‘Obamaphone’ program stashes $9 billion in private bank accounts

Just your typical government funded social program in action.

This x1000 is what a communist society is like

>>153612
Obama uses " slush fund "

It's not very effective...

>The program, run by the Federal Communications Commission, predates President Obama
But sure, let's keep calling it the "Obamaphone" program.

>washingtontimes
This site is shit. The links to reports cited in their articles often just link back to them (like in this article).
>>153613
>>153627
>Typical guvment socialism
>This is Obama's fault
The "Obamaphone" program is a program that was available before Obama's presidency, and it isn't funded by taxpayer money

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/10/the-obama-phone/

Washingtontimes is breitbart-tier garbage

>>153636
by "them", I meant it takes you to the washingtontimes webpage

>>153635
No you see, back when Obama was 24, he used his evil muslim mind control powers to force the Reagan administration to start the Lifeline program back in 1985.

>>153636
Well it happened. At least they don't make shit up outright like CNN, Wapost and NyTimes

>>153636
>Washingtontimes is breitbart-tier garbage
Agreed, but you can still fuck off.
Your country deserves it's lying press.

>>153636
Washington times is still more legit than CNN, Wapo or the Jew york times.

>>153613
Except phone companies are the ones pocketing the money, and the systemwas in place before Obama's presidency.

>>153689
>>153670
We can agree that CNN, WashPo, and NYTimes are often full of shit, but I can't think of a single Washingtontimes or Breitbart article that wasn't complete bullshit

>>153678
>Agreed, but you can still fuck off
>Your country deserves its lying press
I'm afraid I don't understand your frustration, friend

>>153694
I can

>>153636
>and it isn't funded by taxpayer money

This lie needs to end

The telecommunications companies funding the program get massive fucking subsidies.

Saying the federal government isn't funding it is like me giving you a dollar to buy a candy bar for me and then saying you bought it with your own money.

>>153694
Breitbart and Washingtontimes are often not the best articles, but taking the extremist that everything they publish is shit is only going to make you look foolish when someone proves you wrong.

>>153694
Honestly 100% better then the MSM at this point. Not a single major retraction.

>>153755
You don't have to issue retractions if you don't care about the validity of your articles.

>>153756
Name a single major retraction by the Washington Times or Breitbart then

>>153759
I literally just said they don't have to issue retractions if they don't care about the validity of their claims.

They're yellow journalism, just like CNN.

>>153760
Do you have any news sources which you trust to report the facts?

>>153760
Then one false story?

Goal!

>>153761
they all highlight stories that support their bias

Fox news will have an article about an illegal who rapes and steals while MSNBC will have an article about an illegal alien who went to college and started a successful startup

Its disgusting on both sides. This article's headline is clearly meant to mislead the reader. The key question is who is paying, which is left out and the article even mentions taxpayers

>is causing this program to fail the American taxpayer
>We’re currently letting phone companies cash a government check every month with little more than the honor system

These are outright lies

if the headline read as "Multi-Billion dollar Telecom company posting 97% profit margins are being ripped off by people slightly above poverty level." no one would care.

Being mad at obama and welfare is fun and all. But the purpose of this program is to help people be employed instead of raping and stealing

>investigators questioned whether the program is even needed anymore. The price of phones and service on many plans have dropped dramatically, making them affordable for nearly everyone, the GAO says

I got a phone as good as a moto g for 35 dollars FLAT and I pay 3.33 a month with a service called black wireless, which is a virtual network for AT&T. Its very cheep and we need to ensure people who exceed the poverty levels move to virtual networks like mine. And to do that the fcc needs more oversight and more gov. spending. Less would result in worse scandals and more fraud getting through. Which is what FCC Chairman Ajit Pai wants, so he can cut the program when the numbers get bigger (he's a former verizon employee) so poor people might cough up some cash to telecom companies instead of buying food. Right now, he's pulling funding claiming they will do a better job with less (they wont, obviously since costs are entirely labor and paperwork) He's gunning for poor people cash. He wants to sabotage it, and then kill it when it gets bad press

>>153942
Cont.

Basically, as the worlds job opportunities moved online, the popularity of the program has increased among people living below 135% of America's poverty level

As the popularity of the program increased among the poor (who used to be able to fill out paper applications and not need to receive texts from their boss etc) the funding for overseeing the program failed to increase and meet the demands of todays world, so of course they fell behind and made mistakes. Now we're going to cut the program even more which will help how?

Its ridiculous and the gov failing to adapt to changing times should not mean its okay to screw poor people and revel as the commit crimes and work for less than minimum wage or some shit trying to get by.

>>153739
this
people don't understand the definition of subsidies

>>153636
>100% wrong
>Uses fuckin fact check.com

>>153761
Using one, in any case, is bad. The best course of action is to take stock of what the majority is reporting, and making my own judgement. I guess I don't have a singular source I can consistently go back to, because I learned a long time ago to separate the bias and the unconfirmed from the story.

Only problem with that is that journalism as a whole has been declining with the rise of the internet, with outlets reporting stories from each other. A runaway fabrication has only occured a few times in recent memory, but that's enough to consider dropping my interest in current events altogether. On top of that, there's way too many people who have a voice now thank to the internet, when they really really really should keep their mouths shut. That's completely bipartisan btw, there are mouthbreathers in every ideology.

>>153764
I could point out the several that come back from a simple search engine result, but you'll end up saying they aren't false or attacking my sources. The argument will go nowhere, because you refuse to think that they might want to keep the truth from you, like any fucking modern news entity.

So lets call each other faggots and get it over with.

>>153942
>They're getting one over on a profitable corporation, not helping telekoms bleed money from the average consumer!
You missed this part:
>The USF is sustained by contributions from telecommunications companiessuchas "long distance companies, local telephone companies, wireless telephone companies, paging companies, and payphone providers." The companies often charge customers to fund their contributions in the form of auniversal service feeyou might see on your monthly phone bill.

The average consumer's phone bill goes up because of this system. If the system is being exploited, the answers consumer's phone bill goes up unnecessarily

>>153739
>The telecommunications companies funding the program get massive fucking subsidies.
>>154062
>people don't understand the definition of subsidies

except both of you are wrong; the program is funded by a non-profit called th e "Universal Service Fund" which is in turn funded by telecom companies which are required to donate a portion of their revenues to it.

Arguing this means taxpayer funding is an incredibly convoluted stretch of mental gymnastics, especially when the same folks doing this are the ones arguing nobody needs a phone and thus nobody needs to patronize the telecom industry and pay for it indirectly.

>>154227
Sigh...no fun

>>154235
Telecom companies dont have to charge you for it though. They post 97% profit margins. Companies like verizon and comcast never have to raise their prices due to overheads, they make several billion dollars of pure profit every quarter. They bill you for it, and highlight that fact, because they obviously hate the program. Telecom companies are the richest kind of company by far in every country on this earth. And most people dont understand this when talking about them- the gov. can't ignore these massive utility-like companies that rake it in.

And they've lobbied and lobbied and now have a former employee in the gov. who is cutting the program and stirring up scandals on purpose instead of trying to fix the program. Al he does is cut funding, at no point has he mentions how to actually help the program, or mention how they could be less wasteful (if they even are at all- it seems to me like the program just got swamped by new demand)