100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Government giving cell phones to the poor | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
I was nor have ever been in the need for this service myself, but I do see the need. When HR depts became managed by the unqualified and Phone Companies have discontinued an alternative, cell-phones ceased to be a luxury. Instead they are a necessary tool to find employment. Another difference, I too could have benefited from having this service available to me, but it wasn't yet I was able to move forward. There are other means, it is helpful and can be convenient to many but I don't believe it's necessary. jmo |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's obvious you live in a warm climate. It appears that you are wanting to restrict the unemployed's ability to find work. I only hope that you are never forced into such a similar circumstance. It appears you have never been or you just have a penchant to be disagreeable. All people do not have the luxury of a family to lean on. Fanta - this should not have taken the person tone you have just initiated. #1 Yes I live in a warm climate, now. However, when I was unemployed I lived in NYC, not a warm climate. I knew the answer to this. 
#2 I am not wanting to restrict anyone's ability to find work nor am I. I just happen to see things differently, where there is a will there is a way is how I see things. Again this is just my opinion and my point of view, not a law. If you are refusing them the minute minutes of a government cell-phone, or not regulating the application methods used by businesses today then you are restricting them. #3 I have been in those circumstances and situations, I am not exempt nor different from anyone. I just see things differently and go about things in my own way. (now who has the penchant of being disagreeable, you assumed and are wrong about me )
Times have changed my dear fran. They are not like they were 20 or even 10 years ago. #4 Never mentioned family (in my situation) but you are right there are some who have the luxury of a family to lean on and support. Now was I one of those, I've never said. And I never said you said you were. I was just pointing out a fact for those who dont realize this. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I still do not own a cellphone. I do think phones, especially cellphones are a luxury but I have no gripe about impoverished or struggling americans receiving some way to have emergency contact should something go wrong. The world is changing ya know...not sure I like all of it, but on the grand scale this is kind of minor. Msharmony, I disagree with a cell-phone being a luxury today. After removing most of the pay-phones in existence, the poor don't really have a choice when their home phone is disconnected after the loss of a job. Most businesses won't even accept a job application unless its produced on-line. Many businesses provide a Kiosk for the purpose and one can go to their local library for computer access. However that doesn't give the unemployed the phone number necessary, if they are lucky enough to be one of the multitude applying for the one job to be chosen, to receive a call back. The small quantity of minutes on the government cell-phones are not enough to qualify as a luxury. Can they be abused? Yes, but it won't give them much. I also do not use payphones. To be on the phone with someone is not a necessity, in terms of basic needs, unless it is life or death. I could agree that a phone number is necessary to apply for a job however....but that still wouldnt require one to have a cell phone personally. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I too hate phones, but they are necessary to a successful and proficient search for employment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I too hate phones, but they are necessary to a successful and proficient search for employment. Yes, phones are a necessity in the search for employment, however who needs to OWN the actual phone is up for debate. As I said before though, I dont mind at all helping impoverished people by giving them temporary phones for employment and emergencies. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I too hate phones, but they are necessary to a successful and proficient search for employment. Yes, phones are a necessity in the search for employment, however who needs to OWN the actual phone is up for debate. As I said before though, I dont mind at all helping impoverished people by giving them temporary phones for employment and emergencies. The phones are prepaid cheap throw aways. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
cashu
on
Wed 11/25/09 11:10 AM
|
|
those phones are one of the cheapest things we have given the poor folk . you should add up what we have (the people of the us) have given the poor folk . its more than any nation has given to any group before in history . its more like we are paying for protection from a crime family . your losing your country stupid ....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
those phones are one of the cheapest things we have given the poor folk . you should add up what we have (the people of the us) have given the poor folk . its more than any nation has given to any group before in history . its more like we are paying for protection from a crime family . your losing your country stupid .... Tax money doesnt give, it gives BACK. People put in and they get something in return, its not a huge deal. As far as how much we give compared to other nations, Id be interested in seeing some actual numbers supporting that statement(numbers meaning percentage of taxes not monetary figures as we have more wealth than most). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax money doesnt give, it gives BACK. People put in and they get something in return, its not a huge deal. I don't get anything back. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax money doesnt give, it gives BACK. People put in and they get something in return, its not a huge deal. I don't get anything back.
