Cell Phones as an entitlment and other stupid things

[Karee 4,191]

That is true. Since Reagan signed this law back in the 80's, every president and congress had a chance to do away with it. Yet, here we are, and it is still trickling down...

What law?

[JohnR! 5,495]

What law?

The Universal Access Fund. It could have gone the way of the Dodo bird when telecomms were deregulated.

[Karee 4,191]

The Universal Access Fund. It could have gone the way of the Dodo bird when telecomms were deregulated.

If I recall that was a fee to subsidize rural WIRELINE telecom expansion. Not sure what it has to do with cell phones.

[kytwell 179]

The Universal Access Fund. It could have gone the way of the Dodo bird when telecomms were deregulated.

Did you mean this:

The Universal Service Fund (USF) was created by the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in 1997 to meet Congressional universal service goals as mandated by the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The 1996 Act states that all providers of telecommunications services should contribute to federal universal service in some equitable and nondiscriminatory manner

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Service_Fund

[JohnR! 5,495]

If I recall that was a fee to subsidize rural WIRELINE telecom expansion. Not sure what it has to do with cell phones.

Cell phones were not prevalent back then. They were bulky, expensive and had limited coverage.

[JohnR! 5,495]

Did you mean this:

The Universal Service Fund (USF) was created by the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in 1997 to meet Congressional universal service goals as mandated by the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The 1996 Act states that all providers of telecommunications services should contribute to federal universal service in some equitable and nondiscriminatory manner

http://en.wikipedia....al_Service_Fund

Yes. Congress did not look into it until 1996.

Communications Act of 1934

The Communications Act of 1934 includes in its preamble a reference to universal service. It calls for “rapid, efficient, Nation-wide, and world-wide wire and radio communication service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges” to “all the people of the United States.” Communications Act of 1934 - Title I, Sec. 1 [47 U.S.C. 151] The code was amended by the Telecommunications Act in 1996 to include, “without discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex…” To comply, AT&T began increasing the price of long distance service to pay for universal service. The act also established the FCC to oversee all non-governmental broadcasting, interstate communications, as well as international communication which originate or terminate in the United States.

Era of deregulation

There was a push for deregulating the telecommunications industry in the 1980s. Under President Ronald Reagan, the FCC shifted its focus from “social equity to an economic efficiency objective,” which it claimed was a primary purpose of the Communications Act of 1934.^[4] After AT&T was split up in 1984, universal service was still “supported by a system of above-cost access charges paid to local exchange companies.” Increased competition and universal service were later legislatively addressed and codified with the Telecommunications Act of 1996.^[5]

Telecommunications Act of 1996

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 was the first major rewrite of the Communications Act of 1934. The act addresses new challenges and opportunities of the digital information age, with the goal of promoting an economic environment conducive for the growth of new information technology. It also further developed the meaning and implementation of universal service. The act calls for the creation of a joint federal-state board to make recommendations to the FCC on defining federal universal services and set time tables. The act also set out some immediate priorities of universal service. These include quality and reasonably priced services, access to advanced telecommunication services, access for rural, low-income and high-cost regions, equitable and nondiscriminatory service, specific and predictable price structure, access of advanced telecommunication services for schools and health care and libraries (Sec. 254(b)(1)-(7)). The act provided ability in the constantly changing telecommunication environment to periodically revisit and adjust universal service, while setting core principles (Sec. 254©). The 1996 act also “mandated the creation of the universal service fund (USF) into which all telecommunications providers are required to contribute a percentage of their interstate and international end-user telecommunications revenues”.^[5]

Universal Service Administrative Company

Following the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the subsequent creation of the Universal Service Fund, the FCC designated the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) to manage the contribution of revenue to and distribution of funding from the Universal Service Fund. USAC is an independent corporation whose purpose is to impartially distribute funds from the USF in a manner that will best meet the goals of universal service set by the Telecommunications Act of 1996.

