It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Wage Strikes Planned at Fast Food Outlets in 100 US Cities on Thursday (12/5/13)

page: 19
15
<< 16  17  18    20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 21 2013 @ 06:34 AM
link   

macman

TheRegal
So what?

iPhones are free if you sign a contract. You absolutely need a phone these days. How do you know she even had a data plan? She could've been paying 15 bucks a month for that iPhone.



iPhones....strike that. ALL smartphones under contract require the addition of a Data plan.

You........Loose.........Again...........


Someone should probably call Bell and tell them to start charging me for data that I would never use on my Android, then.

You absolutely do not need a data plan to have a smartphone.

I like how in all of the threads you visit, you leave a foot at the bottom of each post like "try again", "You lose", "Got anything else?", and your posts are consistently as juvenile and shallow as the closing remarks. Points for consistency, I suppose.

I'm so sorry to be such a looser. I'll get tight again soon.
edit on 21-12-2013 by TheRegal because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 21 2013 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRegal
 


So an unlocked android phone, that was paid for either through a contractual agreement or outright.
If the provider found that you had a smart phone on huge network, it would be suspended until you corrected the plan.


Oh, car to try again?



posted on Dec, 21 2013 @ 11:23 PM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


You can buy a non-carrier tied smartphone and not have to use a data plan.

An, on my current plan, I can upgrade to a 250mb data plan for an extra $30/mo. I don't have a data plan. I use an Anrdoid.

I don't have to "try again", because I was correct in the first place.

Actually, you don't even need a contract at all to use a smartphone:

You do not need a contract or subscription to utilize your smart phone.
edit on 21-12-2013 by TheRegal because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 06:36 AM
link   
reply to post by TheRegal
 


And you still had to pay money, locally going for $100 or more, for that smart phone.

So............the website provided offers a "trick" to the option. You and others are basically going against the contract you agreed to. If a smartphone is to be attached to the carriers network, it is to be charged accordingly. Even the "no contract" companies will have a statement in the user agreement that if a smartphone is attached, it will be charge.

Just because you have found a way to scam the system, wonder what other systems you scam, doesn't mean anything except you have a way of scamming the system.

The phone was still purchased outright, which is an expense usually at $100 or more. The "need" for a smartphone is high for you, as it seems you don't use it to the full potential, and it is more of a social/fashion statement of "look at me, I have a smartphone".

The ownership of a smartphone of someone getting the free handout from daddy government is a poke in huge eye to the taxpayer funding it.

If it is contractual agreement for the free phone, it is paid for many times over during the course of the 2 year agreement. A waste of taxpayer money.

If the welfare receiver bought it outright, it is again a waste of taxpayer money, as a new iPhone is $500 without a contract or $450 through private sale.

Either way, it is a waste of taxpayer money, just for the phone.
The data plan is another cost that is not necessary for the welfare receiver to get that most important job call that everyone whines about.


I would like to offer you another chance.
Please, take another turn.
edit on 22-12-2013 by macman because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 07:32 PM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


Reading comprehension score: zero.

I am not using the method that I provided in the link. I've stated many times now, as anyone with the illectual capacity above toddler level would recognize, that my Anroid is most certainly attached to a large carrier -- Bell.

Take care to note what the word "actually" really means and that should clear things up for you when you re-read the post.

Again, no re-trys needed. You're still incorrect. There are carriers out there who do not require you to have a data plan to use your phone, and the circumstance we're talking about is one woman who had an iPhone and you clowns seem to think she MUST BE TIED INTO A $80/MO DATA PLAN AND HAVE PAID FULL PRICE FOR THE PHONE. Straight up; you're wrong.

End of discussion.
edit on 23-12-2013 by TheRegal because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 08:54 AM
link   

TheRegal
you clowns seem to think she MUST BE TIED INTO A $80/MO DATA PLAN AND HAVE PAID FULL PRICE FOR THE PHONE. Straight up; you're wrong.