Poppycock! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax money doesnt give, it gives BACK. People put in and they get something in return, its not a huge deal. I don't get anything back.
Poppycock! Maybe in some other states you do, but I live in California, and we don't. We haven't for a very long time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I didnt see in the op anything about joblessness. I think it is unwise to assume that people are poor because they dont have a job. We have a thing in the US called the WORKING POOR and there are more people in that category than you may think. .....Those eligible for SafeLink must already be on a federal welfare program ........... the latest offering from Lifeline, an FCC program that has tried since 1984 to help make phones affordable by discounting installation fees or subsidizing monthly charges. The cost was still too high for many people. SafeLink is the first totally free project. And yes, says Fuentes, his company =====hopes recipients use the cells to find employment===== and become regular customers after the free year is up. They'll be able to keep the handsets and buy TracFone's small-denomination calling cards.Studies have shown lack of telephone access is a huge problem for those who've fallen by the economic wayside. They can't get callbacks if they're job searching and risk confidence-killing isolation. "Back in the 1980s, people were asking for a basic telephone allowance within welfare assistance," says Torjman. "But it was decided not to do that." ----- so life line is offering this service to gain customers and help those in need ---- some that may be looking for work (hard to apply for jobs if you have no contact number) and this is a bad thing? why? lets see if some one gets a job and starts paying taxes say at age 27 and remains employed till retirement at wwhat 67 how many taxes did that 240 dollars bring in just a thought but hey what do i know |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax money doesnt give, it gives BACK. People put in and they get something in return, its not a huge deal. I don't get anything back.
Poppycock! Maybe in some other states you do, but I live in California, and we don't. We haven't for a very long time. i think they were talking about services such as fuel tax goes to build roads (supposedly) so you have govt services for the tax you pay the question that needs analyzed is are the services provided worth the money being payed out to get them |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I didnt see in the op anything about joblessness. I think it is unwise to assume that people are poor because they dont have a job. We have a thing in the US called the WORKING POOR and there are more people in that category than you may think. .....Those eligible for SafeLink must already be on a federal welfare program ........... the latest offering from Lifeline, an FCC program that has tried since 1984 to help make phones affordable by discounting installation fees or subsidizing monthly charges. The cost was still too high for many people. SafeLink is the first totally free project. And yes, says Fuentes, his company =====hopes recipients use the cells to find employment===== and become regular customers after the free year is up. They'll be able to keep the handsets and buy TracFone's small-denomination calling cards.Studies have shown lack of telephone access is a huge problem for those who've fallen by the economic wayside. They can't get callbacks if they're job searching and risk confidence-killing isolation. "Back in the 1980s, people were asking for a basic telephone allowance within welfare assistance," says Torjman. "But it was decided not to do that." ----- so life line is offering this service to gain customers and help those in need ---- some that may be looking for work (hard to apply for jobs if you have no contact number) and this is a bad thing? why? lets see if some one gets a job and starts paying taxes say at age 27 and remains employed till retirement at wwhat 67 how many taxes did that 240 dollars bring in just a thought but hey what do i know exactly what do you know  Missed ya 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
nuttn honey
o just popping in for a minute 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax money doesnt give, it gives BACK. People put in and they get something in return, its not a huge deal. I don't get anything back.
LOL Don't you have Job safety laws? Equal employment laws? Recieve Highway funding? Consumer Protection? etc? etc? etc? Like I said Poppycock! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i think they were talking about services such as fuel tax goes to build roads (supposedly) so you have govt services for the tax you pay the question that needs analyzed is are the services provided worth the money being payed out to get them Oh. I guess that's what I get for not reading the whole thread. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some States need to dip in the pool more than others.
We are the United States though and those states that have should help those who don't. Right? In 2004 Calif only received $.78 for every dollar paid in. That's the last year I can find recorded but that has not always been the case. For instance, in 1984 Cali received $1.08 for every dollar paid. Since then it has steadily been going down Unfortunately their debt has been increasing. I suspect they have found another means of borrowing since they pay the highest State taxes in the country. The debt has to come from somewhere. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax money doesnt give, it gives BACK. People put in and they get something in return, its not a huge deal. I don't get anything back.
Sure you do, by way of paved roads, education,,,etc,,,,,tax money goes towards all those things. |
|
|
|
|