The USAC receives contributions from all companies providing interstate and international telephone and Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) service. Contributors send payments based on projected quarterly earnings. This revenue is deposited into a central fund, from which the USAC distributes money to the four central services at the core of the USF: High Cost, Low Income, Schools and Libraries, and Rural Health Care.

Over the years, questions have been raised regarding USAC's abuse of its delegated authority. See http://commlaw.cua.edu/res/docs/06-v19-2-Marashlian-USF-Final.pdf

USAC reports quarterly revenue projections detailing what contributions are expected and detailing what actions are taken in the expansion and bolstering of universal service. While the USAC cannot act without Congressional approval, it can make recommendations. USAC recommendations have resulted in expanding telecommunication resources, particularly broadband Internet and mobile access to schools and libraries, and recognizing Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) as a form of interstate and international communication, which requires those companies providing VoIP services to contribute to the USF.^[6]

[Karee 4,191]

Yes. Congress did not look into it until 1996.

Communications Act of 1934

The Communications Act of 1934 includes in its preamble a reference to universal service. It calls for “rapid, efficient, Nation-wide, and world-wide wire and radio communication service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges” to “all the people of the United States.” Communications Act of 1934 - Title I, Sec. 1 [47 U.S.C. 151] The code was amended by the Telecommunications Act in 1996 to include, “without discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex…” To comply, AT&T began increasing the price of long distance service to pay for universal service. The act also established the FCC to oversee all non-governmental broadcasting, interstate communications, as well as international communication which originate or terminate in the United States.

Era of deregulation

There was a push for deregulating the telecommunications industry in the 1980s. Under President Ronald Reagan, the FCC shifted its focus from “social equity to an economic efficiency objective,” which it claimed was a primary purpose of the Communications Act of 1934.^[4] After AT&T was split up in 1984, universal service was still “supported by a system of above-cost access charges paid to local exchange companies.” Increased competition and universal service were later legislatively addressed and codified with the Telecommunications Act of 1996.^[5]

Telecommunications Act of 1996

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 was the first major rewrite of the Communications Act of 1934. The act addresses new challenges and opportunities of the digital information age, with the goal of promoting an economic environment conducive for the growth of new information technology. It also further developed the meaning and implementation of universal service. The act calls for the creation of a joint federal-state board to make recommendations to the FCC on defining federal universal services and set time tables. The act also set out some immediate priorities of universal service. These include quality and reasonably priced services, access to advanced telecommunication services, access for rural, low-income and high-cost regions, equitable and nondiscriminatory service, specific and predictable price structure, access of advanced telecommunication services for schools and health care and libraries (Sec. 254(b)(1)-(7)). The act provided ability in the constantly changing telecommunication environment to periodically revisit and adjust universal service, while setting core principles (Sec. 254©). The 1996 act also “mandated the creation of the universal service fund (USF) into which all telecommunications providers are required to contribute a percentage of their interstate and international end-user telecommunications revenues”.^[5]

Universal Service Administrative Company

Following the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the subsequent creation of the Universal Service Fund, the FCC designated the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) to manage the contribution of revenue to and distribution of funding from the Universal Service Fund. USAC is an independent corporation whose purpose is to impartially distribute funds from the USF in a manner that will best meet the goals of universal service set by the Telecommunications Act of 1996.

The USAC receives contributions from all companies providing interstate and international telephone and Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) service. Contributors send payments based on projected quarterly earnings. This revenue is deposited into a central fund, from which the USAC distributes money to the four central services at the core of the USF: High Cost, Low Income, Schools and Libraries, and Rural Health Care.

Over the years, questions have been raised regarding USAC's abuse of its delegated authority. See http://commlaw.cua.edu/res/docs/06-v19-2-Marashlian-USF-Final.pdf

USAC reports quarterly revenue projections detailing what contributions are expected and detailing what actions are taken in the expansion and bolstering of universal service. While the USAC cannot act without Congressional approval, it can make recommendations. USAC recommendations have resulted in expanding telecommunication resources, particularly broadband Internet and mobile access to schools and libraries, and recognizing Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) as a form of interstate and international communication, which requires those companies providing VoIP services to contribute to the USF.^[6]

So again, what does this have to do with cell phones?

