Are cell phones a right or a privilege?
An article in yesterday’s Toronto Star puts the spotlight on the question of whether people who can’t afford a wireless device should have one as a basic service.
The pro-argument is people in a lower social-economic group should have a wireless device so they have the ability to communicate and be economically engaged.
“A telephone service, just in general, is not a privilege, it’s a right, and we fell it’s a corporate responsibility to provide it,” said Jose Fuentes, director of government relations with TracFone, which is the driving force behind the SafeLink program that eligible people with a free cell phone and 68 minutes a month of free service.
I find it hard to buy into the idea that wireless service is something that every citizen should have. I’m not trying to be cold-hearted but shouldn’t health-care, food and basic housing be higher priorities.
If anything, there should be free basic telephone service (wireline) to people who can’t afford home or wireless service. This free service should come with voice-mail so people can retrieve messages. You could make the same argument for Internet access. There’s no doubt there should be places where people can go online at no cost but free residential service doesn’t have to happen.
Technorati Tags: wireless
4 Comments
I agree with you. I don’t think you’re being cold hearted at all. It’s a privilege. Having a cellphone for free in order to be “economically engaged” is a ridiculous excuse to waste money. They’re still economically engaged if they have a house phone and who doesn’t have one of those or at least know someone with one.
As aforementioned, there are way more important things that should be free. What’s the world coming to? If there’s a free cellphone before there’s free health-care, something is seriously wrong with the world.
No human has a right to any thing that must be created by another human.
Rights are those actions capable of being performed by a human which all other humans are morally bound not to impede. A possible action is considered to be a right when and only when the action is never destructive in any way to the life of any other non-consenting human.
I think that having a cell phone is a luxury. They were only invented 20 years ago, if human civilization could live without them for thousands of years… I’m pretty sure that people can still survive without them now. As for a home phone, I agree that everyhome should have one, mainly for emergencies for free though. A monthly fee should still be charged for any kind of social or non-emergency type of calls.
It’s not about “rights”, it’s about a country maintaining its competitive advantage. In today’s world a country cannot afford NOT to give all its kids internet access. Of course healthcare, food, etc. are more important basic necessities, but a country where only rich kids have broadband is dooming itself.
One Trackback
[...] discovered this article via Mark Evan’s blog where he voices his opinion on the topic. Once again, I disagree for many of the same reasons that [...]