Free Internet at Your Expense for Low Income Families

[Quantum Windbag]

That works out to just over .13/taxpayer based on filings from 2009. Yes, I think I can handle paying an additional .13/year for this program.

I think your math is a little off if you count only those who are actually working and paying into the national treasury without getting back most or more than they pay in. And again you are only counting one U.S. city. Add in ALL the U.S. cities and I think you'll be looking at paying a substantial amount every year to fund such a program.

$2.1M (per you) for the cost of the program in FL divided by the number of tax filers in 2009 (156M) equals just over .13/filer. Where is my math off?

Because roughly have of the tax filers have $0.00 tax liability?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

How much is this program costing the individual taxpayer?

You tell me. $2.1 million to provide free internet service plus some other perks for one low income housing project in Tampa Fl. How much would that be if all low income housing projects in Florida are included. In all of the southeast? In all of the south? In all of the country?

The point isn't so much the amount allocated for this project but the precedent being set and the implications of that.

what is a 'perk', hon? are they getting credit cards to go to bloomingdales? starbucks gift certificates? coops on park avenue? free porn for all?

let's define terms. your poll says as choice a "lets give them all of it" then choice b says 'only educational sites'.

what's an educational site. i can tell you that my 13 year old son couldn't excel in school without the ability to do research. that includes the site his english teacher downloads their reading assignments to downloading information from wikipedia as a beginning point to his research.

is wikipedia an 'educational site'?

how about cbs?

how about comedy central if a teacher wants them to watch something on jon stewart?

is there a difference in cost if they get 'all of it'? or is that just a way to be spiteful? (not you, the policy).

and why on earth would it bother you? how much money do we give that subsidizes agriculture? how much have we spent building infrastructure in iraq while ignoring our own?

seriously...

we spent 70 million investigating a failed land deal and got a blue dress; darryl issa the idiot wants to spend millions doing 'an investigation a day'. we have spent trillions on an unnecessary war of choice. we spent a million dollars when baby bush was president on a study to ascertain if prayer works and we're going to haggle over kids getting the internet?

Let them go to the public mother fucking library. They can read all the books and surf the net all they want, and during school hours they have access there as well.

Gimmee gimmee gimmee gimmee gimmee.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I think your math is a little off if you count only those who are actually working and paying into the national treasury without getting back most or more than they pay in. And again you are only counting one U.S. city. Add in ALL the U.S. cities and I think you'll be looking at paying a substantial amount every year to fund such a program.

$2.1M (per you) for the cost of the program in FL divided by the number of tax filers in 2009 (156M) equals just over .13/filer. Where is my math off?

Because roughly have of the tax filers have $0.00 tax liability?

And roughly 100% of said half wil be lining up for free internet.

 

[goldcatt]

Millions of us managed to get an education without free internet or computers being provided. Heck, there wasn't any such thing as personal computers during much of my formal education. If you wanted to be educated you had to get your butt out of bed, get to a school campus someplace, and attend classes.

EVERY school from first through twelfth grade, every junior college, every university, every community center, etc. etc. etc. has computers provided for use. Not as convenient as being able to stay home in your jammies with your beer and pretzels for sure, but perhaps creating a work ethic to have to get out and get it done.

Small rural communities without broadband access may just have to work together to bring it in like all rural communities have had to do with sewer systems, electricity, natural gas, and telephones. And availability of broadband access is not a problem in Tampa FL.

If we were going to spend the money, infrastructure for rural broadband access instead would be my choice.

It's not just about personal use, there are also lots of farms and businesses out here in the sticks that could and would benefit. You can't expand to internet sales or use many business applications on dialup service, and for many rural small businesses the cost of satellite service (assuming it's available) eats into the bottom line. As hard hit as some cities are, the rural economy in many areas got the bust without really benefiting much from the boom years before it. Any hand up to new opportunity would be helpful.

