rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
| reply to Defcon888
Re: .
This isn't Internet access. It's unlimited local telephone service.
Poor poeple need a lot more than Internet access. They need to improve their situation through education and obtaining a better job. Granted, some won't be qualified for better work regardless of the program but Internet access? |
|
Defcon888
Premium
join:2003-07-22
San Bruno, CA
 ·AT&T Yahoo
·DSL EXTREME
| reply to rradina
No I'm not on the low income thing.
But, poor people need internet access too. I'm glad CA provides low income and low priced service.
--
defcon888@gmail.com
send me spam! |
|
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
| reply to Defcon888
I asked why poor folks would get unlimited local service on the cheap. Are you claiming to be income disadvantaged? Under your avatar it lists two DSL providers. Do you have two DSL accounts? If you do, how can you claim to be disadvantaged?
I consider income disadvantaged people as those who cannot provide for themselves the basic necessities (food, shelter, medical care). Because the general public (i.e. the government) likes to consider itself humane, social programs are available to help these people. The last time I checked these programs don't guarantee friends, family, love or a job. If these things aren't guaranteed, what good is a phone beyond life-line service? Why would CA do this? |
|
Defcon888
Premium
join:2003-07-22
San Bruno, CA
·AT&T Yahoo
·DSL EXTREME
| reply to rradina
said by rradina  :Why would CA provide unlimited local call phone service for poor people? I'm not against helping poor folks but what's the thought process behind subsidizing phone service in this manner? I understand life-line service (calling 911 and such). Because AT&T West rocks! I'm on their measured rate because I don't use my landline whatsoever except for DSL. Close enough to naked-DSL. Cheaper than actual naked-DSL too.
Cingular ftw btw!
--
defcon888@gmail.com
send me spam! |
|
