dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
1540
nony
Premium Member
join:2012-11-17
New York, NY

nony

Premium Member

[Price] Affordable Broadband for Low-Income Homebound Seniors

Here's a new Whitehouse petition - »petitions.whitehouse.gov ··· ZLfkkcGT

Perhaps Comcast can expand their Internet Essentials program to include this demographic as part of the terms of their merger.

-nony
nony

nony

Premium Member

Internet Essentials needs to be enhanced to cover our unserved and underserved communities.

»Time Warner Cable/Comcast and America's poor

-nony

FureverFurry
RIP Daphne: 3/12/05 - 6/19/12
Premium Member
join:2012-02-20
49xxx
Zoom 5341J
ARRIS WBM760
Vonage VDV-21

FureverFurry to nony

Premium Member

to nony
I like the idea but - based on all the hoops CC makes low income families jump through - I doubt some seniors could manage that. I know "pride goeth before a fall" but there are also some seniors that will just refuse because they don't want to admit they are poor.

linicx
Caveat Emptor
Premium Member
join:2002-12-03
United State

linicx to nony

Premium Member

to nony
They can't. Many of those underserved communities are not in their market, or their marketing plan. Just like first tier telco they should but they won't. They dumped the small insignificant communities with little revenue 20 years ago.
nony
Premium Member
join:2012-11-17
New York, NY

nony

Premium Member

said by linicx:

They can't. Many of those underserved communities are not in their market, or their marketing plan. Just like first tier telco they should but they won't

The CC/TWC merger approval can be conditioned by the appropriate federal/state/local regulatory authorities to include $10/month broadband in the their expanded footprint for eligible low-income families. They can start with our case-managed low-income, homebound elderly.

And they need to be held to account, as suggested by the piece.

-nony

linicx
Caveat Emptor
Premium Member
join:2002-12-03
United State

linicx

Premium Member

I agree 100%. In my particular isolated rural area, the nearest CC/AT&T are 12 miles east. It makes no difference what we want or need. Our cable and wireline is served by two second tier phone companies and has been for many years. The two giants are not going to absorb another 4,000 rural residents for the feckless FCC. BB to the homebound elderly is a big of a pipe dream to my community as is 25/5. It ain't gonna happen as there is no practical reason. Further, most of the homebound elderly I know don't want or need bb. They want a phone and some type of tv service that works.
nony
Premium Member
join:2012-11-17
New York, NY

4 edits

nony

Premium Member

said by linicx:

Further, most of the homebound elderly I know don't want or need bb. They want a phone and some type of tv service that works.

We can leave needs assessment to the case managers who provide sevices for our homebound, low-income elderly, and not based on your personal realm. The option of an affordable Internet lifeline is essential for these folks.

»www.nytimes.com/2013/08/ ··· net.html

Let's take a look at the research:

The Digital Divide Among Low-Income Homebound Older Adults-
»www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc ··· 3650931/
said by linicx:

don't want or need bb

In some cases, they proxy off of their broadband-connected family and friends to get vital benefit info, competitive pricing/purchases.... off of the net. However, that arrangement is not always an option.

I also know high-info, very well educated, low-income, homebound elderly, (including an IBMer who worked on SOS) who absolutely want nothing to do with the Internet. And you can't impose your will on them. So I get it.

SOS - SHARE Operating System

-nony
rody_44
Premium Member
join:2004-02-20
Quakertown, PA

rody_44 to nony

Premium Member

to nony
Its not enough my rates already subsidize kids that get free lunch. Now you want me to pay for seniors to. No thanks
nony
Premium Member
join:2012-11-17
New York, NY

nony

Premium Member

said by rody_44:

Its not enough my rates already subsidize kids that get free lunch. Now you want me to pay for seniors to. No thanks

»www.city-data.com/povert ··· nia.html

-nony

linicx
Caveat Emptor
Premium Member
join:2002-12-03
United State

linicx to nony

Premium Member

to nony
I understand, but you need to understand I speak from the perspective of rural America 2000 miles from Manhattan. where the nearest town is 50 miles, and DSL doesn't reach 2 miles. As I said most of the seniors I know don't want it, or can't afford it.
$100/mo for a phone that doesn't always work and 1.5/.512 is way too expensive on a limited income.

It would be nice for our seniors to have the same, but first you have to be able to deliver it. Thus far our second tier telco has little incentive to do it.
nony
Premium Member
join:2012-11-17
New York, NY

2 edits

nony

Premium Member

The BTOP grants were initially focused on reaching rural America. And that funding continues.
»www.ntia.doc.gov/files/n ··· port.pdf

National Broadband Map
»broadbandmap.gov

Connecting America's Communities Map
»www2.ntia.doc.gov/BTOPmap/

-nony
rody_44
Premium Member
join:2004-02-20
Quakertown, PA

4 edits

rody_44

Premium Member

Most of that money was wasted. Comcast along with most cable companies never took advantage of that fund. It came with invisible strings attached. It was mostly phone companies that took advantage of it as the invisible strings were clearly visible to there already tax funded infrastructure.