Although every phone bill has included a fee for rural broadband for years, makes me wonder what's been done with that money.

Sadly the huge lion's share of all federal monies is swallowed up by the bureaucracy and never gets to its intended target. That is why I oppose the federal government doing muich of anything outside of its constitutionally mandated responsibilities. Most state governments are far more efficient and local governments evenmoreso--the best solution for most rural problems are private coops by which almost all of the funding collected is assigned to fixing the problem.

I know there are exceptions and we all can probably name at least one. But I think Americans have become far too dependent on government instead of looking to correct what needs fixing themselves. There is a solution for almost every situation if enough heads determine to figure it out and then muster the gumption to just do it.

However there are areas in New Mexico that still do not have any form of public utilities--no electricity, no public telephone service, no broadband, no piped in natural gas, etc. The people who choose to live in those areas accept that as the way it is for those who choose to live where they live. They use propane lighting, heating, etc., or utilize wind chargers or propane fueled generators, satellite phones and computer service, etc. etc. and they get along just fine. After visiting with some of the rugged individuals who choose that lifestyle they wouldn't give up their freedom and way of life for the amenities that we folks in the city enjoy for anything. I sort of envy them actually.

No, I'm not talking about a tax. It's a fee paid directly to the phone company to subsidize them building broadband access in rural areas. It never goes to the government.

I'd like to know what's happening to that money.

Sure, for individuals it's a choice to live in those areas. But until and unless urban farming reaches a scale where cities are going to be self-sufficient in food production, or you want to import all of your produce, y'all need the farms and orchards in more fertile areas near major cities to stay afloat. And the people who live in those areas need to make a living to be able to stay in business, something that's been exceedingly difficult for family truck and dairy farmers in the last 30 years.

And here when they go our of business it's not to sell to agribusiness, it's to sell to developers and that farmland is gone forever. Which means more imported food, more produce lying on a truck for days instead of getting there quickly, and higher dairy prices.

There are a lot of areas like the one where I live, where there are still a huge number of family farms, orchards, and dairies that serve the I-95 corridor. Something as simple as broadband internet access for those businesses can do a lot increase efficiency, which saves both time and money.

In some depressed rural areas unemployment right now is running 20% and real estate isn't moving for people to be able to get out. There are a lot of home based businesses that can be launched or jobs with companies at a distance that can be worked from home to help families cope...but not on dialup.

Yep, I live here so I'm biased. Sue me. But seriously, if you're going to spend the money isn't it better to invest it in an area where some of it will come back in increased earnings, jobs and taxes than to throw it away?

 

[Agit8r]

I've heard ads telling the listener that they may qualify for unlimited cel-phone and texting minutes... for safety. It seems to be a case of a luxury being package as a necessity, and one of those seemingly extravagant subsidy/handouts that give liberals a bad name

 

[shintao]

Coming soon for Low Income Folks. . . .Free Internet access and Other Perks

So what do you think? Is it a good use of your hard earned tax dollar to provide free internet access, computer instruction, and low cost computers to folks while you are busting your butt to keep a roof over your head, food on the table, and you pay for your internet access and full price for your computer as well as whatever you need to use it?

Or will the payoff of better skilled and trained people be worth it?

Would you approve of all porn sites, shopping sites, gaming sites, Facebook, Twitter, etc. being blocked by the internet provider to ensure that the computers will be used only for research and educational purposes?

Please discuss.

The Tampa Housing Authority has secured a $2.1 million federal grant to provide broadband Internet access to 23 public housing sites. Details are being finalized with Bright House Networks, which will provide the service, and residents will be connected beginning March 1.

The project will be the first such one in Florida and one of the few in the nation.

Internet access will be available to about 3,400 residents for free for the first two years. After two years, residents will be able to pay for the access for the next three years for $18.35 per month.

In addition to having Internet access, the housing authority also will make available a selection of computer training options, including basic computer and Internet keyboarding, Microsoft A+ Certification and an online computer curriculum for school-age children.

