AND profits, while millions of Americans will finally be able to ditch AOL.

The only sad part is that the cable companies hadn't thought to do this themselves already; this was a failure of the "Free market," and an illustration why some government influence is necessary; not a heavy hand, but a gentle nudge when the free market's force isn't strong enough to punish the "too big to fail" companies, as was apparent here.

 

[askers]

Looks like a Mac but it's a cool case.
thanks.

 

[mayne92]

[citation][nom]acadia11[/nom]You mean so we can continue to behind the curve where places like England, Japan, Korea, etc ... get their citizens 50mbs for much cheaper prices. The GOP and you guys can go away with your let's have America actually be behind ... as opposed to leading from behind. "You People" are the reason why the US lags behind the top nations your so caught up in your politics that you don't realize other governments don't give a ...t about ideology they give a ...t about hwat's effective and being at the top. YOu know why China is kicking our axx in the green jobs market, because, they don't give a ...t about their government spending $30+ billion on it to fund companies, subsidize, and do research consequently leading to much much lower prices on their goods like for example solar panels. And you guys bytch about a company like solyndra getting $500 million in loans over several years and still not being able to compete, and us spending a total of $2.4 billion to subsidize our green economy companies, ain't ... squat compared to what other "Big Government" is spending in their nations.Actually, when the "...f ..." did we become an anti-government nation, I thought even since the beginning it was "Federal Government" vs "State Government (localized)" not some backwards axx idea that government was bad? In any vain welcome to the 21st century and if you can't adapt to the changing landscape you can be like every other great nation that has failed, refused to change with the times and became irrelevant.[/citation]
This is what I gathered from your comment; You can't read, you can't write and you don't make any logical sense. Are you getting $9.99 broadband Internet through this initiative?...because that would explain alot!

 

[mayne92]

[citation][nom]nottheking[/nom]...The only sad part is that the cable companies hadn't thought to do this themselves already; this was a failure of the "Free market," and an illustration why some government influence is necessary; not a heavy hand, but a gentle nudge when the free market's force isn't strong enough to punish the "too big to fail" companies, as was apparent here.[/citation]
It wasn't done before because there was no $$ to be made - that is called being SMART about "free market". Do you not know that the gov't is spending taxpayer dollars to help fund this initiative and that those of us who do pay are paying a small percentage to subsidize this initiative as well? But I guess in this day and age it makes perfect sense to invest and make many failed decisions as a corporation because failure isn't an option anymore...the taxpayers got their backs right?!

 

[chunkymonster]

Where's my fvc*ing cheap a$s broad band. I'm getting soaked two ways, 1st from Comcast for $50 a month for residential service and then 2nd my tax dollars are subsidizing for the free loaders. WTF!

I blame Bush for allowing the FCC to let major media companies buy-out and consolidate local companies and markets. And, I blame Obama for his socialist redistribution policies.

Up goes the misery index and down goes our republic!

 

[chunkymonster]

When the fv*k did broad band internet access become a civil right.

Anyone who thinks that it is is a fv*king IDIOT!

 

[figgus]

[citation][nom]BulkZerker[/nom]I'm all for this! 1mbs for $10 a month for anyone period![/citation]

That's not what they are doing, though. If you have a job and take care of yourself, you're screwed. If you live life sucking at the public welfare teat, then here's another perk for you to go with your free food, housing, healthcare, heat, air conditioning, and all the other "free" stuff brought to you by your friends in the government but paid for by the sods who are still stupid enough to work for a living.

The funny thing is, as the handouts get better and better the gap closes and pretty soon it won't be worth it to work anymore. Then what happens?

 

[figgus]

[citation][nom]nottheking[/nom]Naturally, when the federal government manages to convince some big businesses to offer something cheaper or free to the working poor, you can count on countless completely idiotic people to jump on it and assume that taxpayer dollars must be being funneled out here. Anyone who bothered to read the article (reading the original on NYT wasn't even necessary!) would see that what's gotten here are COMMITMENTS by the cable companies: the feds aren't giving them any money at all, and the CORPORATIONS are shouldering the whole burden. (which isn't really a burden, since the article noted that they'll still make a profit here, just a smaller one) And for those that refuse to go back and read it, here's something from the NYT article itself:And yes, apparently broadband access is considered a right in the United States; I distinctly recall BOTH presidents Bush and Obama pushing for universal access throughout their tenures in office: so it's a bipartisan issue here.Anyone screaming "socialism" here doesn't understand what capitalism is, what a free market is, and sure as hell isn't a capitalist. An initiative like this is actually a clear example of a SUCCESS of capitalism, even if it demonstrates a drawback of the "invisible hand" of the free market. (free market and capitalism are HARDLY one and the same) With a little persuasion from the feds, these cable companies have broadened access in America: it's a win-win situation for those in the business, as these cable companies will surely add MILLIONS of subscribers in an era when big losses are the norm for major businesses, (Netflix, anyone?) earning them both volume AND profits, while millions of Americans will finally be able to ditch AOL.The only sad part is that the cable companies hadn't thought to do this themselves already; this was a failure of the "Free market," and an illustration why some government influence is necessary; not a heavy hand, but a gentle nudge when the free market's force isn't strong enough to punish the "too big to fail" companies, as was apparent here.[/citation]

Working poor? No such thing. Generally if you have any income at all or have EVER had any income, you are not getting help from these programs.

and if you think the corporations are paying the costs on this and not the people who actually PAY for the service, well... If that's the case, then you are a dumbass.

Dumbass.

 

[figgus]

"And yes, apparently broadband access is considered a right in the United States; I distinctly recall BOTH presidents Bush and Obama pushing for universal access throughout their tenures in office: so it's a bipartisan issue here."

Oh, I almost forgot: clearly, you don't know what "universal access" means.

 

[majin ssj eric]

Gotta love the benevolence of people on here so willing to give other people's money and resources away! "Sure, let them have free access, doesn't cost me a dime!" Never mind the BILLIONS of dollars the ISP companies have spent in creating broadband infrastructure, never mind the tax dollars handed out to supplement the costs associated to handing out free internet to everybody! This is for the poor! I'm so sick and tired of the stupid entitlement attitude in this country.

You don't want to be poor? Then go out there and do something about it and stop begging everyone else to take care of you!