Im sure internet essentials will be offered thruout if the merger goes thru. Im just not sure why internet essentials should be offered to seniors. I could understand pulling for a senior discount. But internet essentials is like a 80 percent discount. A discount that gets subsidized by our rates.

Thats a pretty cool poverty map you found.

FureverFurry
RIP Daphne: 3/12/05 - 6/19/12
Premium Member
join:2012-02-20
49xxx
Zoom 5341J
ARRIS WBM760
Vonage VDV-21

FureverFurry

Premium Member

said by rody_44:

Im just not sure why internet essentials should be offered to seniors. I could understand pulling for a senior discount.

In hindsight, I like your idea of the senior discount much better *if* it ever is an option. I have mixed views on my tax dollars going to support other people's children. Personal responsibility and all that; some "game" the system and some ARE deserving.

Seniors live on a fixed income and I would say that most have paid their dues (per se) to society. These ever increasing prices EVERYWHERE are hard on seniors' budgets.
rody_44
Premium Member
join:2004-02-20
Quakertown, PA

rody_44

Premium Member

At one time many moons ago comcast did offer a senior discount option. Im actually surprised they dont now.

tax slave
@107.192.88.x

tax slave to nony

Anon

to nony
As a tax-paying alarm clock slapper, I vote NO!
nony
Premium Member
join:2012-11-17
New York, NY

3 edits

nony

Premium Member

Oh tax slave, I don't think that you are one of the Comcast/TWC execs who will be asked by the RAs to offer up givebacks in support of the public interest.

Let's be clear-

Internet Essentials is not taxpayer-subsidized, nor is it funded out of your monthly surcharges (as are other telecommunications programs/broadband initiatives). This is why Comcast has repeatedly testified that they won't expand the program to reach other demographics - including poor, frail, home-bound elderly. For this particular group the Internet is a lifeline.

Consolidated Resource List:
»www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc ··· 3650931/
»www.pewinternet.org/file ··· 0314.pdf
»www.northeastcompcenter. ··· rief.pdf
»www.gao.gov/assets/670/6 ··· 2711.pdf
»www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc ··· 0719.pdf
»www.nytimes.com/2013/08/ ··· net.html
»www.ntia.doc.gov/files/n ··· port.pdf
»broadbandmap.gov
»www2.ntia.doc.gov/BTOPmap/

-nony

tshirt
Premium Member
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA

tshirt to FureverFurry

Premium Member

to FureverFurry
said by FureverFurry:

have mixed views on my tax dollars going to support other people's children.

How are those children different then kittens,? thrown into the world without choice or options of their own.
said by FureverFurry:

Seniors live on a fixed income...

Also COULD be considered a personal responsibility issue, with SOME willing to game the system to the disadvantage on EVERYONE else..
tshirt

tshirt to nony

Premium Member

to nony
said by nony:

Let's be clear-

Internet Essentials is not taxpayer-subsidized, nor is it funded out of your monthly surcharges...

It is in fact paid by other subscribers fees AND being tax deducible somewhat subsidized by taxpayers.

I'm not unsympathetic to the needs of the poor, old or young. but rather than trying to extract a little bit here and there serving some customers of company A, and a few customers of company B, it really makes more sense to allow the company to operate and profit more freely and then TAX those who receive the profits to subsidize the specific individuals needing subside, and those individuals can spend those dollars either for service from the company or whatever serves THEIR own needs and desires.
nony
Premium Member
join:2012-11-17
New York, NY

1 edit

nony to tshirt

Premium Member

to tshirt
Consider, that I have only proposed that we provide an Internet lifeline to poor, low-income, home-bound elderly - out of Comcast's profits.

Should we also take away their home-delivered meals and let them starve?

-nony
nony

nony to tshirt

Premium Member

to tshirt
said by tshirt:

It is in fact paid by other subscribers fees

Kindly substantiate your claims. I have provided a resource list to help you through this.

-nony

tshirt
Premium Member
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA

tshirt

Premium Member

You have post a number of links, but a little common sense tells you ANYTHING Comcast spends come out of their customers pockets and any increase in spending will likely require replacement/reimbursement either as higher rates or if tax deductible(which is really tax redirection) from the taxpayer's pocket in taxes not paid (which must be made up/borrowed from someone else)
Even taken from Comcast profits is not a free lunch as investors* expect those returns, in order to provide funding for the type of build out you suggested above. reducing it will likely make the rapid expansion of service area financially impossible, even if it gets by the crowd saying this merger makes Comcast TOO big and that that is of no advantage to consumers.

I'm not suggesting we take anything from seniors, particularly those requiring meals on wheels type services.
Are you suggesting internet is as important to them as food or medicine?
Shouldn't you instead be suggesting to congress that internet services should be part of Social security or medicare benefits?