[JohnR! 5,495]

So again, what does this have to do with cell phones?

Does it not?

[Karee 4,191]

Does it not?

Not that I can see. Maybe I'm missing something. Please highlight any of your post the deals with wireless communications, spectrum allocation, or anything at all related to wireless access. And if you can find that anything that subsidizes wireless service.

[JohnR! 5,495]

Not that I can see. Maybe I'm missing something. Please highlight any of your post the deals with wireless communications, spectrum allocation, or anything at all related to wireless access. And if you can find that anything that subsidizes wireless service.

I don't think you are. It just so happens we are talking about two different things.

[Harsh_77 718]

You are so defensive. Who said the USA is the UK?

No, I don't know what he meant in his random babble, that's why I asked him what he meant. I would like to know where he lived in the UK where this happened. They don't give you "free food". Medical care is paid for via taxes, houses are not given to you "free", education in USA is paid for the taxpayer, the same as it is in the UK.

Don't talk about things you have no clue about, it makes you look stupid.

Still waiting for an explanation of the "whole communities who think its right and they should get things for free" comment. Care to elaborate on what "whole communities" these are?

I have lived in Scotland...

Historically, all undergraduate education outside the private University of Buckingham and BPP University College was largely state-financed, with a small contribution from top-up fees, however fees of up to £9,000 per annum will be charged from October 2012.

That is from wiki you can look it up... Scotland did not even implement top-up fee.

When I said school I meant college.. school is free in US as well I am very well aware of that...

Check out http://www.turn2us.org.uk/information__resources/benefits/expecting_or_bringing_up_child/income_support.aspx?page=385

I have seen it my self where ppl there don't want to or don't care about working coz, they get a help for paying rent if they cannot pay the rent (means housing is provided) cannot afford the food top-ups are available education and medical is free.

What else is left... I have seen families having more and more kids so they can get more benefits, please tell me if this is not true.

[rocks 494]

I have lived in Scotland...

Historically, all undergraduate education outside the private University of Buckingham and BPP University College was largely state-financed, with a small contribution from top-up fees, however fees of up to £9,000 per annum will be charged from October 2012.

That is from wiki you can look it up... Scotland did not even implement top-up fee.

When I said school I meant college.. school is free in US as well I am very well aware of that...

Check out http://www.turn2us.org.uk/information__resources/benefits/expecting_or_bringing_up_child/income_support.aspx?page=385

I have seen it my self where ppl there don't want to or don't care about working coz, they get a help for paying rent if they cannot pay the rent (means housing is provided) cannot afford the food top-ups are available education and medical is free.

What else is left... I have seen families having more and more kids so they can get more benefits, please tell me if this is not true.

You didn't make it clear you were talking about University, you said education. There is no need to condescend to me, I'm British, I'm quite aware of how University works. Try saying what you mean rather than random words.

I agree that there are lazy people there but there is no "free food". Please stop spreading propaganda.

I'm still waiting for you to explain

there are whole communities who think its right and they should get things for free. No one should be able to question them and they are above law and can do whatever they want.

You were talking about the USA when you said this, you have so far explained your issues with the UK.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Help the poor who want to mooch the system by teaching them job skills.

If they don't want to be educated, throw them in a 5x5 cell with bread and water rations daily.

If they don't want either. Let them die.

[웃 910]

Help the poor who want to mooch the system by teaching them job skills.

If they don't want to be educated, throw them in a 5x5 cell with bread and water rations daily.

If they don't want either. Let them die.

A 5 x 5 cell?

A queen sized bed is about 5 x 6.5.

You want the room smaller than a queen sized bed??

[Obama 2012 1,714]

A 5 x 5 cell?

A queen sized bed is about 5 x 6.5.

You want the room smaller than a queen sized bed??

eh, throw a twin size bed and a toilet in there and they should be good. Want something better? Well, the jobs program is looking pretty good isn't it?