Why doesn't the government provide cell phone service?

[Cooky]

After spending a pretty hefty amount of money on my cell phone bill, I was just wondering why nobody ever suggests that the government creates it's own cellular service, where instead of profits, the government option would merely base prices on what is necessary to maintain the service.

What's your opinion on an optional public cellular service provider, in competition with privatized providers?

 

[Cooky]

...I mean, if it's our government, then it should do whatever we tell it to do, right..?

 

[Brickjectivity]

After spending a pretty hefty amount of money on my cell phone bill, I was just wondering why nobody ever suggests that the government creates it's own cellular service, where instead of profits, the government option would merely base prices on what is necessary to maintain the service.

What's your opinion on an optional public cellular service provider, in competition with privatized providers?

In this country? No, I don't suggest that. We have regulatory services which regulate the companies that provide telecommunications, and that is good enough to make the system work. Also the private companies keep things improving, whereas a government service would stay pathetic.

I am in favor, however, of the government providing a taxpayer funded internet backbone through our post offices. I think we already have public wireless points through our public libraries, but I think the post offices should become providers of a separate redundant fiber optic backbone.

 

[sooda]

After spending a pretty hefty amount of money on my cell phone bill, I was just wondering why nobody ever suggests that the government creates it's own cellular service, where instead of profits, the government option would merely base prices on what is necessary to maintain the service.

What's your opinion on an optional public cellular service provider, in competition with privatized providers?

Are you a socialist, Landon?

 

[Cooky]

Are you a socialist, Landon?

I am aware of what I'm proposing.

 

[Cooky]

In this country? No, I don't suggest that. We have regulatory services which regulate the companies that provide telecommunications, and that is good enough to make the system work. Also the private companies keep things improving, whereas a government service would stay pathetic.

I am in favor, however, of the government providing a taxpayer funded internet backbone through our post offices. I think we already have public wireless points through our public libraries, but I think the post offices should become providers of a separate redundant fiber optic backbone.

I guess I just feel like I'm ready to stab the cell phone companies in their backs, because they're acting like they own me.

Plus, $53 billion dollars in profits..?

How Wireless Carriers Make Their Money - mindWireless

 

[columbus]

I think we already have public wireless points through our public libraries, but I think the post offices should become providers of a separate redundant fiber optic backbone.

But the internet is rapidly rendering both the libraries and post offices roadkill by the side of the information superhighway.
It's already taken out the evening news broadcast and print media.
Tom

 

[Cooky]

To be clear, I don't want to stab Samsung or Apple in the back...

 

[Heyo]

After spending a pretty hefty amount of money on my cell phone bill, I was just wondering why nobody ever suggests that the government creates it's own cellular service, where instead of profits, the government option would merely base prices on what is necessary to maintain the service.

What's your opinion on an optional public cellular service provider, in competition with privatized providers?

"
Vermont Senator and US presidential candidate Bernie Sanders pledged to put a stop to the "greed" of telcos and cable operators with a wide-ranging "High-Speed Internet for All" plan backed by billions in grants designed to expand access to broadband services and reduced pricing.

Sanders, who pledged to accomplish this by the end of his first term as president, wants to take that big step further by using "existing antitrust authority to break up internet service provider and cable monopolies."

Sanders would also put forth a plan to classify broadband ISPs as common carriers under "Title II" and reinstate network neutrality regulations that were recently rolled back at the FCC under the Trump administration. He'd also attempt to have Congress codify those rules into law to prevent more see-sawing of the FCC rules. In another jab at the FCC, Sanders would also seek to conduct a "national broadband census" that creates a more comprehensive and accurate assessment of broadband access maps, speeds and prices" from Bernie Sanders Threatens to Break Up Broadband Market With 'High-Speed Internet for All' Plan | Light Reading

 

[Polymath257]

We don't do this for other utilities, even ones that are essential for survival. I'd be much more inclined to do this for, say, subsidies for heating during cold winters or AC during hot summers. Water and sewer services are another essential that I could see having subsidies for. But cell phone service isn't a necessity.

 

[Cooky]

We don't do this for other utilities, even ones that are essential for survival. I'd be much more inclined to do this for, say, subsidies for heating during cold winters or AC during hot summers. Water and sewer services are another essential that I could see having subsidies for. But cell phone service isn't a necessity.

The thing about subsidies, is that it costs money. With a government cell phone service, the customers would pay the bill, ergo minus the extra billions spent for someone else's profits.

...Of course people could still choose their private cell provider if that's what they want.

 

[Polymath257]

The thing about subsidies, is that it costs money. With a government cell phone service, the customers would pay the bill, ergo minus the extra billions spent for someone else's profits.

...Of course people could still choose their private cell provider if that's what they want.

Once again, I'd prefer this sort of thing for essentials, like health care.

Since we don't have separate services for heat and cooling, it's not so easy for the government to actually supply those. Water is another matter. And guess what? Many governments do, in fact, supply water service.

And sewer.

 

[Iymus]

After spending a pretty hefty amount of money on my cell phone bill, I was just wondering why nobody ever suggests that the government creates it's own cellular service, where instead of profits, the government option would merely base prices on what is necessary to maintain the service.

What's your opinion on an optional public cellular service provider, in competition with privatized providers?

Perhaps subsidized for low income but seems more of a personal convenience than an overall need.

 

[Cooky]

Perhaps subsidized for low income but seems more of a personal convenience than an overall need.

I see nothing wrong with government working for our convenience. It's for us that the government exists, and like a computer program, we can program it to do whatever we want.

 

[Cooky]

You know what guys, the government never does anything for the middle class. It's all about the dirt poor and the filthy rich.

 

[Twilight Hue]

After spending a pretty hefty amount of money on my cell phone bill, I was just wondering why nobody ever suggests that the government creates it's own cellular service, where instead of profits, the government option would merely base prices on what is necessary to maintain the service.

What's your opinion on an optional public cellular service provider, in competition with privatized providers?

It would give the NSA a nice pipeline without the middleman.

 

[columbus]

I see certain broad services as best supplied by an elected body like the government.
Fire and police protection. Basic healthcare and education. Highways and roads.

I see connectivity as similar to highways. Everyone pays taxes that support them, and capitalist endeavors supply the devices needed to access these public services.
Internet connection seems similar to highways. Provide the public infrastructure, then let people choose their method of accessing the infrastructure from the provider who best meets their needs, wants, and willingness/ability to pay for the devices.
We do physical transportation that way. Why not information transportation?
Tom

 

[Cooky]

It would give the NSA a nice pipeline without the middleman.

True. That would be the incentive for many to keep private providers like Sprint, Verizon, etc. That way nobody has a monopoly, not even the government.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Uncle Sam has indeed offered subsidized phone service since Reagan. It started with him, but people began calling them "Obamaphones."
But, I agree a deed phone service would be good, and not just for low income like worth Lifeline phones.

 

[columbus]

The thing about subsidies, is that it costs money.

Why do people who never drive interstate have to subsidize the "freeway" system?
Tom