Re:Smartphones Are a New Tax on the Poor
by zamadatix on Thursday December 16, 2021 @11:30AM
(#29580011)
I don't think it's about "is $<x> a lot of money":
> According to 2020 numbers from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, those in the lowest 20 percent of income earners spent $150 more a year on their cell phones than they did in 2016.
I spend $180/y for unlimited talk/text with 5 GB data per month using Verizon's network through US Mobile. It's a prepaid monthly plan, no credit, no contract. You also have the option to use T-Mobile's GSM network if your existing phone is incompatible or coverage is better in your area. For phones there are plenty of options in the $200 range, both used like GP mentions and new. On the new side I recently picked up 2 Galaxy A12 for the niece/nephew, $170 each. They started on Android 10 but have gotten 11 and are due to get 12 year (and a few patches after that but not likely 13).
So for <$240 a year folks should be able to be connected to decent new phones and service yet in the last 4 years people in the lowest 20% income bracket have been led to spend 2/3 of that more in addition to what they were already paying. I'm not sure where the exact numbers are in the linked source but I'd be curious if these folks are being led to spend more than I am on my high end phone and phone plan.
For that price these folks are getting a lot of value and I don't think that's a problem in itself more than fulfilling any other modern life need is a problem for low income folks. I think the real problem is a combination of predatory tactics from the market as described in the article and lack of knowledge of alternatives amongst low income people. It's hard to learn where you can get a quality phone and plan when you don't have internet and the local T-Mobile store's $0 up front plan is the only way you will have a phone for work next week.
> According to 2020 numbers from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, those in the lowest 20 percent of income earners spent $150 more a year on their cell phones than they did in 2016.
I spend $180/y for unlimited talk/text with 5 GB data per month using Verizon's network through US Mobile. It's a prepaid monthly plan, no credit, no contract. You also have the option to use T-Mobile's GSM network if your existing phone is incompatible or coverage is better in your area. For phones there are plenty of options in the $200 range, both used like GP mentions and new. On the new side I recently picked up 2 Galaxy A12 for the niece/nephew, $170 each. They started on Android 10 but have gotten 11 and are due to get 12 year (and a few patches after that but not likely 13).
So for <$240 a year folks should be able to be connected to decent new phones and service yet in the last 4 years people in the lowest 20% income bracket have been led to spend 2/3 of that more in addition to what they were already paying. I'm not sure where the exact numbers are in the linked source but I'd be curious if these folks are being led to spend more than I am on my high end phone and phone plan.
For that price these folks are getting a lot of value and I don't think that's a problem in itself more than fulfilling any other modern life need is a problem for low income folks. I think the real problem is a combination of predatory tactics from the market as described in the article and lack of knowledge of alternatives amongst low income people. It's hard to learn where you can get a quality phone and plan when you don't have internet and the local T-Mobile store's $0 up front plan is the only way you will have a phone for work next week.