Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site terak.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!hao!noao!terak!suze
From: suze@terak.UUCP (Suzanne Barnett)
Newsgroups: net.consumers
Subject: Re: Re: Long Distance
Message-ID: <966@terak.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 7-Jan-86 12:33:32 EST
Article-I.D.: terak.966
Posted: Tue Jan  7 12:33:32 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 12-Jan-86 06:08:53 EST
References: <82@druhi.UUCP> <837@bu-cs.UUCP>
Organization: Calcomp Display Products Division, Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Lines: 73

> >...add the coming rate increases for my
> >basic service and for *forced* charity I begin to wonder if I
> >really need a telephone.
> 
> I assume by *forced* charity you refer to subsidizing the existence
> of a very low level of service for the poor and elderly. The reason
> such subsidies are tacked on involuntarily is because of people's
> resistance to give voluntarily. If you are an exception and give
> generously then I suggest you deduct that amount from your yearly
> donations, if you are not an exception then you probably know why
> they have to yank it out of your pocket, if you prefer not to give
> anything at all ever then I sincerely hope you are never needy in
> any way.
> 
> The thought, for example, of an elderly or invalid person not being
> able to afford a phone and hence access to emergency services should
> be disturbing, it is not a consumer issue except perhaps to the hard
> of heart. If you feel undeserving people also receive such help, that
> is another issue; one of policy, starving the truly needy because of
> abusers would obviously be a cruel and useless way to correct
> bureaucratic deficiencies.
> 
> Sorry, but I find views like this disturbing.
> 
> It also answers your question, you might need a phone in the event of
> emergency tho you are free to do what you like. Of course, if you
> don't have a phone and don't believe in charity, then when you feel a
> crushing pain in your chest you better have a $10 bill in your hand
> when you knock on *my* door to call for help.
> 
> 	-Barry Shein, Boston University

Regardless of how much I may CHOOSE to give to
charities that I SELECT, being FORCED to financially support a
charity that I DID NOT select is repugnant to me.

The Phoenix area utilities have a program whereby one can
contribute, by paying extra, to a fund that pays some or all
of the utility bills for the poor. This is a GOOD solution.
And it seems to work.

I've lived without a telephone and do NOT consider it a necessity,
EVEN FOR EMERGENCIES, unless, perhaps, one resides in
the country, far from other people or stores that have a
telephone that can be used in emergencies.

We had a kitchen fire when we didn't have a phone. The
neighbors called for us and the fire department was there in
less than three minutes. (This was not the closest few
neighbors, who weren't home, but those several doors away. The
three minutes were from my first knock on the closest
neighbor's door.)

I have seen driving accidents where there was not a phone closer
than 1/2 mile away. We had more trouble getting the ambulance
to come at all, once we got hold of them than we had getting hold
of them to begin with.

Neither case had any serious results. Yes, some luck
was involved, but it does illustrate that a phone is not a
NECESSITY.

On the other hand, food is, why haven't you suggested to your
grocery store that they raise prices to help pay for food to
be given to the poor?
-- 
Merry Christmas!

Suzanne Barnett-Scott
uucp:	 ...{decvax,ihnp4,noao,savax,seismo}!terak!suze
CalComp/Sanders Display Products Division
14151 N 76th Street, Scottsdale, AZ 85260
(602) 998-4800