As much a clown show as you believing their are hundreds of thousands of people running around various cities with new cars, smartphones , bags, bling , $200 sneakers all given to them as gifts while paying for milk with EBT .



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 09:32 AM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


She could be working a full time job, but still be on ebt. If her job paid a livable wage she would not need ebt. this is the point of this thread!

how can you possibly judge some one standing in line at a convenience store?
edit on 24-12-2013 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 09:58 AM
link   

LDragonFire
reply to post by macman
 


She could be working a full time job, but still be on ebt. If her job paid a livable wage she would not need ebt. this is the point of this thread!

how can you possibly judge some one standing in line at a convenience store?
edit on 24-12-2013 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)


Because if 1 person that can afford a smart phone, latest bling, new car, whatever is taking away funds that a person who has to work 3 jobs just to survive could be using then the system is not working right.

Come spend some time in any convenience store in a big city and you can witness this scenario yourself



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 10:04 AM
link   

opethPA

LDragonFire
reply to post by macman
 


She could be working a full time job, but still be on ebt. If her job paid a livable wage she would not need ebt. this is the point of this thread!

how can you possibly judge some one standing in line at a convenience store?
edit on 24-12-2013 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)


Because if 1 person that can afford a smart phone, latest bling, new car, whatever is taking away funds that a person who has to work 3 jobs just to survive could be using then the system is not working right.

Come spend some time in any convenience store in a big city and you can witness this scenario yourself


Again if they made a livable wage there wouldn't be the need to work 3 jobs. thanks for making this point



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 10:22 AM
link   

LDragonFire
Again if they made a livable wage there wouldn't be the need to work 3 jobs. thanks for making this point


So is your logic because someone doesn't make a livable wage it's okay to scam the system?

I work 40-60 hours a week depending on outagesprojects and make a great livableenjoyable wage.
I also have no kids.

A family with 3-4 kids working the same job with the same livable wage would be hard pressed to really enjoy life.

Because that second scenario has kids should their livable wage be higher if they are using the same skill sets and doing the same work?


edit on 2013pAmerica/Chicago3110pam by opethPA because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 05:20 PM
link   

opethPA
Because if 1 person that can afford a smart phone, latest bling, new car, whatever is taking away funds that a person who has to work 3 jobs just to survive could be using then the system is not working right.


Oh and now that we've seen a set of keys we know that it's not only a car that she owns, and paid full price for, but a BRAND SPANKIN' NEW CAR!

The plot with you always thickens and you have this amazing gift to know incredible specifics based on non-finite evidence.


edit on 24-12-2013 by TheRegal because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 05:26 PM
link   

opethPA

LDragonFire
Again if they made a livable wage there wouldn't be the need to work 3 jobs. thanks for making this point


I work 40-60 hours a week depending on outagesprojects and make a great livableenjoyable wage.
I also have no kids.

A family with 3-4 kids working the same job with the same livable wage would be hard pressed to really enjoy life.


Lmao? What side of the argument are you on, here? Honestly, you work 60 hours a week and don't want to be paid more per hour? You're content working 60 hours a week?

2013 slave mentality.


Because that second scenario has kids should their livable wage be higher if they are using the same skill sets and doing the same work?


edit on 2013pAmerica/Chicago3110pam by opethPA because: (no reason given)


Should their kids starve because they only work 60 hours a week?
edit on 24-12-2013 by TheRegal because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 05:26 PM
link   

opethPA

LDragonFire
Again if they made a livable wage there wouldn't be the need to work 3 jobs. thanks for making this point


So is your logic because someone doesn't make a livable wage it's okay to scam the system?


Where is your evidence some one is scamming the system? This thread is about striking workers wanting a livable wage.


I work 40-60 hours a week depending on outagesprojects and make a great livableenjoyable wage.
I also have no kids.

