My best friend was just over to work on his wife's van in my garage. Told
me about a job his son is going to apply for.
Giving away cell phones! Giving away freakin' cell phones.
He has a friend that is doing it and took home a check for $500 for one
weeks worth of effort.
Must be an election year, huh?
How is that not buying votes?
How is that not simply insane?
Freakin' disgusting - again!
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Must be on assistance such as public housing, SNAP, SSI, LIHEAP, TANF, fr=
ee school lunches....it is an extension of telephone service for NEEDY folk=
s that stems from land line only days. Everyone with a phone way back when =
paid something like a $1 per month into the Universal Telephone Assistance=
Program so that others may have access to call 911. Now they set up in ten=
ts and there have been numerous news reports over the past few years about =
how easy it is to walk up and get a cellphone or three or four with so many=
hours per month and texting. I believe the original program predates Bush =
or Reagan. Just like many other great society programs enrollment skyrocket=
ed in the past 6 years. Step right up.
On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 08:57:51 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 10/21/2014 10:18 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>> Once I determined that I didn't need an electronic nurse maid
>> (AKA: Cell Phone), my communication needs became straight
>> forward.
>>
>
>
>> My customers could always get a call back if they left a message
>> on my voice mail and that was drove my whole thought process.
>>
>> If I didn't lose orders, there was no need to solve a problem
>> that didn't exist.
>>
>> Local and Long Distance is covered by Magic Jack for $20/year.
>
>We've converted "wants" to "needs". The world managed to get by without
>the use of cell phones for a long time. They are convenient, but you
>can still get through life without one.
Sure, I don't *need* a smart phone but it the real-time Navi was very
nice driving down to the bowels of Atlanta during rush hour (both
ways). It's also *nice* read the news when I'm waiting in line, the
doctor's office, or whatever.
>We used to walk to school about 1 1/2 miles in the dark because the sun
>was not invented yet. Now, Johnny needs a cell phone because something
>bad might happen while he walks three blocks to school.
Johnny can't play in the dirt with his friends, either. The only
sports are organized by the parents (or schools). I always thought
pick up games were far more fun than organized games. Who needs
parents getting all serious? ;-)
>When I was on the road in sales, I'd call into the office twice a day
>for messages. Now the customer can call directly to the cell phone.
>Questionable as to whether that is an improvement.
I'm at the other end of the phone but I think it's definitely an
improvement. I can get ahold of support or sales people quickly. I
imagine they're pretty useful for building contractors, too.
On 10/21/2014 3:37 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> Last I looked, it seemed that
> the carriers were going to a new plan - instead of almost giving away
> current phones, they now charge you a monthly fee for the phone which comes
> out to nearly full retail if you keep it the life of the agreement. People
> seem to think it's ok to pay $30 per month for a phone that we used to get
> for no more than $99 under the old way of upgrading phones and signing a new
> 2 year agreement. I'm not sure exactly how these new programs work, and I
> need to check into it, but it appears this is a new direction with the
> Carriers.
>
>
Things have changed, be that good or bad. I got a smart phone and data
plan a couple of years ago. Recently my wife decided she wanted a smart
phone so I headed to ATT. Ended up upgrading my smart
phone, upgrading her from a flip to a smart. Unlimited calling, text,
and a 1G shared data plan and it is not much more than I paid with no
texting.
I really like the Galaxy S5
On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 21:58:30 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 10/22/2014 7:56 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> Sure, I don't *need* a smart phone but it the real-time Navi was very
>> nice driving down to the bowels of Atlanta during rush hour (both
>> ways). It's also *nice* read the news when I'm waiting in line, the
>> doctor's office, or whatever.
>>
>
>They work in the bathroom too. My wife thinks it is terrible that I
>text her from the bathroom.
Texting is one thing, but the guy holding a business phone call from
the next stall is a bit icky.
"Mike Marlow" wrote:
> My best friend was just over to work on his wife's van in my garage.
> Told me about a job his son is going to apply for.
>
> Giving away cell phones! Giving away freakin' cell phones.
>
> He has a friend that is doing it and took home a check for $500 for
> one weeks worth of effort.
>
> Must be an election year, huh?
>
> How is that not buying votes?
>
> How is that not simply insane?
>
> Freakin' disgusting - again!
-------------------------------------------------
What qualifies a person to receive a free phone?
Lew
On 10/20/2014 5:35 PM, Martin Eastburn wrote:
> On 10/20/2014 6:13 PM, Edward A. Falk wrote:
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> JohnnyDollar <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> The origin of this was Obama promising free shit for votes
>>
>> It originated with Reagan.
>>
> It started before FDR
>
1928 Presidential Campaign Slogan:
"A chicken in every pot and a car in every garage" -- campaign claim
that the everyone will be prosperous under a Herbert Hoover presidency
> and FDR kicked it up. Reagan did more to calm stormy waters.
> Reagan wanted people to work and to have
> self worth and respect.
>
> Obama wants to kill the military off, enslave the people into
> taking and doing things his way.
>
> Martin
On 10/21/2014 12:37 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>
>>
>> My son pays for data, and text and $10 for talk time, he can get an
>> iPhone 4C or a less featured phone for no extra cost, My wife did the
>> same 2 years ago.
>
> I did something similar (we're on ATT) with my wife's phone. Got an iPhone
> 4 or 4S (can't remember now), factory reconditioned, for $0.99. Did not
> even have to re-sign if I recall correctly, directly off the ATT web site.
> Had it delivered the very next day by FedEx. Did not even have to pay
> shipping. I looked for a similar deal not too long ago, and there were none
> like that. Don't know if there is now that the iPhone 6 has come out.
> Sometimes it's a matter of what new technology has just hit the streets.
>
>
>> My wife got a phone for free and only pays the $10 per month for her
>> share of the talk plan. She was not required to get a data or text
>> plan although the phone id capable of receiving both.
>
> ATT requires you to take a data plan for all smartphones. Used to be you
> could get away with just not signing up for data, but they changed that a
> couple of years ago.
>
>
>>
>> I can get an iPhone 5C for free this November and not pay any more for
>> service than I am right now. Since 2008 we have not paid any more for
>> phone service than we did then and all of us have upgraded 2~3 times,
>> some of us have paid $200 for the latest and greatest iPhones and some
>> of us have opted for the free phones.
>
> I really have to check into this stuff myself because I need to upgrade my
> Galaxy S3 - it's getting slow and the battery life is intermittently
> horrible. Not completely a phone problem, but I'm getting tired of the S3
> being treated like a forgotten child by ATT. Last I looked, it seemed that
> the carriers were going to a new plan - instead of almost giving away
> current phones, they now charge you a monthly fee for the phone which comes
> out to nearly full retail if you keep it the life of the agreement. People
> seem to think it's ok to pay $30 per month for a phone that we used to get
> for no more than $99 under the old way of upgrading phones and signing a new
> 2 year agreement. I'm not sure exactly how these new programs work, and I
> need to check into it, but it appears this is a new direction with the
> Carriers.
>
>
Being total cheapskates, my wife and I have TracFone smart phones. Cost
us $100 for a year with 1350 minutes talk + 1350 texts + 1.3GB data.
Plenty for us.
--
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure,the creed of ignorance, and the
gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-Winston Churchill
"Doug Winterburn" wrote:
> Being total cheapskates, my wife and I have TracFone smart phones.
> Cost us $100 for a year with 1350 minutes talk + 1350 texts + 1.3GB
> data. Plenty for us.
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Once I determined that I didn't need an electronic nurse maid
(AKA: Cell Phone), my communication needs became straight
forward.
When I started looking at cell phones (1990), they were very
expensive, bulky, required a bulky equipment installation
in the vehicle including an antenna and had many dead spots
just when you needed your cell most.
Finally they got rid of the bulky equipment in the vehicle, but
it was still a very expensive system and usage rates were high.
Prices for hardware kept dropping, coverage kept improving,
but my needs just never got to the point I could justify the
hardware and usage costs.
My customers could always get a call back if they left a message
on my voice mail and that was drove my whole thought process.
If I didn't lose orders, there was no need to solve a problem
that didn't exist.
Local and Long Distance is covered by Magic Jack for $20/year.
High Speed ISP service is another $50/month.
A "Burn" phone makes some sense these days if you are
traveling.
Air travel isn't what it once was.
If you are a woman traveling by herself these days, then
a cell phone becomes a security tool in addition to a
communication device.
Different ball game.
Lew
Lew Hodgett wrote:
>> Did you see the bit from the UK the other day?
>>
>> They are running a test in London by converting abandoned pay
>> phone booths into charging stations for phones/electronics/etc.