The program also will help residents get computers of their own by offering 1,000 computers for only $125 and will install almost 200 computers in two communities to offer residents a designated work space. The authority also will launch a website for residents to provide information on housing, employment opportunities, and the like.
Coming soon to Tampa public housing: Free Internet access

The question is, who benefits from there access. That would be the corporations. Let corporations pay for it.

 

[Foxfyre]

How much is this program costing the individual taxpayer?

You tell me. $2.1 million to provide free internet service plus some other perks for one low income housing project in Tampa Fl. How much would that be if all low income housing projects in Florida are included. In all of the southeast? In all of the south? In all of the country?

The point isn't so much the amount allocated for this project but the precedent being set and the implications of that.

what is a 'perk', hon? are they getting credit cards to go to bloomingdales? starbucks gift certificates? coops on park avenue? free porn for all?

let's define terms. your poll says as choice a "lets give them all of it" then choice b says 'only educational sites'.

what's an educational site. i can tell you that my 13 year old son couldn't excel in school without the ability to do research. that includes the site his english teacher downloads their reading assignments to downloading information from wikipedia as a beginning point to his research.

is wikipedia an 'educational site'?

how about cbs?

how about comedy central if a teacher wants them to watch something on jon stewart?

is there a difference in cost if they get 'all of it'? or is that just a way to be spiteful? (not you, the policy).

and why on earth would it bother you? how much money do we give that subsidizes agriculture? how much have we spent building infrastructure in iraq while ignoring our own?

seriously...

we spent 70 million investigating a failed land deal and got a blue dress; darryl issa the idiot wants to spend millions doing 'an investigation a day'. we have spent trillions on an unnecessary war of choice. we spent a million dollars when baby bush was president on a study to ascertain if prayer works and we're going to haggle over kids getting the internet?

Wow, I haven't seen quite that many non sequiturs built into a post in some time as a justification for spending taxpayer money.

Let's just focus on the wisdom, propriety, and justification (if any) for this particular government program cited in the OP shall we?

Is there sufficient reason to allow misuse of the program by anybody just so little Jill or Jack doesn't have to wait in line to use the school computer or get himself/herself to the library or community center?

And how do you square with the folks in the next block who give up having a new car or high def TV or a gym membership so that they can pay for their kids to have necessities for their education? What is wrong with you going down to the housing project and ferreting out the truly needy kids who won't have computer access any other way and help them out yourself? I bet you have lots of friends who would kick in help too.

Why subject the entire country to another expensive entitlement that could be misused or abused by most who are eligible to get it? Why wouldn't it be more efficient and effective for local communities to organize to help the truly needy kids? What would be wrong with that?

And if the teacher is assigning Comedy Central as mandatory homework, the teacher should be replaced.

 

[shintao]

You tell me. $2.1 million to provide free internet service plus some other perks for one low income housing project in Tampa Fl. How much would that be if all low income housing projects in Florida are included. In all of the southeast? In all of the south? In all of the country?

The point isn't so much the amount allocated for this project but the precedent being set and the implications of that.

what is a 'perk', hon? are they getting credit cards to go to bloomingdales? starbucks gift certificates? coops on park avenue? free porn for all?

let's define terms. your poll says as choice a "lets give them all of it" then choice b says 'only educational sites'.

what's an educational site. i can tell you that my 13 year old son couldn't excel in school without the ability to do research. that includes the site his english teacher downloads their reading assignments to downloading information from wikipedia as a beginning point to his research.

is wikipedia an 'educational site'?

how about cbs?

how about comedy central if a teacher wants them to watch something on jon stewart?

is there a difference in cost if they get 'all of it'? or is that just a way to be spiteful? (not you, the policy).

and why on earth would it bother you? how much money do we give that subsidizes agriculture? how much have we spent building infrastructure in iraq while ignoring our own?

seriously...

we spent 70 million investigating a failed land deal and got a blue dress; darryl issa the idiot wants to spend millions doing 'an investigation a day'. we have spent trillions on an unnecessary war of choice. we spent a million dollars when baby bush was president on a study to ascertain if prayer works and we're going to haggle over kids getting the internet?

