Page 1 of 1

The Case For "Obamaphones": Shame on Conks Who Object

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2013 7:57 am
by Cap'n Cat
http://inplainsight.nbcnews.com/_news/2 ... -poor?lite" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

:roll:

'It's not a BlackBerry, but it's helping me for now': Cellphones are now essentials for the poor

After losing her job as a bookstore manager in New York City two years ago, Ethel Brown, 53, also lost her home. Since then, she’s mostly been living under an acquaintance’s roof while trying to find work, and may need to find another place to live soon.

Though money is tight, Brown makes sure she stays on top of her monthly cellphone bill for a $35 prepaid plan from Boost Mobile, which provides her with unlimited minutes and texts. Sometimes she cuts back on buying a cup of coffee or extra food, to ensure she can pay her cellphone bill.

With both her employment and living situation in flux, Brown needs her mobile phone. She uses it to follow up on job and housing leads, and to keep in touch with public assistance agencies, which sometimes follow up with phone calls instead of asking applicants to come into an office. Having a cellphone also helps Brown stay in touch with her family and friends.

"It’s basic. I call it my 'Blueberry,'" Brown said, describing her feature phone. "It’s not a BlackBerry, but it’s helping me for now."

Once considered a luxury, the cellphone has become one of the most popular communication technologies in the world. As a result, many people — regardless of income level — view the cellphone as more of a necessity. Before landlines became essential, they, too, were once used by the privileged few.

Brown is a client at LIFT, an organization that aims to help its community members achieve economic stability. Advocates at the organization also believe cellphone access is crucial to community members, especially for those clients facing a housing difficulty.
"Many of our clients walk through our doors and they’ve just received a marshal’s notice, or a lock has been put on their doors, and they’re trying to figure out next steps and what to do," Rachel Jones, program coordinator at LIFT-The Bronx, told NBC News.

"When your home is in jeopardy, and you are at risk of losing something that should in theory be stable in your life, like a house and a roof over your head, and when a landline is connected to that, then that is essentially not as secure as you would think."
Brown went through a period of a few months where she had no mobile phone, and she said it was awful.

"You have to depend on somebody else to take your messages and when you do go over and speak to the person and say ‘Hey, did anybody call?’… Hopefully they’ll tell you, or they wrote it down," Brown said.


:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

This is the kind of wonderful thing government does. You Conks should be ashamed of yourselves. :ohno:

Image
"Yeah, if we get just a few more votes, we can get cell phones outta the hands of the niqqers. I don't want 'em calling KFC on MY dime!"

Re: The Case For "Obamaphones": Shame on Conks Who Object

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2013 8:20 am
by 89Hen
Nice story. Glad a group of good people fund this program. :thumb:

•Beneficial Bank
•The Bromley Charitable Trust
•The Morris & Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation
•CharityWorks
•The Charles Jacob Foundation
•The Chichester duPont Foundation
•Citizen's Bank
•Claneil Foundation, Inc
•The Corporation for National and Community Service/Americorps*National Direct
•ECMC - Educational Credit Management Corporation
•Evanston Community Foundation
•Glenview Capital Management
•The Goldhirsh Foundation
•JHL Capital Group LLC
•Kenilworth Union Church
•The McCormick Foundation
•Morningstar Foundation
•New Profit, Inc.
•North Shore Community Bank and Trust
•The Polk Bros. Foundation
•Powers Pyles Sutter & Verville PC
•The Prince Charitable Trusts
•Robin Hood
•Wachovia Wells Fargo Foundation
•Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
•Washington Post Foundation

Re: The Case For "Obamaphones": Shame on Conks Who Object

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2013 8:50 am
by Pwns
Honestly, I don't have much of a problem with this. Hard to imagine going through the process of finding a place to live or getting a job without a phone these days.

Re: The Case For "Obamaphones": Shame on Conks Who Object

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2013 9:07 am
by AZGrizFan
89Hen wrote:Nice story. Glad a group of good people fund this program. :thumb:

•Beneficial Bank
•The Bromley Charitable Trust
•The Morris & Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation
•CharityWorks
•The Charles Jacob Foundation
•The Chichester duPont Foundation
•Citizen's Bank
•Claneil Foundation, Inc
•The Corporation for National and Community Service/Americorps*National Direct
•ECMC - Educational Credit Management Corporation
•Evanston Community Foundation
•Glenview Capital Management
•The Goldhirsh Foundation
•JHL Capital Group LLC
•Kenilworth Union Church
•The McCormick Foundation
•Morningstar Foundation
•New Profit, Inc.
•North Shore Community Bank and Trust
•The Polk Bros. Foundation
•Powers Pyles Sutter & Verville PC
•The Prince Charitable Trusts
•Robin Hood
•Wachovia Wells Fargo Foundation
•Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
•Washington Post Foundation
A bunch of evil corporations if you ask me. :ohno:

Re: The Case For "Obamaphones": Shame on Conks Who Object

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2013 4:24 pm
by BDKJMU
Pwns wrote:Honestly, I don't have much of a problem with this. Hard to imagine going through the process of finding a place to live or getting a job without a phone these days.
People in the 90s and prior managed to do it just fine without cell phones...