-----------------------------------------------
"sofarris" wrote:
> This is really interesting, have you got a link for this Lew?
--------------------------------------------
Nope.
Lew
>
>
>
> --
> sofarris
On 10/27/2014 11:52 AM, Edward A. Falk wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Martin Eastburn <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 10/20/2014 6:13 PM, Edward A. Falk wrote:
>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>> JohnnyDollar <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> The origin of this was Obama promising free shit for votes
>>>
>>> It originated with Reagan.
>>>
>> It started before FDR and FDR kicked it up.
>
> I was referring to the cell phone subsidies for the poor, which
> started this thread.
>
It's very unlikely that cell phone subsidies for the poor were started
in the Reagan administration - unless the gov was spending thousands per
person on the cell phone technology of the '80s.
--
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure,the creed of ignorance, and the
gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-Winston Churchill
On 10/29/2014 04:50 PM, Edward A. Falk wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Doug Winterburn <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> I was referring to the cell phone subsidies for the poor, which
>>> started this thread.
>>>
>> It's very unlikely that cell phone subsidies for the poor were started
>> in the Reagan administration - unless the gov was spending thousands per
>> person on the cell phone technology of the '80s.
>
> To be precise, telephone subsidies ("Lifeline") started under
> Reagan, and became the cell phone subsidies we see today.
>
Then why did you state:
"I was referring to the cell phone subsidies for the poor, which
started this thread." ?
--
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure,the creed of ignorance, and the
gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-Winston Churchill
On 10/29/2014 06:42 PM, Doug Winterburn wrote:
> On 10/29/2014 04:50 PM, Edward A. Falk wrote:
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> Doug Winterburn <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I was referring to the cell phone subsidies for the poor, which
>>>> started this thread.
>>>>
>>> It's very unlikely that cell phone subsidies for the poor were started
>>> in the Reagan administration - unless the gov was spending thousands per
>>> person on the cell phone technology of the '80s.
>>
>> To be precise, telephone subsidies ("Lifeline") started under
>> Reagan, and became the cell phone subsidies we see today.
>>
>
> Then why did you state:
>
> "I was referring to the cell phone subsidies for the poor, which
> started this thread." ?
>
...and to be precise, Reagan didn't start cell phone subsidies.
--
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure,the creed of ignorance, and the
gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-Winston Churchill
On 10/22/2014 7:56 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> Sure, I don't *need* a smart phone but it the real-time Navi was very
> nice driving down to the bowels of Atlanta during rush hour (both
> ways). It's also *nice* read the news when I'm waiting in line, the
> doctor's office, or whatever.
>
They work in the bathroom too. My wife thinks it is terrible that I
text her from the bathroom.
On 10/14/2014 8:26 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> My best friend was just over to work on his wife's van in my garage. Told
> me about a job his son is going to apply for.
>
> Giving away cell phones! Giving away freakin' cell phones.
>
> He has a friend that is doing it and took home a check for $500 for one
> weeks worth of effort.
>
> Must be an election year, huh?
>
> How is that not buying votes?
>
> How is that not simply insane?
>
> Freakin' disgusting - again!
>
Well cell phones, like printers, are not about selling the phone/printer
so much as selling the minutes-data-texts/ink.
FWIW you can get an iPhone from APPLE and most any carrier for free.
On 10/14/2014 8:58 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> "Mike Marlow" wrote:
>
>> My best friend was just over to work on his wife's van in my garage.
>> Told me about a job his son is going to apply for.
>>
>> Giving away cell phones! Giving away freakin' cell phones.
>>
>> He has a friend that is doing it and took home a check for $500 for
>> one weeks worth of effort.
>>
>> Must be an election year, huh?
>>
>> How is that not buying votes?
>>
>> How is that not simply insane?
>>
>> Freakin' disgusting - again!
> -------------------------------------------------
> What qualifies a person to receive a free phone?
>
> Lew
Walking into an Apple store and asking for one.
On Wednesday, October 15, 2014 9:16:18 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>=20
> http://www.apple.com/iphone/compare/
>=20
>=20
>=20
> Scroll down a touch and you will see the free one. ATT and other=20
>=20
> carriers do this too.
Sorry, old chum. No free lunch, no free ride. Free means no strings attac=
hed. Free would mean I could walk into the Apple store and ask for a phone=
, they would hand me one, we would shake hands and I would walk out.
Not the case, and the phone companies have been doing this for years. They=
simply add the price of the phone to the plan. To get your "free" phone, =
all you have to do is sign a two year contract based on your desire to get =
a "free" phone. To find out how "free" the phone actually is, cancel your =
two year contract, or more immediately, drive the Apple store and try to wa=
lk out with a new Apple phone of any model without signing a 24 month commi=
tment or paying for the phone.
To follow up your link, this is the next step called "choosing your carrier=
".
http://store.apple.com/us/buy-iphone/iphone5c
Note that they actually do offer that phone contract free, unlocked and rea=
dy to go as a phone ONLY for a mere $450.
Just sayin'. Everything costs something.
My younger sister crows about the fact that she has a new Samsung Galaxy th=
at was "free". Really excited!
She was really upset and nearly refused to believe she was paying for the p=
hone until we contacted Verizon and they told her that she could get the sa=
me service plan with her own Samsung Galaxy for $25 less a month with <<no>=
> 24 month commitment. Probably not so coincidentally, the 24 months X $25=
per month extra she is paying is exactly the price of her Galaxy of $599.
Robert
Robert
cut and paste from the FCC website...don't think Reagan was in office in '9=
6. Maybe that was William Jefferson or his wife. I can see him now with tha=
t pointed finger pulled back in saying" I did not give cell phones to that =
woman"
Prior to the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the Universal Service Fund (US=
F) operated as a mechanism by which interstate long distance carriers were =
assessed to subsidize telephone service to low-income households and high-c=
ost areas. The Communications Act of 1934 stated that all people in the Uni=
ted States shall have access to rapid, efficient, nationwide communications=
service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges.
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 expanded the traditional definition of u=
niversal service - affordable, nationwide telephone service to include amon=
g other things rural health care providers and eligible schools and librari=
es. Today, FCC provides universal service support through four mechanisms:
High Cost Support Mechanism provides support to certain qualifying telephon=
e companies that serve high cost areas, thereby making phone service afford=
able for the residents of these regions.=20
Low Income Support Mechanism assists low-income customers by helping to pay=
for monthly telephone charges as well as connection charges to initiate te=
lephone service.=20
Rural Health Care Support Mechanism allows rural health care providers to p=
ay rates for telecommunications services similar to those of their urban co=
unterparts, making telehealth services affordable.=20
Schools and Libraries Support Mechanism, popularly know as the "E-Rate," pr=
ovides telecommunication services (e.g., local and long-distance calling, h=
igh-speed lines), Internet access, and internal connections (the equipment =
to deliver these services) to eligible schools and libraries.
On 10/22/2014 9:37 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 21:58:30 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 10/22/2014 7:56 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> Sure, I don't *need* a smart phone but it the real-time Navi was very
>>> nice driving down to the bowels of Atlanta during rush hour (both
>>> ways). It's also *nice* read the news when I'm waiting in line, the
>>> doctor's office, or whatever.
>>>
>>
>> They work in the bathroom too. My wife thinks it is terrible that I
>> text her from the bathroom.
>
> Texting is one thing, but the guy holding a business phone call from
> the next stall is a bit icky.
>
I can just hear the echo in his call - and a flush next door...
and the customer rolls his eyes.
Martin
On Fri, 24 Oct 2014 15:54:40 +0000, Chris Logan
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Mike Marlow wrote:
>>Rant - This country is screwed up
>>
>>
>>
>
>Amen brother!
>the sick, twisted adults that were behind this video should be thrown in jail. It's unbelievable the lengths that the left will go to advance their agenda.
>Childhood innocence be damned.
>
>http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/22/little-girls-drop-f-bombs-in-profane-feminist-ad/
>
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqHYzYn3WZw
>
One would think there would be a case for child abuse here.
Unfortunately, we all know our fund raiser-in-chief would never let
his attorney general waste his time on that.
On 10/19/2014 3:15 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 15, 2014 9:16:18 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>
>>
>> http://www.apple.com/iphone/compare/
>>
>>
>>
>> Scroll down a touch and you will see the free one. ATT and other
>>
>> carriers do this too.
>
> Sorry, old chum. No free lunch, no free ride. Free means no strings attached. Free would mean I could walk into the Apple store and ask for a phone, they would hand me one, we would shake hands and I would walk out.
