Slashdot Mirror
Ajit Pai Faces Heat Over Proposal To Take Away Poor People's Broadband Plans (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Democratic senators yesterday asked Ajit Pai to abandon a proposal that the senators say would take subsidized broadband plans away from "millions of Americans." The Federal Communications Commission chairman's plan for the Lifeline subsidy program would force most users of the program to find new providers. But such users could have trouble finding replacement plans or similar prices because Pai's proposal would prevent all telecom resellers from offering Lifeline-subsidized service. "Your proposal impacts over 70 percent of current Lifeline-recipient households by eliminating their wireless providers from the program, leaving less affordable and fewer Lifeline options, while making it more difficult for the companies trying to serve Lifeline customers," Senate Democrats wrote in the letter to Pai yesterday. "Instead of cutting the program, we should ensure Lifeline reaches more Americans in need of access to communication services." The letter was written by Sens. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Edward Markey (D-Mass.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), and Cory Booker (D-NJ).
We're pissing and moaning over losing a $9.25 subsidy? You can go to Wal-Mart right now and buy a monthly plan for $30 that gives unlimited talk, text and 2g data + 3gb LTE. You can get an iPhone SE on that plan for ~$150 all in on the phone.
He doesn't have enough brains for that. But the point is still valid. Why should I have to pay for someone elses private internet services?
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
I don't believe it's my responsibility as a taxpayer to give poor people broadband. Seriously.
If they need to watch YouTube that bad, go to the public library.
-Styopa
An the SJW here on /. have just proven my point for me. Instead of debating my point that taking this subsidy and putting into public wifi that would benefit everyone. They would rather mod my posts down as flame bate so no one will see it at all. Typical SJW thinking.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
And your economics is tinted by Marxist bull. That the rich keep a portion that is larger than those they employ is not a wrong thing, despite your rhetoric.
"Exactly what entitles these rich to take this portion of wealth?"
The same can be asked of what entitled you to a portion of their wealth either.
"Is it because they won the birth canal lottery?"
Sometimes yes, is it fair? Should we starve kids and make them get a job to pay for their education so "things can be fair"? Education is available to anyone willing to learn. I am a high school dropout and I earn a six figure salary and was born poor enough to know what being hungry means. But somehow my work to improve myself is owed to you? How? I don't own a business and neither did I steal your crap to get here. I earned it fair and square because I made myself valuable and worth paying for the services I provide!
parasite
That definition matches you perfectly, so far all I am seeing is that you claim that you deserve something that others have because they have more of it than you. What are you doing to deserve it? Maybe you should go and talk to people that have more and see if there is a service you can provide to exchange with their wealth instead of rallying people to go and take from them?