[TheRealThing]

No, I said the 2008 expansion occured while Bush was in office, just like Katrina.

And it was actually Reagan who started it all. But I guess the FCC isn't a valid source of my info, since it's an Obama website. http://www.fcc.gov/lifeline

Don't misunderstand my intent. Very often when I see an indigent walking the streets they have a cell phone pressed up to the side of their head. And as I mentioned, companies like Safe-Link actively recruit subscribers, going as far as setting up outdoor pavilions in strategic locations. Sort of like fishing where one knows the fish are the most abundant. How much money would you bet that these folks are walking around talking to perspective employers? My money would be on the likelihood that they're just blowing gas with friends. This is an apt example of how good intentions of well meaning legislators can go awry once turned over to the machinations of bureaucracy. Like everything else folks on the dole get, they live for today and if the phones are gone tomorrow or if their minutes are wasted leaving the intended benefit of the lifeline program unfulfilled, such as emergency calls or to a prospective employer, that's not something they are going to worry about.

The point is, not only are government giveaway programs available to the needy. They are actively and aggressively pushed on the public by so-called navigators, social workers and vendors who many times, have quotas they are trying to meet. So, those who are a bit too bashful to come in and apply for the various benefits may now expect social workers to come to where they hang out I suppose. Therefore, even though programs such as 'Lifeline' may have seen their humble origin arise during the Reagan administration or some other, they in present form, bear no faint similarity to the out of control entitlement situation of our time.

It's one thing to give blood, it's quite another to donate to the point of death. Same thing with the very replete list of available entitlements, from ObamaCare to free cell phones. Federal mandates which force those that work to care for those who for the most part, choose not to work, IMO will lead our nation to the same end as the overzealous blood donor. There was no place to draw the line on entitlements from the day America decided she would 'buy' the problems of the poor under the auspices of LBJ's social vision dubbed "The Great Society". Liberals love to give things away, and this president has taken a program started by Ronald Reagan and gone berzerk with it, nearly tripling the cost of the program over the last four years. So, blaming Reagan or Bush for all these cell phones flying around is a bit disingenuous, is it not? Under this administration, t's the same story across the hand-out board, foodstamps up, disability claims up, everything up. When demand exceeds supply, I worry lawlessness will ensue.

The argument for a national safety net to me is both financially and morally sound. But, anybody can come in with a sad story and ask their living be handed to them by the rest of us. You know, this idea of being governed of and by the people is very similar to the concept of casualty insurance. Sharing a risk among many, is far more affordable and has the side affect of quaranteeing collateral loans. If I lose my home to fire I lose everything. But, if I pay an affordable fee each year along with 10,000 other home owners in a risk sharing pool, the 20 or so who experience a fire will be able to replace their belongings far easier. As mentioned, this concept in turn is the basis for the mortgage industry.

In short, I don't mind sharing the risk with my fellow hard working neighbors. But, I've got a real problem when they get the same benefits freely given to them by the government that I must pay to have. In the eyes of the federal government, there is something they call the poverty line. Anybody who falls below the line whether by circumstance or by choice legally qualifies to have life handed to them. A much more black and white picture than prosecuting criminals or determining what the definition of is, is. LOL At any rate, what the government does is decide who has to work and who doesn't, who has to pay and who doesn't. You know that can't work forever.