A family with 3-4 kids working the same job with the same livable wage would be hard pressed to really enjoy life.


hence enter welfare, welfare is designed around the kids needs.


Because that second scenario has kids should their livable wage be higher if they are using the same skill sets and doing the same work?


edit on 2013pAmerica/Chicago3110pam by opethPA because: (no reason given)


they are striking for a livable wage, this would include you as well.



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 09:04 PM
link   

TheRegal
Lmao? What side of the argument are you on, here? Honestly, you work 60 hours a week and don't want to be paid more per hour? You're content working 60 hours a week?

2013 slave mentality.


Not even close and I like how you left off part of my statement.
A few weeks ago we had an outage where I worked so yes I worked around 60 hours a week. On weeks when that doesn't happen i work around 40-45.
I get compensated beyond well for what I do in the career of my choice for an end cause that matters.
If that makes me a slave then I bet a lot of people would want to be a slave like me also.



Should their kids starve because they only work 60 hours a week?


Nope but just because you have kids doesnt mean you should make more money then someone else when putting out the same level of work.



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 09:06 PM
link   

LDragonFire

Where is your evidence some one is scamming the system? This thread is about striking workers wanting a livable wage.



Good point..Nothing wrong with someone having EBT and yet driving a Lexus, with a fancy purse and a new smartphone. Clearly that equation makes sense .


hence enter welfare, welfare is designed around the kids needs.

Yup and I hope it is always there for the people that don't scam the system or need it to survive.


Because that second scenario has kids should their livable wage be higher if they are using the same skill sets and doing the same work?


they are striking for a livable wage, this would include you as well.

Not really but if you want to believe that ok.



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 10:08 PM
link   
reply to post by opethPA
 



You consistently miss the point of this thread to go on about some self-conceived chip on your shouler that you base on personal anecdotes -- full of assumptions that you did no investigation on.

If people got paid a living wage, and all had jobs, we wouldn't need EBT cards for anyone but the physically disabled.



posted on Dec, 25 2013 @ 11:09 AM
link   

TheRegal
You consistently miss the point of this thread to go on about some self-conceived chip on your shouler that you base on personal anecdotes -- full of assumptions that you did no investigation on.

If people got paid a living wage, and all had jobs, we wouldn't need EBT cards for anyone but the physically disabled.


I have no chip on my shoulder.
I don't agree with people that scam a system meant to benefit those that are struggling.

The following part of this email is not meant in a confrontational manner at all:

How do you define what a living wage is?
Should a network engineer get paid the same as a surgeon who gets paid the same as a fast food worker?
Should someone working at 1 retail store get paid more of a living wage because they have 2 kids while another worker has no kids?



posted on Dec, 30 2013 @ 09:53 AM
link   
reply to post by TheRegal
 


Please, call up any major carrier and ask what would happen if they discovered a smartphone connected to their network, with no data plan attached to the contract.

So, do tell. How would one go about getting a smartphone, to be connected to a non-contract based service.



I will wait.



posted on Dec, 30 2013 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by LDragonFire
 


Oh good hell. the living wage argument again.

I do love going to Disneyland last week, seeing the thousands of locals with yearly memberships, discussing their Welfare arrangements and the use of EBT cards in the park. Oh, and don't forget about the hundreds of dollars worth of tattoo and piercing work they have showing.

Goes back to a simple poor use of funds coming in. Others should not be funding people.

And no wonder people in Cali think the US sucks. Cali is a crap hole. Everywhere I turned, I saw homeless people shuffling around, dirty streets, self absorbed people that drive like no one else matters. If I lived there and saw nothing but what Cali has to offer, I would probably think the world sucked too.



posted on Dec, 30 2013 @ 10:28 AM
link   

macman
So, do tell. How would one go about getting a smartphone, to be connected to a non-contract based service.


I could go to T-Mobile's site and order a pay-as-you go smartphone right now if I really wanted to.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 16  17  18    20 >>

log in

join