>
> Not the case, and the phone companies have been doing this for years. They simply add the price of the phone to the plan. To get your "free" phone, all you have to do is sign a two year contract based on your desire to get a "free" phone. To find out how "free" the phone actually is, cancel your two year contract, or more immediately, drive the Apple store and try to walk out with a new Apple phone of any model without signing a 24 month commitment or paying for the phone.
>
> To follow up your link, this is the next step called "choosing your carrier".
>
> http://store.apple.com/us/buy-iphone/iphone5c
>
> Note that they actually do offer that phone contract free, unlocked and ready to go as a phone ONLY for a mere $450.
>
> Just sayin'. Everything costs something.
>
> My younger sister crows about the fact that she has a new Samsung Galaxy that was "free". Really excited!
>
> She was really upset and nearly refused to believe she was paying for the phone until we contacted Verizon and they told her that she could get the same service plan with her own Samsung Galaxy for $25 less a month with <<no>> 24 month commitment. Probably not so coincidentally, the 24 months X $25 per month extra she is paying is exactly the price of her Galaxy of $599.
>
> Robert
>
> Robert
>
Well yes, the phone will cost you, but the phone itself is free. It
only stands to reason that you will need to agree to a 2 year plan, the
phone is worthless with out the plan.
But as a comparison, the 2 year plan/ commitment cost is the same for
the free phone as it is for the $500 iPhone 6+, and $500 less.
On 10/21/2014 3:38 PM, Doug Winterburn wrote:
> On 10/21/2014 12:37 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Leon wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> My son pays for data, and text and $10 for talk time, he can get an
>>> iPhone 4C or a less featured phone for no extra cost, My wife did the
>>> same 2 years ago.
>>
>> I did something similar (we're on ATT) with my wife's phone. Got an
>> iPhone
>> 4 or 4S (can't remember now), factory reconditioned, for $0.99. Did not
>> even have to re-sign if I recall correctly, directly off the ATT web
>> site.
>> Had it delivered the very next day by FedEx. Did not even have to pay
>> shipping. I looked for a similar deal not too long ago, and there
>> were none
>> like that. Don't know if there is now that the iPhone 6 has come out.
>> Sometimes it's a matter of what new technology has just hit the streets.
>>
>>
>>> My wife got a phone for free and only pays the $10 per month for her
>>> share of the talk plan. She was not required to get a data or text
>>> plan although the phone id capable of receiving both.
>>
>> ATT requires you to take a data plan for all smartphones. Used to be you
>> could get away with just not signing up for data, but they changed that a
>> couple of years ago.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I can get an iPhone 5C for free this November and not pay any more for
>>> service than I am right now. Since 2008 we have not paid any more for
>>> phone service than we did then and all of us have upgraded 2~3 times,
>>> some of us have paid $200 for the latest and greatest iPhones and some
>>> of us have opted for the free phones.
>>
>> I really have to check into this stuff myself because I need to
>> upgrade my
>> Galaxy S3 - it's getting slow and the battery life is intermittently
>> horrible. Not completely a phone problem, but I'm getting tired of
>> the S3
>> being treated like a forgotten child by ATT. Last I looked, it seemed
>> that
>> the carriers were going to a new plan - instead of almost giving away
>> current phones, they now charge you a monthly fee for the phone which
>> comes
>> out to nearly full retail if you keep it the life of the agreement.
>> People
>> seem to think it's ok to pay $30 per month for a phone that we used to
>> get
>> for no more than $99 under the old way of upgrading phones and signing
>> a new
>> 2 year agreement. I'm not sure exactly how these new programs work,
>> and I
>> need to check into it, but it appears this is a new direction with the
>> Carriers.
>>
>>
> Being total cheapskates, my wife and I have TracFone smart phones. Cost
> us $100 for a year with 1350 minutes talk + 1350 texts + 1.3GB data.
> Plenty for us.
>
>
Nothing wrong with that. We are on an old Unity plan, 5 users share 700
minutes a month. We have over 5000 carry over minutes that have
accumulated. If we call any number serviced by ATT we get don't get
charged with talk time or if we call after 8~9 pm week days or anytime
on weekends.
I also have unlimited data for $30 a month.
On 10/20/2014 6:13 PM, Edward A. Falk wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> JohnnyDollar <[email protected]> wrote:
>> The origin of this was Obama promising free shit for votes
>
> It originated with Reagan.
>
It started before FDR and FDR kicked it up. Reagan did more to
calm stormy waters. Reagan wanted people to work and to have
self worth and respect.
Obama wants to kill the military off, enslave the people into
taking and doing things his way.
Martin
On 10/15/2014 9:18 PM, Unquestionably Confused wrote:
> On 10/15/2014 12:55 PM, Leon wrote:
>
> [snip]
>>
>>
>> Well cell phones, like printers, are not about selling the phone/printer
>> so much as selling the minutes-data-texts/ink.
>>
>> FWIW you can get an iPhone from APPLE and most any carrier for free.
>
> Put your money where your mouth is, Leon. I'm calling bullshit on that
> last comment.
Actually you can call it what you want. If you are willing to pay for
service you can get any number of telephones at zero "extra" cost to you.
> You can pick up an iPhone if you have credit without any money done but
> you'll find you're paying $22 to $26 month for 24 months (depending on
> which model you're getting) in ADDITION to your call/data/text/line charge.
My son pays for data, and text and $10 for talk time, he can get an
iPhone 4C or a less featured phone for no extra cost, My wife did the
same 2 years ago.
My wife got a phone for free and only pays the $10 per month for her
share of the talk plan. She was not required to get a data or text plan
although the phone id capable of receiving both.
When our family started getting cell phones on a single family plan, the
price for 5 phones per month was and still is $100, first phone service
was $60 plus taxes each additional phone $10 each.
Three of us opted for the $20 Sony phones which were fine for just a
phone and 2 of us opted for the 1 cent phones. They all worked as
expected. 3 of us have up graded to iPhones so we pay more for data but
the others have upgraded for free and still only pay the $10 for service.
I can get an iPhone 5C for free this November and not pay any more for
service than I am right now. Since 2008 we have not paid any more for
phone service than we did then and all of us have upgraded 2~3 times,
some of us have paid $200 for the latest and greatest iPhones and some
of us have opted for the free phones.
What it boils down to is you can get a phone for free if you are willing
to not have the latest versions, although these are new phones, and will
pay for the service.
When I look at leaving my service the same and upgrading my phone from a
5 to a 6 or 5C, I can pay $200 for the 6 or $0 for the 5C with no
additional cost to me.
And for those that are wondering, I typically get the new phone set up
charge reversed since we have 5 phones on the same plan.
On 10/15/2014 2:08 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>> On 10/14/2014 8:58 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
>>> "Mike Marlow" wrote:
>>>
>>>> My best friend was just over to work on his wife's van in my garage.
>>>> Told me about a job his son is going to apply for.
>>>>
>>>> Giving away cell phones! Giving away freakin' cell phones.
>>>>
>>>> He has a friend that is doing it and took home a check for $500 for
>>>> one weeks worth of effort.
>>>>
>>>> Must be an election year, huh?
>>>>
>>>> How is that not buying votes?
>>>>
>>>> How is that not simply insane?
>>>>
>>>> Freakin' disgusting - again!
>>> -------------------------------------------------
>>> What qualifies a person to receive a free phone?
>>>
>>> Lew
>
>> Walking into an Apple store and asking for one.
>
> I'm not so sure that is possible anymore. A year or so ago I was able to
> replace an iPhone 4S that my wife owned and broke, for $ 0.99 through our
> carrier (ATT). I've not seen similar offers for a while now. Certainly
> hadn't stumbled across any free offers.
>
http://www.apple.com/iphone/compare/
Scroll down a touch and you will see the free one. ATT and other
carriers do this too.
On 10/15/2014 4:21 AM, pentapus wrote:
>> I have heard 250 minutes around here and they are iPhones.
>
> You have heard wrong.
>
> What drives this is a $9.25/month subsidy. The business providing the
> phones gets the profit between what the subsidy provides and the cost.
> Nobody can make money giving away iPhones to get that $9.25/month minus
> service costs.
The phones I saw were low end cell phones, not IPhones.
On 10/15/2014 12:55 PM, Leon wrote:
[snip]
>
>
> Well cell phones, like printers, are not about selling the phone/printer
> so much as selling the minutes-data-texts/ink.
>
> FWIW you can get an iPhone from APPLE and most any carrier for free.
Put your money where your mouth is, Leon. I'm calling bullshit on that
last comment.
You can pick up an iPhone if you have credit without any money done but
you'll find you're paying $22 to $26 month for 24 months (depending on
which model you're getting) in ADDITION to your call/data/text/line charge.
TINSTAAFL! Unless you're one of worthless POS's holding out your hand
for a free ride off the backs of the diminishing minority in the country
with a work ethic.