Let them go to the public mother fucking library. They can read all the books and surf the net all they want, and during school hours they have access there as well.

Gimmee gimmee gimmee gimmee gimmee.

Oh sorry, they shut the Libraries down due to budget cuts. They should shut the street down you live on until they can afford to fix the pot holes, heh? We wouldn't want you suing the city if you drive off in a chuck hole, would we?

And "gimmee?" Have you ever paid your way in society? Have you served your country, or let others go die for your freedoms to spout shit here? I just have a feeling you are one of the gimmee bunch yourself, hypocrite.

 

[High_Gravity]

Free internet is cool but how about free Malt liquor and lap dances at the club?

 

[shintao]

I think a government should furnish communication means to it's people if they want it. Germany pays for cable TV for it's people.

 

[shintao]

Free internet is cool but how about free Malt liquor and lap dances at the club?

You are just a lil bit ahead of your time. LMAO! But eventually yes.

 

[jillian]

You tell me. $2.1 million to provide free internet service plus some other perks for one low income housing project in Tampa Fl. How much would that be if all low income housing projects in Florida are included. In all of the southeast? In all of the south? In all of the country?

The point isn't so much the amount allocated for this project but the precedent being set and the implications of that.

what is a 'perk', hon? are they getting credit cards to go to bloomingdales? starbucks gift certificates? coops on park avenue? free porn for all?

let's define terms. your poll says as choice a "lets give them all of it" then choice b says 'only educational sites'.

what's an educational site. i can tell you that my 13 year old son couldn't excel in school without the ability to do research. that includes the site his english teacher downloads their reading assignments to downloading information from wikipedia as a beginning point to his research.

is wikipedia an 'educational site'?

how about cbs?

how about comedy central if a teacher wants them to watch something on jon stewart?

is there a difference in cost if they get 'all of it'? or is that just a way to be spiteful? (not you, the policy).

and why on earth would it bother you? how much money do we give that subsidizes agriculture? how much have we spent building infrastructure in iraq while ignoring our own?

seriously...

we spent 70 million investigating a failed land deal and got a blue dress; darryl issa the idiot wants to spend millions doing 'an investigation a day'. we have spent trillions on an unnecessary war of choice. we spent a million dollars when baby bush was president on a study to ascertain if prayer works and we're going to haggle over kids getting the internet?

Wow, I haven't seen quite that many non sequiturs built into a post in some time as a justification for spending taxpayer money.

Let's just focus on the wisdom, propriety, and justification (if any) for this particular government program cited in the OP shall we?

Is there sufficient reason to allow misuse of the program by anybody just so little Jill or Jack doesn't have to wait in line to use the school computer or get himself/herself to the library or community center?

And how do you square with the folks in the next block who give up having a new car or high def TV or a gym membership so that they can pay for their kids to have necessities for their education? What is wrong with you going down to the housing project and ferreting out the truly needy kids who won't have computer access any other way and help them out yourself? I bet you have lots of friends who would kick in help too.

Why subject the entire country to another expensive entitlement that could be misused or abused by most who are eligible to get it? Why wouldn't it be more efficient and effective for local communities to organize to help the truly needy kids? What would be wrong with that?

And if the teacher is assigning Comedy Central as mandatory homework, the teacher should be replaced.

perhaps you missed the point. the point is about WHAT we spend money on and its value. is there a value to this.

again, what is a perk?

and what i would do on a personal level is not your question. you asked something specific. i'm merely trying to ascertain the cost. whether the cost is different if there is limited internet access. and what are our financial priorities.

i see a greater value, perhaps, in getting people wired than i do in finding out if 'prayer works'.

if you don't wish to address the issues i raised, that's fine. but i can't answer *your* poll without those things.

but you're free to continue to deflect.
otherwise, it's just another call for a yes, you are... no, you aren't thread.

