221 replies to this topic

[llawen]

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

Sent from my XT875 using Tapatalk 2

[llawen]

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

Sent from my XT875 using Tapatalk 2

[welsalex]

OK man, Tim Griffin r- ark has put forth a bill to end federal subsidies to gov. Phones. Federal money. Keep telling yourself it is just a fee. And cell phones were added in 2008. Before that it was just land lines.

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

Sent from my XT875 using Tapatalk 2

I'm not telling myself anything. I'm reading the article. Are we even reading the same article?

[llawen]

Sent from my XT875 using Tapatalk 2

[welsalex]

A realization! You claim the money going through the program doubled from 2008 to now. Don't you think adding cellphones to the program would be the reason? And the Bush administration added them, not obama.

[llawen]

Only part of the money comes from the fee. The government is funding the rest. 1.6 billion annually

Sent from my XT875 using Tapatalk 2

[welsalex]

Only part of the money comes from the fee. The government is funding the rest. 1.6 billion annually

Sent from my XT875 using Tapatalk 2

It would be easier to understand you if you provided some sourcing for your claims. I'm not calling you a liar, but so far you haven't been good at referencing sources

[llawen]

. But Obama pushed them. Listen to Tim talk about it. Why he pushed the bill. And fighting this. It exploded under Obama.

Sent from my XT875 using Tapatalk 2

[llawen]

Let me know after you read and listen to the sources.

Sent from my XT875 using Tapatalk 2

[llawen]

Sent from my XT875 using Tapatalk 2

[chiahead52]

Please Login or Register to see this Hidden Content

too late.looks like they are already trying to fight the abuse of the system with the reform it passed in June of 2011. Many months before Griffin's articles you linked. Obama didnt start the program or expand it. Cell phones were added to the program as an option versus a land line in.wait for it........2005(Bush's Term).

also I cannot seem to find anywhere that the Lifeline program is funded by anything but the FCC fees already mentioned. Not funded by tax dollars.

[llawen]

Cell phones were added in 2008. Yes bushes term. You keep saying that. We all agree on that.
The fee is mandated by the government. Wait for it ....a tax that is collected by the government. If the government is forcing you to pay for something it is a tax. But for grins we will call it a fee.
It is collected by government and distributed by government agency. Thus, that's why it was called free gov. Phones.
It exploded under Obama's watch.
Let me remind you that his first year he had complete control of house and senate. If he wanted to change anything he had no opposition.
I will not post the video that went viral. But that is the reason why this has gone unchallenged.

Sent from my XT875 using Tapatalk 2

[llawen]

Reform no. Tim is trying to go back to just land lines. It is the first bill. There are a few democrats involved. I say people are hurting. We are taxed enough.
I like what time said....
For one day try to be mindful of all the taxes you pay.
Get up in the morning turn the TV on, it was taxed when you bought it.
Cable is taxed.
Electricity is taxed.
Gas for your car is taxed
State tax
Income tax
Our money is taxed at 25%. The government gets a quarter of every dollar we earn.
Go buy something with that money taxed.
Cell phone bill is taxed twice. ( one to pay for others cell phones with texting and picture mail)
It is ridiculous.
I said there are some good points to Obama care. But the tax increases out way the good it will do. More tax.
We are getting closer and closer to being taxed 50% . That is if you add all the tax you pay a month vs our salaries.
Obama said on video. I can get it for you to provide a source....that he was for redistribution of wealth.
That is what this cell phone crap is. Take my money and give it to someone else for a luxury. Cell phones are not a necessity. It is a luxury. Redistribution.
Tax tax tax tax
I

Sent from my XT875 using Tapatalk 2

[llawen]

I want take a moment to ask every one to keep all affected by sandy in our prayers.

Sent from my XT875 using Tapatalk 2

[chiahead52]

Cell phones were added in 2008. Yes bushes term. You keep saying that. We all agree on that.
The fee is mandated by the government. Wait for it ....a tax that is collected by the government. If the government is forcing you to pay for something it is a tax. But for grins we will call it a fee.
It is collected by government and distributed by government agency. Thus, that's why it was called free gov. Phones.
It exploded under Obama's watch.
Let me remind you that his first year he had complete control of house and senate. If he wanted to change anything he had no opposition.
I will not post the video that went viral. But that is the reason why this has gone unchallenged.

Sent from my XT875 using Tapatalk 2

if the Fee is on a luxury item which u claim is a luxury, then that is not a tax. It is an additional cost to buy that luxury item. your logic doesnt make sense to me. The Govt is not forcing people to buy cell phones and pay the fees.

[chiahead52]

I agree we are taxed a tremendous amount. but I do think that we need to pay taxes for some things that I think are important. I think many different things fall under providing for the general wellfare for the people and the community needs to pay for that. I have no problems paying taxes as long as it is helping me and others. What I have a problem with is people getting greedy and selfish and thinking they are the only ones that matter and that they dont need to pay taxes. That they can benefit from others taxes and somehow not have to pay themselves. Is there waste and fraud and abuse in almost every system? Yes because they are run by people and people are not always perfect. I also believe in helping those that need the help as long as they are making moves to improve there situation. In stead of arguing about a program that Obama didnt start or change or had anything to do with costing us 1.6 billion a year, why not attack much bigger things like oil subsidies and other big corp handouts. I am against those and if we stopped giving large corporations hand outs and subsidies then we would save way more money then changing the lifeline program to only allow land lines.

[- JPB]

Cell phones were added in 2008. Yes bushes term. You keep saying that. We all agree on that.
The fee is mandated by the government. Wait for it ....a tax that is collected by the government. If the government is forcing you to pay for something it is a tax. But for grins we will call it a fee.
It is collected by government and distributed by government agency. Thus, that's why it was called free gov. Phones.
It exploded under Obama's watch.
Let me remind you that his first year he had complete control of house and senate. If he wanted to change anything he had no opposition.
I will not post the video that went viral. But that is the reason why this has gone unchallenged.