Life line? WTF needs 300 or more minutes and texts each month to
SURVIVE? Six hours on the phone better spent looking for work or doing
shit that you CAN do for yourself rather than expecting somebody else
(the government) to do it for you.
So... Show me the free iPhone. Should be easy for you to do since, "you
can get an iPhone from APPLE and most any carrier for free" <g>
On Thu, 23 Oct 2014 21:43:38 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>Fortunately, my new Samsung is waterproof. Hope I never have to find out
>how well it works. An incredible number of phones meet their demise in
>the toilet though.
FYI, I have the Samsung S5 Active. A friend of mine has the same
phone. He forgot he had it in his back pocket and when swimming this
summer. After 30 minutes in the pool he realized his mistake. There
was no damage and the moisture indicators did not turn red.
--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA
On 10/15/2014 4:24 AM, pentapus wrote:
> On 10/15/2014 12:43 AM, JohnnyDollar wrote:
>> The origin of this was Obama promising free shit for votes from the
>> parasites. Parasites don't look for jobs, so there is no real need for
>> the phone except for making dope deals and taking selfies.
>
> Do you ever think? Or do you just say the first thing that was fed into
> your mind?
>
> Obama, had little to do with this.
>>>
Right, Obama did not start it, but he made sure his potential voters
knew of the program and got the free phones.
Just another conniving politician. The man is half white, but he used
his blackness to get elected.
On Wed, 15 Oct 2014 14:27:59 -0400, pentapus <[email protected]> wrote:
>Tell me more about the proactive, cite some source because I have never
>seen any video of a democrat promoting it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio
http://www.obamaphone.com/get-obama-phone
> >>>>
> >
> >"I was referring to the cell phone subsidies for the poor, which
> >started this thread." ?
>=20
> The original rant was about cell phone subsidies. But those subsidies
> are just an extension of the general phone subsidies, which started
> under Reagan.
>=20
> --=20
> -Ed Falk, [email protected]
> http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/
Cut and paste from Century Link website....they are a carrier company out o=
f the Midwest I believe, maybe offer some local service. Specifically menti=
ons the fund started in 1997.
Federal Universal Service Fund (USF) Explained
This surcharge keeps local phone service affordable for all Americans by pr=
oviding discounts on services to schools, libraries, as well as those livin=
g in rural and high-cost areas and income eligible families.
What is the (Federal) Universal Service Fund charge that appears on my bill=
?
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which regulates all telecommun=
ications companies, set the Universal Service Fund up in 1997. All long dis=
tance, local telephone companies, cellular companies, paging companies and =
pay phone providers that provide service between states contribute a percen=
tage of the total amount they bill to the fund. The amount CenturyLink Long=
Distance is required to contribute to the Fund continues to increase, and =
we recover our cost in the form of this charge, as allowed by the FCC.
On 10/23/2014 11:23 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 21:58:30 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>> They work in the bathroom too. My wife thinks it is terrible that I
>> text her from the bathroom.
>
> You've probably heard of this method, but for those who haven't, it
> appears to work (sometimes)!
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJAteBSMvbA
>
Fortunately, my new Samsung is waterproof. Hope I never have to find out
how well it works. An incredible number of phones meet their demise in
the toilet though.
On 10/22/2014 7:57 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 10/21/2014 10:18 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>> Once I determined that I didn't need an electronic nurse maid
>> (AKA: Cell Phone), my communication needs became straight
>> forward.
>>
>
>
>> My customers could always get a call back if they left a message
>> on my voice mail and that was drove my whole thought process.
>>
>> If I didn't lose orders, there was no need to solve a problem
>> that didn't exist.
>>
>> Local and Long Distance is covered by Magic Jack for $20/year.
>
> We've converted "wants" to "needs". The world managed to get by without
> the use of cell phones for a long time. They are convenient, but you
> can still get through life without one.
Have you seen the absence of pay phones? ;~)
That and breaking down on the highway are the number one reasons that we
all made the switch 6 years ago.
On 10/21/2014 2:37 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>
>>
>> My son pays for data, and text and $10 for talk time, he can get an
>> iPhone 4C or a less featured phone for no extra cost, My wife did the
>> same 2 years ago.
>
> I did something similar (we're on ATT) with my wife's phone. Got an iPhone
> 4 or 4S (can't remember now), factory reconditioned, for $0.99. Did not
> even have to re-sign if I recall correctly, directly off the ATT web site.
> Had it delivered the very next day by FedEx. Did not even have to pay
> shipping. I looked for a similar deal not too long ago, and there were none
> like that. Don't know if there is now that the iPhone 6 has come out.
> Sometimes it's a matter of what new technology has just hit the streets.
>
>
>> My wife got a phone for free and only pays the $10 per month for her
>> share of the talk plan. She was not required to get a data or text
>> plan although the phone id capable of receiving both.
>
> ATT requires you to take a data plan for all smartphones. Used to be you
> could get away with just not signing up for data, but they changed that a
> couple of years ago.
>
>
>>
>> I can get an iPhone 5C for free this November and not pay any more for
>> service than I am right now. Since 2008 we have not paid any more for
>> phone service than we did then and all of us have upgraded 2~3 times,
>> some of us have paid $200 for the latest and greatest iPhones and some
>> of us have opted for the free phones.
>
> I really have to check into this stuff myself because I need to upgrade my
> Galaxy S3 - it's getting slow and the battery life is intermittently
> horrible. Not completely a phone problem, but I'm getting tired of the S3
> being treated like a forgotten child by ATT. Last I looked, it seemed that
> the carriers were going to a new plan - instead of almost giving away
> current phones, they now charge you a monthly fee for the phone which comes
> out to nearly full retail if you keep it the life of the agreement. People
> seem to think it's ok to pay $30 per month for a phone that we used to get
> for no more than $99 under the old way of upgrading phones and signing a new
> 2 year agreement. I'm not sure exactly how these new programs work, and I
> need to check into it, but it appears this is a new direction with the
> Carriers.
>
>
Yeah they have introduced Next, IIRC. It allows up to 9 phones with
unlimited talk and text. Each phone is $15. You buy your own phone
interest free, on top of the $15, and can trade it back in in 12 and 18
month intervals for credit towards a new phone IIRC. Once you phone is
paid for your bill is back to $15. NO Contract.
With our current plan once the 2 year obligation is up the payment
remains the same.
This looks like a better deal for us if we choose to not upgrade every 2
years.
On 10/21/2014 3:29 PM, dadiOH wrote:
> "Leon" <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>
>> My son pays for data, and text and $10 for talk time, he can get an
>> iPhone 4C or a less featured phone for no extra cost, My wife did the
>> same 2 years ago.
>> My wife got a phone for free and only pays the $10 per month for her
>> share of the talk plan. She was not required to get a data or text plan
>> although the phone id capable of receiving both.
>>
>> When our family started getting cell phones on a single family plan, the
>> price for 5 phones per month was and still is $100, first phone service
>> was $60 plus taxes each additional phone $10 each.
>> Three of us opted for the $20 Sony phones which were fine for just a
>> phone and 2 of us opted for the 1 cent phones. They all worked as
>> expected. 3 of us have up graded to iPhones so we pay more for data but
>> the others have upgraded for free and still only pay the $10 for service.
>>
>> I can get an iPhone 5C for free this November and not pay any more for
>> service than I am right now. Since 2008 we have not paid any more for
>> phone service than we did then and all of us have upgraded 2~3 times,
>> some of us have paid $200 for the latest and greatest iPhones and some
>> of us have opted for the free phones.
>>
>> What it boils down to is you can get a phone for free if you are willing
>> to not have the latest versions, although these are new phones, and will
>> pay for the service.
>>
>> When I look at leaving my service the same and upgrading my phone from a
>> 5 to a 6 or 5C, I can pay $200 for the 6 or $0 for the 5C with no
>> additional cost to me.
>>
>> And for those that are wondering, I typically get the new phone set up
>> charge reversed since we have 5 phones on the same plan.
>
> Gee, I wonder if I should give up my rotary dial, pulse phone? :)
>
Yes! And take it to The Antiques Road Show for an appraisal. ;~)
On 10/21/2014 10:18 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Once I determined that I didn't need an electronic nurse maid
> (AKA: Cell Phone), my communication needs became straight
> forward.
>
> My customers could always get a call back if they left a message
> on my voice mail and that was drove my whole thought process.
>
> If I didn't lose orders, there was no need to solve a problem
> that didn't exist.
>
> Local and Long Distance is covered by Magic Jack for $20/year.
We've converted "wants" to "needs". The world managed to get by without
the use of cell phones for a long time. They are convenient, but you
can still get through life without one.