* many of whom are seniors and pension/retirement funds, trying to provide for another large group of seniors.
nony
Premium Member
join:2012-11-17
New York, NY

nony

Premium Member

said by tshirt:

I'm not suggesting we take anything from seniors, particularly those requiring meals on wheels type services.
Are you suggesting internet is as important to them as food or medicine?
Shouldn't you instead be suggesting to congress that internet services should be part of Social security or medicare benefits?

I'm suggesting that we target our case-managed population, since they have already met local income and service-specific eligibility requirements for home-delivered meals, and other in-home services.

-nony

tshirt
Premium Member
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA

tshirt

Premium Member

said by nony:

we target our case-managed population,...

I agree, I just think it should be funded/controlled on the case management side, rather then a "TAX" on Comcast customers only.
I think that each of these special allowances forced on individual businesses, eventually becomes a disincentive for those businesses to expand/excel/succeed in their primary mission.
Rather then expecting them to become a social service agency, let them be really good at their job, in return for a proportional payment from the proceeds, to the gov't to handle (what should be) gov't primary responsibility (taking care of the people).

Unbundled
But When ? ?
Premium Member
join:2010-09-13
Irving, TX
Technicolor E31T2V1

Unbundled to nony

Premium Member

to nony
When cable in my city was a city-chartered deal, then I noticed that Basic-Basic cable ran about $10 month for decades.
But that Basic-Basic cable fee has risen to almost $20.
I guess having the poor pay mire helps the big cable companies with their R&D budget, which is made practical with how the middle and upper class use their cable and internet.

Shame Shame Shame

I don't know if the the Preumium tier has almost doubled.
I doubt it.

Shame Shame Shame to our Federal Govt. and the FCC!!!
rody_44
Premium Member
join:2004-02-20
Quakertown, PA

rody_44 to nony

Premium Member

to nony
You are aware internet essentials includes a lap top computer? At the price of internet essentials it most certainly is subsidized with subscriber rates.
rody_44

rody_44 to Unbundled

Premium Member

to Unbundled
And when your basic tv was 10 dollars a month the broadcast stations were NOT charging the cable companies broadcast charges. Now they do. In the days of cheap basic tv the cable companies didnt pay a kings ransom for public broadcast stations, now they DO. Cable companies wouldnt even turn a profit from video services these days if it wasnt for internet and phone services. Thats where they make the money.

Sterling
IP Support Tier III
Premium Member
join:2003-05-30
Pittsburgh, PA

Sterling

Premium Member

very true, and much of that went toward maintenance and such
nony
Premium Member
join:2012-11-17
New York, NY

4 edits

nony to rody_44

Premium Member

to rody_44
@rody_44,

In order to successfully execute we need three components:
1. Affordable Broadband
2. Situation-Appropriate Connected Device
3. Training

We can work through (2) and (3) philanthropically, via public/private partnerships, as has been demonstrated over the last decade -

The training component may be the most difficult challenge, and the connected device may need to support assistive/adaptive technology.
»blog.tapestry.net/best-t ··· seniors/
»www.nyls.edu/advanced-co ··· eccs.pdf

But in order to be doable and sustainable, both the one-time and monthly recurring charges need to be affordable and locked in.

-nony
nony

nony to tshirt

Premium Member

to tshirt
said by tshirt:

I agree, I just think it should be funded/controlled on the case management side, rather then a "TAX" on Comcast customers only.
I think that each of these special allowances forced on individual businesses, eventually becomes a disincentive for those businesses to expand/excel/succeed in their primary mission.
Rather then expecting them to become a social service agency, let them be really good at their job, in return for a proportional payment from the proceeds, to the gov't to handle (what should be) gov't primary responsibility (taking care of the people).

tshirt,

You strike the right balance.

-nony

Unbundled
But When ? ?
Premium Member
join:2010-09-13
Irving, TX
Technicolor E31T2V1

Unbundled to rody_44

Premium Member

to rody_44
That's true that broadcast stations now get to charge. I wish that wasn't so. But, I do feel that the Big cable companies have also added a few dollars to the Basic bill to fund R&D for technology that the Basic subscriber couldn't or wouldn't be able to afford in the first place. There have been some stop-gap measures to lighten the fee load on certain Basic customers, like a free digital box. But I understand that that is eventually going away, in 2015. Seniors and the poor have been hit with the double-whammy of rising Basic cable costs, and the Digital over-the-air world that requires, in many new cases, more than rabbit ears to get any TV picture at all. Yes, the govt. "paid" for the digital converter, but, the govt. did --not-- pay for the new antenna, or for the antenna's installation, in the attic, or outside. A govt. job half-done, if you asked me. So, many used to get by with OTA reception, now need cable to get all of their local channels, to see breaking severe weather reports.