Sent from my XT875 using Tapatalk 2

I am so beyond tired and disgusted by the LIE that President Obama had no opposition at the beginning of his term. Can you say "filibuster"? The republicans in congress opposed virtually every piece of legislation that he attempted to pass with the threat of filibuster, which would require a supermajority to overcome, even legislation that was previously supported by, and in some cases, even introduced by, republicans.

You go ahead and keep believing what you choose to believe, and keep repeating the lies, but the reason Mr. Romney is going to lose this election is because too many people are better informed than just accepting the "facts" fed to them by right-wing media.

No, I will not return to argue points in this thread, because it seems you have already made up your mind to believe the people who are lying to you. All one needs to do is read through this thread to see what sort of absurdities you believe. The debate seems pointless to me. We choose who to believe, and in some cases, when it's important enough to us, and/or we have time to do so, we dig further to try to get to the truth of the matter (or, at least some of us do). One reason I do not support the republican viewpoint is because most times that I research any given issue, it seems the republican viewpoint is by far the one more skewed by misinformation.

Cite my sources? Why bother? You will simply come back with some other "source" that opposes my viewpoint, however invalid that "source" may be. I've seen this too much with too many people. They believe what they want to believe, and will not seek out or even give credence to any opposing opinion that does not support what they want to believe. From some of your previous statements, it seems you believe President Obama is some sort of radical Muslim (At the very least, you have made some rather obvious ad-hominem and guilt-by-association insinuations to that effect. BTW, both of those are known fallacies used in debating a topic that do nothing to bolster a viewpoint, but rather simply make your argument look weak to anyone educated enough to recognize it.) He is, in fact, a fairly moderate Christian democrat, but like I said, you believe what you want to believe...

I don't know why so many Americans seem to hate President Obama so much, but since the reasons I've seen given so far almost always turn out to be... less-than-true, I can only surmise they are either quite gullible, not willing to spend the time to debunk what they are being fed by thier choice of "news" media, or are not being completely honest with themselves about the real reasons...

Peace out,

[welsalex]

I am so beyond tired and disgusted by the LIE that President Obama had no opposition at the beginning of his term. Can you say "filibuster"? The republicans in congress opposed virtually every piece of legislation that he attempted to pass with the threat of filibuster, which would require a supermajority to overcome, even legislation that was previously supported by, and in some cases, even introduced by, republicans.

You go ahead and keep believing what you choose to believe, and keep repeating the lies, but the reason Mr. Romney is going to lose this election is because too many people are better informed than just accepting the "facts" fed to them by right-wing media.

No, I will not return to argue points in this thread, because it seems you have already made up your mind to believe the people who are lying to you. All one needs to do is read through this thread to see what sort of absurdities you believe. The debate seems pointless to me. We choose who to believe, and in some cases, when it's important enough to us, and/or we have time to do so, we dig further to try to get to the truth of the matter (or, at least some of us do). One reason I do not support the republican viewpoint is because most times that I research any given issue, it seems the republican viewpoint is by far the one more skewed by misinformation.

Cite my sources? Why bother? You will simply come back with some other "source" that opposes my viewpoint, however invalid that "source" may be. I've seen this too much with too many people. They believe what they want to believe, and will not seek out or even give credence to any opposing opinion that does not support what they want to believe. From some of your previous statements, it seems you believe President Obama is some sort of radical Muslim (At the very least, you have made some rather obvious ad-hominem and guilt-by-association insinuations to that effect. BTW, both of those are known fallacies used in debating a topic that do nothing to bolster a viewpoint, but rather simply make your argument look weak to anyone educated enough to recognize it.) He is, in fact, a fairly moderate Christian democrat, but like I said, you believe what you want to believe...

I don't know why so many Americans seem to hate President Obama so much, but since the reasons I've seen given so far almost always turn out to be... less-than-true, I can only surmise they are either quite gullible, not willing to spend the time to debunk what they are being fed by thier choice of "news" media, or are not being completely honest with themselves about the real reasons...

Peace out,

+1

[snives]

if the Fee is on a luxury item which u claim is a luxury, then that is not a tax. It is an additional cost to buy that luxury item. your logic doesnt make sense to me. The Govt is not forcing people to buy cell phones and pay the fees.

A 'tax' is by definition an imposed demand. The government uses the term tax to label the compulsory fees they attach to goods, services, and revenue being made between parties other than the governmental body. The term 'fee' simply implies that payment is required. Saying that a fee is not a tax tax is analogous to saying a square is not a rectangle. The additional 'fee' imposed onto our bills is compulsory, as it is not a service we can opt out of individually. We can also avoid paying sales tax by not making money, but that doesn't make having a job a luxury.

By the way, my favorite thing about what this fee goes towards was the letter I received at my apartment notifying me that I could get a free phone if I was on Wellfare... It said that this program was implemented to eliminate the 'demographic discrimination, that prevents those people on wellfare from applying for jobs with an annual income greater than $100,000'. I would personally love to meet the person on wellfare that is qualified for jobs making that much, yet is held back because they didn't have a cellphone to wave around during the interview.

[llawen]

if the Fee is on a luxury item which u claim is a luxury, then that is not a tax. It is an additional cost to buy that luxury item. your logic doesnt make sense to me. The Govt is not forcing people to buy cell phones and pay the fees.

Go buy cigarettes or beer. That is a luxury item and they have the sin tax added.
Fee or tax, its arguing Semantics.
Sent from my XT875 using Tapatalk 2