We used to walk to school about 1 1/2 miles in the dark because the sun
was not invented yet. Now, Johnny needs a cell phone because something
bad might happen while he walks three blocks to school.
When I was on the road in sales, I'd call into the office twice a day
for messages. Now the customer can call directly to the cell phone.
Questionable as to whether that is an improvement.
On Wed, 15 Oct 2014 14:41:07 +0000 (UTC), Baxter
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Shouldn't this rant be in a .politics group instead of a woodworking
>group?
Ever hear of a "kill file" or "next" key? Instead of becoming a
netkop, learn to use one of them.
On 10/14/2014 9:26 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> My best friend was just over to work on his wife's van in my garage. Told
> me about a job his son is going to apply for.
>
> Giving away cell phones! Giving away freakin' cell phones.
>
> He has a friend that is doing it and took home a check for $500 for one
> weeks worth of effort.
>
> Must be an election year, huh?
>
> How is that not buying votes?
The origin of this traces to Reagan and George W expanded it to
cellphones. So, tell me, what were they thinking?
I can see that if you don't have a phone that getting a job is
impossible. But it is clearly abused and businesses are in it for the
money. Apparently enough to make them spring up like mushrooms after a rain.
>
> How is that not simply insane?
>
> Freakin' disgusting - again!
>
--
pentapus
On 10/14/2014 9:58 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> "Mike Marlow" wrote:
>
>> My best friend was just over to work on his wife's van in my garage.
>> Told me about a job his son is going to apply for.
>>
>> Giving away cell phones! Giving away freakin' cell phones.
>>
>> He has a friend that is doing it and took home a check for $500 for
>> one weeks worth of effort.
>>
>> Must be an election year, huh?
>>
>> How is that not buying votes?
>>
>> How is that not simply insane?
>>
>> Freakin' disgusting - again!
> -------------------------------------------------
> What qualifies a person to receive a free phone?
http://www.freegovernmentcellphones.net/basics/qualify
Where I live they are restricted to 300 minutes. You can buy extra, and
the phones are very cheap types.
>
> Lew
>
>
>
--
pentapus
Lew Hodgett wrote:
> "Mike Marlow" wrote:
>
>> My best friend was just over to work on his wife's van in my garage.
>> Told me about a job his son is going to apply for.
>>
>> Giving away cell phones! Giving away freakin' cell phones.
>>
>> He has a friend that is doing it and took home a check for $500 for
>> one weeks worth of effort.
>>
>> Must be an election year, huh?
>>
>> How is that not buying votes?
>>
>> How is that not simply insane?
>>
>> Freakin' disgusting - again!
> -------------------------------------------------
> What qualifies a person to receive a free phone?
>
I don't have a clue Lew.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
pentapus wrote:
> On 10/14/2014 9:58 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
>> "Mike Marlow" wrote:
>>
>>> My best friend was just over to work on his wife's van in my garage.
>>> Told me about a job his son is going to apply for.
>>>
>>> Giving away cell phones! Giving away freakin' cell phones.
>>>
>>> He has a friend that is doing it and took home a check for $500 for
>>> one weeks worth of effort.
>>>
>>> Must be an election year, huh?
>>>
>>> How is that not buying votes?
>>>
>>> How is that not simply insane?
>>>
>>> Freakin' disgusting - again!
>> -------------------------------------------------
>> What qualifies a person to receive a free phone?
>
> http://www.freegovernmentcellphones.net/basics/qualify
>
> Where I live they are restricted to 300 minutes. You can buy extra,
> and the phones are very cheap types.
I have heard 250 minutes around here and they are iPhones.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On 10/14/2014 11:23 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> pentapus wrote:
>> On 10/14/2014 9:58 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
>>> "Mike Marlow" wrote:
>>>
>>>> My best friend was just over to work on his wife's van in my garage.
>>>> Told me about a job his son is going to apply for.
>>>>
>>>> Giving away cell phones! Giving away freakin' cell phones.
>>>>
>>>> He has a friend that is doing it and took home a check for $500 for
>>>> one weeks worth of effort.
>>>>
>>>> Must be an election year, huh?
>>>>
>>>> How is that not buying votes?
>>>>
>>>> How is that not simply insane?
>>>>
>>>> Freakin' disgusting - again!
>>> -------------------------------------------------
>>> What qualifies a person to receive a free phone?
>>
>> http://www.freegovernmentcellphones.net/basics/qualify
>>
>> Where I live they are restricted to 300 minutes. You can buy extra,
>> and the phones are very cheap types.
>
> I have heard 250 minutes around here and they are iPhones.
You have heard wrong.
What drives this is a $9.25/month subsidy. The business providing the
phones gets the profit between what the subsidy provides and the cost.
Nobody can make money giving away iPhones to get that $9.25/month minus
service costs.
http://www.fcc.gov/guides/lifeline-and-link-affordable-telephone-service-income-eligible-consumers
>
--
pentapus
On 10/15/2014 12:43 AM, JohnnyDollar wrote:
> The origin of this was Obama promising free shit for votes from the
> parasites. Parasites don't look for jobs, so there is no real need for
> the phone except for making dope deals and taking selfies.
Do you ever think? Or do you just say the first thing that was fed into
your mind?
Obama, had little to do with this.
>>
>>
>
--
pentapus
On 10/14/2014 11:23 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> pentapus wrote:
>> On 10/14/2014 9:58 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
>>> "Mike Marlow" wrote:
>>>
>>>> My best friend was just over to work on his wife's van in my garage.
>>>> Told me about a job his son is going to apply for.
>>>>
>>>> Giving away cell phones! Giving away freakin' cell phones.
>>>>
>>>> He has a friend that is doing it and took home a check for $500 for
>>>> one weeks worth of effort.
>>>>
>>>> Must be an election year, huh?
>>>>
>>>> How is that not buying votes?
>>>>
>>>> How is that not simply insane?
>>>>
>>>> Freakin' disgusting - again!
>>> -------------------------------------------------
>>> What qualifies a person to receive a free phone?
>>
>> http://www.freegovernmentcellphones.net/basics/qualify
>>
>> Where I live they are restricted to 300 minutes. You can buy extra,
>> and the phones are very cheap types.
>
> I have heard 250 minutes around here and they are iPhones.
More on this:
http://money.cnn.com/2012/10/26/technology/mobile/tracfone-free-phones/
The subsidy is from a government-created program called Lifeline, which
is paid for by customer fees on most phone bills. The program is
overseen by the Federal Communications Commission, and has its roots in
a universal access initiative that began in 1985, during Ronald Reagan's
administration.
Here's how it works: If you're eligible for other forms of government
assistance like Medicaid or food stamps (the rules differ by state),
then you qualify to receive a $9.25 per month phone subsidy.
Participating wireless companies will typically offer a free phone (paid
for by the company), with an allotment of Lifeline minutes each month.
Lifeline subscribers can collect only one monthly subsidy, for either a
landline or a wireless phone. Around 75% of them have chosen to go wireless.
Where does the money for Lifeline subsidy come from? You.
Take a look at your phone bill and you'll see a charge -- typically a
few dollars a month -- for payments to the "Universal Service Fund."
That's the umbrella program covering various ventures, including
Lifeline, that are designed to make telephone communications universally
available to all Americans.
The government requires most telecoms to pay into the fund. The carriers
then typically pass the costs on to their customers as a monthly
surcharge. Last year, Lifeline accounted for 20% of the $8.1 billion
Universal Service Fund distributed to support connections for rural
areas, schools, hospitals and low-income individuals.
There are 17 million households currently signed up for the program, up
from under 7 million just four years ago.
There are two reasons for the rapid growth.
First, the recession dramatically increased the number of people who are
eligible.
Second, in 2008, during George W. Bush's administration, the FCC allowed
wireless carrier Tracfone to join the program's list of approved providers.
Tracfone has aggressively gone after Lifeline customers. It advertises
its "free phone" on television, pays commissioned street teams to canvas
low-income neighborhoods for new subscribers, and signs customers up
through a splashy website that promises "250 Free Minutes Every Month!
Pay Nothing!"
>
--
pentapus
BillinGA wrote:
> Must be on assistance such as public housing, SNAP, SSI, LIHEAP,
> TANF, free school lunches....it is an extension of telephone service
> for NEEDY folks that stems from land line only days. Everyone with a
> phone way back when paid something like a $1 per month into the
> Universal Telephone Assistance Program so that others may have access
> to call 911. Now they set up in tents and there have been numerous
> news reports over the past few years about how easy it is to walk up
> and get a cellphone or three or four with so many hours per month and
> texting. I believe the original program predates Bush or Reagan. Just
> like many other great society programs enrollment skyrocketed in the
> past 6 years. Step right up.