 

[Foxfyre]

what is a 'perk', hon? are they getting credit cards to go to bloomingdales? starbucks gift certificates? coops on park avenue? free porn for all?

let's define terms. your poll says as choice a "lets give them all of it" then choice b says 'only educational sites'.

what's an educational site. i can tell you that my 13 year old son couldn't excel in school without the ability to do research. that includes the site his english teacher downloads their reading assignments to downloading information from wikipedia as a beginning point to his research.

is wikipedia an 'educational site'?

how about cbs?

how about comedy central if a teacher wants them to watch something on jon stewart?

is there a difference in cost if they get 'all of it'? or is that just a way to be spiteful? (not you, the policy).

and why on earth would it bother you? how much money do we give that subsidizes agriculture? how much have we spent building infrastructure in iraq while ignoring our own?

seriously...

we spent 70 million investigating a failed land deal and got a blue dress; darryl issa the idiot wants to spend millions doing 'an investigation a day'. we have spent trillions on an unnecessary war of choice. we spent a million dollars when baby bush was president on a study to ascertain if prayer works and we're going to haggle over kids getting the internet?

Wow, I haven't seen quite that many non sequiturs built into a post in some time as a justification for spending taxpayer money.

Let's just focus on the wisdom, propriety, and justification (if any) for this particular government program cited in the OP shall we?

Is there sufficient reason to allow misuse of the program by anybody just so little Jill or Jack doesn't have to wait in line to use the school computer or get himself/herself to the library or community center?

And how do you square with the folks in the next block who give up having a new car or high def TV or a gym membership so that they can pay for their kids to have necessities for their education? What is wrong with you going down to the housing project and ferreting out the truly needy kids who won't have computer access any other way and help them out yourself? I bet you have lots of friends who would kick in help too.

Why subject the entire country to another expensive entitlement that could be misused or abused by most who are eligible to get it? Why wouldn't it be more efficient and effective for local communities to organize to help the truly needy kids? What would be wrong with that?

And if the teacher is assigning Comedy Central as mandatory homework, the teacher should be replaced.

perhaps you missed the point. the point is about WHAT we spend money on and its value. is there a value to this.

again, what is a perk?

and what i would do on a personal level is not your question. you asked something specific. i'm merely trying to ascertain the cost. whether the cost is different if there is limited internet access. and what are our financial priorities.

i see a greater value, perhaps, in getting people wired than i do in finding out if 'prayer works'.

if you don't wish to address the issues i raised, that's fine. but i can't answer *your* poll without those things.

but you're free to continue to deflect.
otherwise, it's just another call for a yes, you are... no, you aren't thread.

Yeah like you weren't deflecting by bringing in a bunch of non sequiturs that have nothing to do with this particular program? Give me a break!

A 'perk' is getting internet access whether you use it to further your education or ability to merit or hold a job or not.

A 'perk' is using taxpayer funded internet access to cruise sites like Comedy Central or porn sites or shopping sites or gaming sites or USMB.

A 'perk' is getting a subsidized computer and free training that most Americans expect to work to pay for themselves.

We don't know the cost because these things generally escalate once a precedent is set. This was just for one housing project in Tampa FL. Again what is the cost if it expands to all housing projects in Florida? To all of the southeast? To all of the south? To all of the country? And will we get our money's worth?