Re: The Case For "Obamaphones": Shame on Conks Who Object

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2013 9:54 pm
by Chizzang
AZGrizFan wrote:
89Hen wrote:Nice story. Glad a group of good people fund this program. :thumb:

•Beneficial Bank
•The Bromley Charitable Trust
•The Morris & Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation
•CharityWorks
•The Charles Jacob Foundation
•The Chichester duPont Foundation
•Citizen's Bank
•Claneil Foundation, Inc
•The Corporation for National and Community Service/Americorps*National Direct
•ECMC - Educational Credit Management Corporation
•Evanston Community Foundation
•Glenview Capital Management
•The Goldhirsh Foundation
•JHL Capital Group LLC
•Kenilworth Union Church
•The McCormick Foundation
•Morningstar Foundation
•New Profit, Inc.
•North Shore Community Bank and Trust
•The Polk Bros. Foundation
•Powers Pyles Sutter & Verville PC
•The Prince Charitable Trusts
•Robin Hood
•Wachovia Wells Fargo Foundation
•Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
•Washington Post Foundation
A bunch of evil corporations if you ask me. :ohno:
It's a f*-ing write off :nod:
They have tax lawyers run this end of their business
I'd bet you straight up (prior to all the fuss) the chiefs and officers of these company's had no idea they were donating to this...

Again:
That arm of the business is handled by the legal teams Tax Specialists (Period)
Zero emotion / Zero concern of "good will"

100% business :coffee:

Re: The Case For "Obamaphones": Shame on Conks Who Object

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:00 am
by houndawg
BDKJMU wrote:
Pwns wrote:Honestly, I don't have much of a problem with this. Hard to imagine going through the process of finding a place to live or getting a job without a phone these days.
People in the 90s and prior managed to do it just fine without cell phones...
:jack:

Re: The Case For "Obamaphones": Shame on Conks Who Object

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:59 am
by D1B
houndawg wrote:
BDKJMU wrote:
People in the 90s and prior managed to do it just fine without cell phones...
:jack:
BDCUMSTN :dunce:

Re: The Case For "Obamaphones": Shame on Conks Who Object

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2013 6:25 am
by AZGrizFan
Chizzang wrote:
AZGrizFan wrote:A bunch of evil corporations if you ask me. :ohno:
It's a f*-ing write off :nod:
They have tax lawyers run this end of their business
I'd bet you straight up (prior to all the fuss) the chiefs and officers of these company's had no idea they were donating to this...

Again:
That arm of the business is handled by the legal teams Tax Specialists (Period)
Zero emotion / Zero concern of "good will"

100% business :coffee:
See? Evil.

Re: The Case For "Obamaphones": Shame on Conks Who Object

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2013 6:30 am
by ASUG8
Chizzang wrote: It's a f*-ing write off :nod:
They have tax lawyers run this end of their business
I'd bet you straight up (prior to all the fuss) the chiefs and officers of these company's had no idea they were donating to this...

Again:
That arm of the business is handled by the legal teams Tax Specialists (Period)
Zero emotion / Zero concern of "good will"

100% business :coffee:

True, but also 100% funding. If not for the tax writeoff this program would be (1) 100% funded by tax dollars, (2) fully subsidized by the Universal Service fees we all pay, or (3) non existent.

I don't mind the program as long as there is some proper oversight, but we should expect none and hope to be surprised as with most government programs.
Congress is finally getting involved in reining in one of the government’s most bloated programs, the $9.3 billion Universal Service Fund, which is responsible for saddling telephone bills with an inscrutable array of taxes and fees. People have to pay more to keep in touch with friends and family because the government is raising cash to buy Obamaphones.
These are the devices made famous in an election-year YouTube video featuring a woman explaining her ballot-box choice. “Keep Obama as president,” she said, “he gave us a phone.” Officially, it’s known as the Universal Service Fund’s Lifeline program, something that has more than doubled in size from $822 million to $2.1 billion under President Obama. The flood of new money has covered the cost of hiring vendors to stand outside welfare offices and sign up people for “free” high-tech smartphones. Companies on the dole also set up websites enticing the public to get their “free government cellphones” online.


Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... z2emN215kV" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... amaphones/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: The Case For "Obamaphones": Shame on Conks Who Object

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:31 am
by 89Hen
Chizzang wrote:It's a f*-ing write off :nod:
I always get a kick out of people who say this. Pay $100 and save $30 on your taxes. It's free money. :lol: :dunce:

Re: The Case For "Obamaphones": Shame on Conks Who Object

Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2013 11:10 pm
by Chizzang
89Hen wrote:
Chizzang wrote:It's a f*-ing write off :nod:
I always get a kick out of people who say this. Pay $100 and save $30 on your taxes. It's free money. :lol: :dunce:
Oh come on you're not that stupid...
It's an absolute imperative to have Tax Lawyers
Companies have teams that have mastered the art of ZERO taxes (see: GE)

Good corporations are aggressive in reducing their tax burden through various tax credits and deductions created by the federal government.
It's also now extremely popular to get creative in moving a good deal of profits offshore
(and far easier than your average American realizes)

Beyond pay payroll taxes and local and state taxes (which are easy to track) federal taxes go unreported because of huge loop holes and targeted donations

How much?
We don’t know, none of the big guys say, nor are they required to...