You're right that the program started back in the days of Reagan, but the
Obama reign saw this program turned into a vote getter - pushing the program
proactively during election years.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 10/15/2014 4:21 AM, pentapus wrote:
>
>>> I have heard 250 minutes around here and they are iPhones.
>>
>> You have heard wrong.
>>
>> What drives this is a $9.25/month subsidy. The business providing the
>> phones gets the profit between what the subsidy provides and the
>> cost. Nobody can make money giving away iPhones to get that
>> $9.25/month minus service costs.
>
> The phones I saw were low end cell phones, not IPhones.
Have not actually seen any of the phones myelf, I was just told iPhones.
The web site does show smart phones, but it does not show iPhones.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
"Mike Marlow" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> BillinGA wrote:
>> Must be on assistance such as public housing, SNAP, SSI, LIHEAP,
>> TANF, free school lunches....it is an extension of telephone service
>> for NEEDY folks that stems from land line only days. Everyone with a
>> phone way back when paid something like a $1 per month into the
>> Universal Telephone Assistance Program so that others may have access
>> to call 911. Now they set up in tents and there have been numerous
>> news reports over the past few years about how easy it is to walk up
>> and get a cellphone or three or four with so many hours per month and
>> texting. I believe the original program predates Bush or Reagan. Just
>> like many other great society programs enrollment skyrocketed in the
>> past 6 years. Step right up.
>
> You're right that the program started back in the days of Reagan, but
> the Obama reign saw this program turned into a vote getter - pushing
> the program proactively during election years.
>
Shouldn't this rant be in a .politics group instead of a woodworking
group?
------
The Lifeline program is not directly subsidized by taxpayer monies. It is
paid for out of the federal Universal Service Fund (USF) through a fee
assessed against telecommunications service providers, who may or may not
pass those costs along to their customers:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/cellphone.asp
--
-----------------------------------------------------
Free Software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
-----------------------------------------------------
"Baxter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> "Mike Marlow" <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
> > BillinGA wrote:
> > > Must be on assistance such as public housing, SNAP, SSI, LIHEAP,
> > > TANF, free school lunches....it is an extension of telephone service
> > > for NEEDY folks that stems from land line only days. Everyone with a
> > > phone way back when paid something like a $1 per month into the
> > > Universal Telephone Assistance Program so that others may have
> > > access
> > > to call 911. Now they set up in tents and there have been numerous
> > > news reports over the past few years about how easy it is to walk up
> > > and get a cellphone or three or four with so many hours per month
> > > and
> > > texting. I believe the original program predates Bush or Reagan.
> > > Just
> > > like many other great society programs enrollment skyrocketed in the
> > > past 6 years. Step right up.
> >
> > You're right that the program started back in the days of Reagan, but
> > the Obama reign saw this program turned into a vote getter - pushing
> > the program proactively during election years.
> >
>
> Shouldn't this rant be in a .politics group instead of a woodworking
> group?
Woodworkers like to rant too :)
> The Lifeline program is not directly subsidized by taxpayer monies. It
> is
> paid for out of the federal Universal Service Fund (USF) through a fee
> assessed against telecommunications service providers, who may or may
> not
> pass those costs along to their customers:
Want to make book on how many don't?
--
dadiOH
____________________________
Winters getting colder? Tired of the rat race?
Taxes out of hand? Maybe just ready for a change?
Check it out... http://www.floridaloghouse.net
Baxter wrote:
> "Mike Marlow" <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>> BillinGA wrote:
>>> Must be on assistance such as public housing, SNAP, SSI, LIHEAP,
>>> TANF, free school lunches....it is an extension of telephone service
>>> for NEEDY folks that stems from land line only days. Everyone with a
>>> phone way back when paid something like a $1 per month into the
>>> Universal Telephone Assistance Program so that others may have
>>> access to call 911. Now they set up in tents and there have been
>>> numerous news reports over the past few years about how easy it is
>>> to walk up and get a cellphone or three or four with so many hours
>>> per month and texting. I believe the original program predates Bush
>>> or Reagan. Just like many other great society programs enrollment
>>> skyrocketed in the past 6 years. Step right up.
>>
>> You're right that the program started back in the days of Reagan, but
>> the Obama reign saw this program turned into a vote getter - pushing
>> the program proactively during election years.
>>
>
> Shouldn't this rant be in a .politics group instead of a woodworking
> group?
No - not when 90% of the participants in this usenet newsgroup are a fairly
tight community of regular contributors who feel free to treat this group a
bit as a coffee bar sometimes.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On 10/15/2014 8:00 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 10/15/2014 4:24 AM, pentapus wrote:
>> On 10/15/2014 12:43 AM, JohnnyDollar wrote:
>>> The origin of this was Obama promising free shit for votes from the
>>> parasites. Parasites don't look for jobs, so there is no real need for
>>> the phone except for making dope deals and taking selfies.
>>
>> Do you ever think? Or do you just say the first thing that was fed into
>> your mind?
>>
>> Obama, had little to do with this.
>>>>
>
>
> Right, Obama did not start it, but he made sure his potential voters
> knew of the program and got the free phones.
I think you missed what is going on. The man responsible for all those
tents with "free phones" is Carlos Slim:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Slim
Who owns Tracfone and a whole lot more.
What probably confuses you is that el Rushbo pushed the video of that
Cleveland woman going off on her "Obamaphone", others picked up on it
That is how it got in the popular lexicon.
>
> Just another conniving politician. The man is half white, but he used
> his blackness to get elected.
Anybody could have beat McCain the year that the recession hit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Recession
Being black is not what got him elected. It was the complete and failing
mess the country was in. Being half white helped.
>
--
pentapus
On 10/15/2014 6:58 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> BillinGA wrote:
>> Must be on assistance such as public housing, SNAP, SSI, LIHEAP,
>> TANF, free school lunches....it is an extension of telephone service
>> for NEEDY folks that stems from land line only days. Everyone with a
>> phone way back when paid something like a $1 per month into the
>> Universal Telephone Assistance Program so that others may have access
>> to call 911. Now they set up in tents and there have been numerous
>> news reports over the past few years about how easy it is to walk up
>> and get a cellphone or three or four with so many hours per month and
>> texting. I believe the original program predates Bush or Reagan. Just
>> like many other great society programs enrollment skyrocketed in the
>> past 6 years. Step right up.
>
> You're right that the program started back in the days of Reagan, but the
> Obama reign saw this program turned into a vote getter - pushing the program
> proactively during election years.
Tell me more about the proactive, cite some source because I have never
seen any video of a democrat promoting it. Let alone a vast push. I've
just heard republicans bitch about it. It is a much bigger deal to them.
You think this is politics? It is business, cold and simple:
Check the Marvin ad:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/10/06/you-might-be-surprised-to-learn-who-is-seemingly-behind-ad-campaign-for-so-called-obamaphone-subsidies/
And then remember that Carlos Slim, one of the richest men in the world
owns those "obamaphone" tents.
>
--
pentapus
Leon wrote:
> On 10/14/2014 8:58 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
>> "Mike Marlow" wrote:
>>
>>> My best friend was just over to work on his wife's van in my garage.
>>> Told me about a job his son is going to apply for.
>>>
>>> Giving away cell phones! Giving away freakin' cell phones.
>>>
>>> He has a friend that is doing it and took home a check for $500 for
>>> one weeks worth of effort.
>>>
>>> Must be an election year, huh?
>>>
>>> How is that not buying votes?
>>>
>>> How is that not simply insane?
>>>
>>> Freakin' disgusting - again!
>> -------------------------------------------------
>> What qualifies a person to receive a free phone?
>>
>> Lew
> Walking into an Apple store and asking for one.
I'm not so sure that is possible anymore. A year or so ago I was able to
replace an iPhone 4S that my wife owned and broke, for $ 0.99 through our
carrier (ATT). I've not seen similar offers for a while now. Certainly
hadn't stumbled across any free offers.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
pentapus wrote:
> On 10/15/2014 8:00 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> On 10/15/2014 4:24 AM, pentapus wrote:
>>> On 10/15/2014 12:43 AM, JohnnyDollar wrote:
>>>> The origin of this was Obama promising free shit for votes from the
>>>> parasites. Parasites don't look for jobs, so there is no real need
>>>> for the phone except for making dope deals and taking selfies.
>>>
>>> Do you ever think? Or do you just say the first thing that was fed
>>> into your mind?
>>>
>>> Obama, had little to do with this.
>>>>>
>>
>>
>> Right, Obama did not start it, but he made sure his potential voters
>> knew of the program and got the free phones.