We sure as hell haven't with the housing projects themselves.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

what is a 'perk', hon? are they getting credit cards to go to bloomingdales? starbucks gift certificates? coops on park avenue? free porn for all?

let's define terms. your poll says as choice a "lets give them all of it" then choice b says 'only educational sites'.

what's an educational site. i can tell you that my 13 year old son couldn't excel in school without the ability to do research. that includes the site his english teacher downloads their reading assignments to downloading information from wikipedia as a beginning point to his research.

is wikipedia an 'educational site'?

how about cbs?

how about comedy central if a teacher wants them to watch something on jon stewart?

is there a difference in cost if they get 'all of it'? or is that just a way to be spiteful? (not you, the policy).

and why on earth would it bother you? how much money do we give that subsidizes agriculture? how much have we spent building infrastructure in iraq while ignoring our own?

seriously...

we spent 70 million investigating a failed land deal and got a blue dress; darryl issa the idiot wants to spend millions doing 'an investigation a day'. we have spent trillions on an unnecessary war of choice. we spent a million dollars when baby bush was president on a study to ascertain if prayer works and we're going to haggle over kids getting the internet?

Let them go to the public mother fucking library. They can read all the books and surf the net all they want, and during school hours they have access there as well.

Gimmee gimmee gimmee gimmee gimmee.

Oh sorry, they shut the Libraries down due to budget cuts. They should shut the street down you live on until they can afford to fix the pot holes, heh? We wouldn't want you suing the city if you drive off in a chuck hole, would we?

And "gimmee?" Have you ever paid your way in society? Have you served your country, or let others go die for your freedoms to spout shit here? I just have a feeling you are one of the gimmee bunch yourself, hypocrite.

Look you little uninformed fuckwit imbecile, I've been living on my own since age 19, and I am 50. I am self employed and have supported a family since age 28. I haven't seen a tax refund in 20 years thanks to folks like you that get 110% of their taxes back at year end.

So.... piss off you parasite and go get in line for your free Internet.

 

[Missourian]

Democracy in Iraq is neither their right nor a necessity, the government has no right using my money to provide it to them. However, Internet access is going to cost you .13/year. How much will our invasion, occupation and nation building in Iraq ultimately cost you? Not to mention the loss of 4,000 American lives....

Oh for fuck's sake Yank. Ever heard of staying on topic?

Ever heard of making a mountain out of a mole hill? Who gives a shit about an extra .13 in additional taxes for this program when we and our children and their children will be paying through the nose for nation building in Iraq???

This right here is the problem in Washington, and at the State, County and local levels of government.


"Oh, it just 13 cents" they say.

But 13 cents times 10,000 of these ridiculous grants is $1,300 per taxpayer!

 

[boedicca]

A good and timely piece from American Spectator on "positive rights". The central context is health care as a positive right (which is actually an oxymoron) - but the same principle applies to internet access as one.

...Yet, if a "right" ends at an arbitrary point set by bureaucrats and legislators -- a point not based on conflict with other rights but rather with changeable financial or political considerations -- then it can't be a right. Furthermore, if a positive right such as that claimed by supporters of Obamacare can be curtailed because of cost, then every government program that relies on the redistribution of wealth can be curtailed. Either they're all "rights" or none of them is.

Of course, the idea that government, with an incentive to "control costs," would be involved with end-of-life counseling is disturbing enough. But perhaps the biggest problem for Progressivism in the news of Berwick's giant step toward health care rationing is that the country is learning in an unmistakable way that the emperor has no clothes. In our constitutional republic, positive rights are anathema to liberty and to life itself.

The American Spectator : Is It a Right or Isn't It?

 

[shintao]

but you're free to continue to deflect.
otherwise, it's just another call for a yes, you are... no, you aren't thread.

Are you saying he isn't "Thread-Worthy?"

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Internet access... paid for by someone else...... the new unalienable human right.

 

[shintao]

A good and timely piece from American Spectator on "positive rights". The central context is health care as a positive right (which is actually an oxymoron) - but the same principle applies to internet access as one.

This thread is about free internet access, so not sure what you are talking about. It sounds off topic to me.

 

[shintao]

Internet access... paid for by someone else...... the new unalienable human right.

You get your freedom free, so they get their internet free. Not a bad trade considering you could die or get messed up in the military for freedom.