>
> I think you missed what is going on. The man responsible for all those
> tents with "free phones" is Carlos Slim:
>
I'm afraid it is you who is missing what is going on. The program has been
in place since 1996 but it falls asleep until election years when all of a
sudden feet hit the street in a proactive way, to distribute these phones to
potential voters. Then - the program goes silent again until the next
somewhat important election year.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
pentapus wrote:
> On 10/15/2014 6:58 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>> BillinGA wrote:
>>> Must be on assistance such as public housing, SNAP, SSI, LIHEAP,
>>> TANF, free school lunches....it is an extension of telephone service
>>> for NEEDY folks that stems from land line only days. Everyone with a
>>> phone way back when paid something like a $1 per month into the
>>> Universal Telephone Assistance Program so that others may have
>>> access to call 911. Now they set up in tents and there have been
>>> numerous news reports over the past few years about how easy it is
>>> to walk up and get a cellphone or three or four with so many hours
>>> per month and texting. I believe the original program predates Bush
>>> or Reagan. Just like many other great society programs enrollment
>>> skyrocketed in the past 6 years. Step right up.
>>
>> You're right that the program started back in the days of Reagan,
>> but the Obama reign saw this program turned into a vote getter -
>> pushing the program proactively during election years.
>
> Tell me more about the proactive, cite some source because I have
> never seen any video of a democrat promoting it. Let alone a vast
> push. I've just heard republicans bitch about it. It is a much bigger
> deal to them.
I'll not bother. You seem intent upon distracting this by raising the
irrelevant points about USF, etc. Read my other posts and chose to either
disagree or to ignore them.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On 10/15/2014 3:10 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> pentapus wrote:
>> On 10/15/2014 8:00 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>> On 10/15/2014 4:24 AM, pentapus wrote:
>>>> On 10/15/2014 12:43 AM, JohnnyDollar wrote:
>>>>> The origin of this was Obama promising free shit for votes from the
>>>>> parasites. Parasites don't look for jobs, so there is no real need
>>>>> for the phone except for making dope deals and taking selfies.
>>>>
>>>> Do you ever think? Or do you just say the first thing that was fed
>>>> into your mind?
>>>>
>>>> Obama, had little to do with this.
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Right, Obama did not start it, but he made sure his potential voters
>>> knew of the program and got the free phones.
>>
>> I think you missed what is going on. The man responsible for all those
>> tents with "free phones" is Carlos Slim:
>>
>
> I'm afraid it is you who is missing what is going on. The program has been
> in place since 1996 but it falls asleep until election years when all of a
> sudden feet hit the street in a proactive way, to distribute these phones to
> potential voters. Then - the program goes silent again until the next
> somewhat important election year.
If this anecdotal on your part, it is not what I see at all. I have
reason to go in the hood and I see these year after year, not more now
than last year, nor the year before. What you do hear more of on the
election years is it being brought up on talk radio.
It's about the money, and although it is only about 20% of the fee, with
the rest going to rural and schools and such, but it is still real
money. Follow the money and you see what is going on, the politics of
this favors the right not the left, which is why all the agitation is
on the right.
As far as buying votes, the rabble you most complain about with the
"Free" phones are not voters. Giving them a phone and they are no more
inclined to vote than before, or change parties. The facts are not
there, regardless of what some talking head says. The right will get
more votes out of arousing their base on this than the left will
counting on deadbeats with free phones to be inspired to push the D.
That is fiction and fantasy to believe that is where the D votes are.
Follow the money, see where it goes, and you will have a better idea.
>
--
pentapus
pentapus wrote:
>
> If this anecdotal on your part, it is not what I see at all. I have
> reason to go in the hood and I see these year after year, not more now
> than last year, nor the year before. What you do hear more of on the
> election years is it being brought up on talk radio.
>
Fist off - this is anecdotal on your part. You have reason to go into the
hood and see things but how much do you genuinely evaluate any one of these
things? Second - you clearly missed or ignord my original point. I never
made any mention of talk radio, rather of somewhat close personal
experience. You jumped to the talk radio thing that has not even been a
part of this conversation to this point. That alone is cause enough to
write you off.
> It's about the money, and although it is only about 20% of the fee,
> with the rest going to rural and schools and such, but it is still
> real money. Follow the money and you see what is going on, the
> politics of this favors the right not the left, which is why all the
> agitation is on the right.
Follow the politics - unless that is against your lean.
>
> As far as buying votes, the rabble you most complain about with the
> "Free" phones are not voters. Giving them a phone and they are no more
> inclined to vote than before, or change parties.
Cite...?
> The facts are not
> there, regardless of what some talking head says.
So - talking head would include internet voices like yours.
> The right will get
> more votes out of arousing their base on this than the left will
> counting on deadbeats with free phones to be inspired to push the D.
> That is fiction and fantasy to believe that is where the D votes are.
Interesting - you brought the right vs left into this. That was not an
element of this discussion until you brought it up. Why is that such a
prevelant thought in your mind when it has not been introduced by anyone
else? I sense an agenda at work here.
>
> Follow the money, see where it goes, and you will have a better idea.
Follow the politics and you will see, but I doubt that will ever happen.
I'm now dropping out of this conversation with you.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
In article <[email protected]>,
pentapus <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>http://www.freegovernmentcellphones.net/basics/qualify
Why doesn't that domain name end with ".gov"? Why does it contain
commercial advertisements?
Here is an actual government site about the program:
http://www.fcc.gov/guides/lifeline-and-link-affordable-telephone-service-income-eligible-consumers
Basically, they help low-income people by subsidizing cell phone
access, which can be crucial to people trying to get out of
poverty.
--
-Ed Falk, [email protected]
http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/
In article <[email protected]>,
JohnnyDollar <[email protected]> wrote:
>The origin of this was Obama promising free shit for votes
It originated with Reagan.
--
-Ed Falk, [email protected]
http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/
Leon wrote:
>
> My son pays for data, and text and $10 for talk time, he can get an
> iPhone 4C or a less featured phone for no extra cost, My wife did the
> same 2 years ago.
I did something similar (we're on ATT) with my wife's phone. Got an iPhone
4 or 4S (can't remember now), factory reconditioned, for $0.99. Did not
even have to re-sign if I recall correctly, directly off the ATT web site.
Had it delivered the very next day by FedEx. Did not even have to pay
shipping. I looked for a similar deal not too long ago, and there were none
like that. Don't know if there is now that the iPhone 6 has come out.
Sometimes it's a matter of what new technology has just hit the streets.
> My wife got a phone for free and only pays the $10 per month for her
> share of the talk plan. She was not required to get a data or text
> plan although the phone id capable of receiving both.
ATT requires you to take a data plan for all smartphones. Used to be you
could get away with just not signing up for data, but they changed that a
couple of years ago.
>
> I can get an iPhone 5C for free this November and not pay any more for
> service than I am right now. Since 2008 we have not paid any more for
> phone service than we did then and all of us have upgraded 2~3 times,
> some of us have paid $200 for the latest and greatest iPhones and some
> of us have opted for the free phones.
I really have to check into this stuff myself because I need to upgrade my
Galaxy S3 - it's getting slow and the battery life is intermittently
horrible. Not completely a phone problem, but I'm getting tired of the S3
being treated like a forgotten child by ATT. Last I looked, it seemed that
the carriers were going to a new plan - instead of almost giving away
current phones, they now charge you a monthly fee for the phone which comes
out to nearly full retail if you keep it the life of the agreement. People
seem to think it's ok to pay $30 per month for a phone that we used to get
for no more than $99 under the old way of upgrading phones and signing a new
2 year agreement. I'm not sure exactly how these new programs work, and I
need to check into it, but it appears this is a new direction with the
Carriers.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
"Leon" <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> My son pays for data, and text and $10 for talk time, he can get an
> iPhone 4C or a less featured phone for no extra cost, My wife did the
> same 2 years ago.
> My wife got a phone for free and only pays the $10 per month for her
> share of the talk plan. She was not required to get a data or text plan
> although the phone id capable of receiving both.
>
> When our family started getting cell phones on a single family plan, the
> price for 5 phones per month was and still is $100, first phone service
> was $60 plus taxes each additional phone $10 each.
> Three of us opted for the $20 Sony phones which were fine for just a
> phone and 2 of us opted for the 1 cent phones. They all worked as
> expected. 3 of us have up graded to iPhones so we pay more for data but
> the others have upgraded for free and still only pay the $10 for
> service.
>
> I can get an iPhone 5C for free this November and not pay any more for
> service than I am right now. Since 2008 we have not paid any more for
> phone service than we did then and all of us have upgraded 2~3 times,
> some of us have paid $200 for the latest and greatest iPhones and some
> of us have opted for the free phones.
>
> What it boils down to is you can get a phone for free if you are willing
> to not have the latest versions, although these are new phones, and will
> pay for the service.
>
> When I look at leaving my service the same and upgrading my phone from a
> 5 to a 6 or 5C, I can pay $200 for the 6 or $0 for the 5C with no
> additional cost to me.
>
> And for those that are wondering, I typically get the new phone set up
> charge reversed since we have 5 phones on the same plan.
Gee, I wonder if I should give up my rotary dial, pulse phone? :)
--
dadiOH
____________________________
Winters getting colder? Tired of the rat race?
Taxes out of hand? Maybe just ready for a change?
Check it out... http://www.floridaloghouse.net
"Leon" <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Have you seen the absence of pay phones? ;~)
Yeah, I kinda miss them.
I joined the navy in July, 1951 when I was just shy of 18. Since I was
from Indiana, they naturally sent me to San Diego for boot camp. One of
the first things I learned from the California guys was how to make a pay
phone think a penny was a nickel (calls were $0.05 back then). About the
second thing was what to do with a cup of coffee and a benzedrine inhaler.
Those CA guys were a caution :)
> That and breaking down on the highway are the number one reasons that we
> all made the switch 6 years ago.
I ain't gonna switch, no need, my wife has one. I hate it.
--
dadiOH
____________________________
Winters getting colder? Tired of the rat race?
Taxes out of hand? Maybe just ready for a change?
Check it out... http://www.floridaloghouse.net
Mike Marlow wrote:
>Rant - This country is screwed up
>
>
>
Amen brother!
the sick, twisted adults that were behind this video should be thrown in jail. It's unbelievable the lengths that the left will go to advance their agenda.
Childhood innocence be damned.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/22/little-girls-drop-f-bombs-in-profane-feminist-ad/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqHYzYn3WZw
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: [email protected] ---
In article <[email protected]>,
Martin Eastburn <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 10/20/2014 6:13 PM, Edward A. Falk wrote:
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> JohnnyDollar <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> The origin of this was Obama promising free shit for votes
>>
>> It originated with Reagan.
>>
>It started before FDR and FDR kicked it up.
I was referring to the cell phone subsidies for the poor, which
started this thread.
--
-Ed Falk, [email protected]
http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/
pentapus <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 10/14/2014 11:23 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>> pentapus wrote:
>>> On 10/14/2014 9:58 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> http://money.cnn.com/2012/10/26/technology/mobile/tracfone-free-phones/
>
> The subsidy is from a government-created program called Lifeline, which
> is paid for by customer fees on most phone bills. The program is
> overseen by the Federal Communications Commission, and has its roots in
> a universal access initiative that began in 1985, during Ronald Reagan's
> administration.
> Here's how it works: If you're eligible for other forms of government
> assistance like Medicaid or food stamps (the rules differ by state),
> then you qualify to receive a $9.25 per month phone subsidy.
> Participating wireless companies will typically offer a free phone (paid
> for by the company), with an allotment of Lifeline minutes each month.
> Lifeline subscribers can collect only one monthly subsidy, for either a
> landline or a wireless phone. Around 75% of them have chosen to go wireless.
> Where does the money for Lifeline subsidy come from? You.
> Take a look at your phone bill and you'll see a charge -- typically a
> few dollars a month -- for payments to the "Universal Service Fund."
> That's the umbrella program covering various ventures, including
> Lifeline, that are designed to make telephone communications universally
> available to all Americans.
how about more pay phones? bring them back
In article <[email protected]>,
Doug Winterburn <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> I was referring to the cell phone subsidies for the poor, which
>> started this thread.
>>
>It's very unlikely that cell phone subsidies for the poor were started
>in the Reagan administration - unless the gov was spending thousands per
>person on the cell phone technology of the '80s.
To be precise, telephone subsidies ("Lifeline") started under
Reagan, and became the cell phone subsidies we see today.
--
-Ed Falk, [email protected]
http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/
Contrarian wrote:
> how about more pay phones? bring them back
Don't hold your breath - those things are dead. Museum pieces now.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
In article <[email protected]>,
Doug Winterburn <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 10/29/2014 04:50 PM, Edward A. Falk wrote:
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> Doug Winterburn <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I was referring to the cell phone subsidies for the poor, which
>>>> started this thread.
>>>>
>>> It's very unlikely that cell phone subsidies for the poor were started
>>> in the Reagan administration - unless the gov was spending thousands per
>>> person on the cell phone technology of the '80s.
>>
>> To be precise, telephone subsidies ("Lifeline") started under
>> Reagan, and became the cell phone subsidies we see today.
>>
>
>Then why did you state:
>
>"I was referring to the cell phone subsidies for the poor, which
>started this thread." ?
The original rant was about cell phone subsidies. But those subsidies
are just an extension of the general phone subsidies, which started
under Reagan.
--
-Ed Falk, [email protected]
http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 23:30:22 +0000 (UTC),
"Contrarian"<[email protected]> wrote:
>pentapus <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 10/14/2014 11:23 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>>> pentapus wrote:
>>>> On 10/14/2014 9:58 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
>
>> http://money.cnn.com/2012/10/26/technology/mobile/tracfone-free-phones/
>>
>> The subsidy is from a government-created program called Lifeline, which
>> is paid for by customer fees on most phone bills. The program is
>> overseen by the Federal Communications Commission, and has its roots in
>> a universal access initiative that began in 1985, during Ronald Reagan's
>> administration.
>
>
>> Here's how it works: If you're eligible for other forms of government
>> assistance like Medicaid or food stamps (the rules differ by state),
>> then you qualify to receive a $9.25 per month phone subsidy.
>
>
>> Participating wireless companies will typically offer a free phone (paid
>> for by the company), with an allotment of Lifeline minutes each month.
>> Lifeline subscribers can collect only one monthly subsidy, for either a
>> landline or a wireless phone. Around 75% of them have chosen to go wireless.
>
>> Where does the money for Lifeline subsidy come from? You.
>> Take a look at your phone bill and you'll see a charge -- typically a
>> few dollars a month -- for payments to the "Universal Service Fund."
>> That's the umbrella program covering various ventures, including
>> Lifeline, that are designed to make telephone communications universally
>> available to all Americans.
>
>how about more pay phones? bring them back
Sounds like a good business venture for you.
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 16:29:01 -0400, "dadiOH" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>"Leon" <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]
>
>> My son pays for data, and text and $10 for talk time, he can get an
>> iPhone 4C or a less featured phone for no extra cost, My wife did the
>> same 2 years ago.
>> My wife got a phone for free and only pays the $10 per month for her
>> share of the talk plan. She was not required to get a data or text plan
>> although the phone id capable of receiving both.
>>
>> When our family started getting cell phones on a single family plan, the
>> price for 5 phones per month was and still is $100, first phone service
>> was $60 plus taxes each additional phone $10 each.
>> Three of us opted for the $20 Sony phones which were fine for just a
>> phone and 2 of us opted for the 1 cent phones. They all worked as
>> expected. 3 of us have up graded to iPhones so we pay more for data but
>> the others have upgraded for free and still only pay the $10 for
>> service.
>>
>> I can get an iPhone 5C for free this November and not pay any more for
>> service than I am right now. Since 2008 we have not paid any more for
>> phone service than we did then and all of us have upgraded 2~3 times,
>> some of us have paid $200 for the latest and greatest iPhones and some
>> of us have opted for the free phones.
>>
>> What it boils down to is you can get a phone for free if you are willing
>> to not have the latest versions, although these are new phones, and will
>> pay for the service.
>>
>> When I look at leaving my service the same and upgrading my phone from a
>> 5 to a 6 or 5C, I can pay $200 for the 6 or $0 for the 5C with no
>> additional cost to me.
>>
>> And for those that are wondering, I typically get the new phone set up
>> charge reversed since we have 5 phones on the same plan.
>
>Gee, I wonder if I should give up my rotary dial, pulse phone? :)
I have a rotary dial app for my smart phone. ;-)
On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 21:58:30 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>They work in the bathroom too. My wife thinks it is terrible that I
>text her from the bathroom.
You've probably heard of this method, but for those who haven't, it
appears to work (sometimes)!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJAteBSMvbA
'Lew Hodgett[_6_ Wrote:
> ;3299469']"Leon" wrote:
> -
> Have you seen the absence of pay phones?-
> ------------------------------------------------
> Did you see the bit from the UK the other day?
>
> They are running a test in London by converting abandoned pay
> phone booths into charging stations for phones/electronics/etc.
>
> Lew
This is really interesting, have you got a link for this Lew?
--
sofarris