Mobile phones scandal in the USA
 

I was shocked to discover how backward or undeveloped the USA is when it comes to mobile phones, or cells as they call them here, compared to the UK.

What I object to quite strongly is having to pay to receive phone calls, as your account/minutes total is debited when you receive calls as well as when you make calls - what a bloody cheek!:mad:
Nobody pays to receive calls on landlines so how the mobile phone companies been able to get away with this scam is quite beyond me.
This applies whether you have a pay as you go or a contract, its the same thing. I tried Virgin hoping they were better, but they are just the same as all the others. So much for Richard being "different".

What I want is something like a UK pay as you go where you are not required to top up every so often if you don't want to or need to. I only need my mobile once in a while or as an emergency or car break-down, etc., as public phones are rare where I am (NC). Therefore, paying $20-$30 every 2-3 months for nothing is a waste of money and an affront to me, as all that happens is that my credit just builds up and up and remains unused.

Has anyone found a pay as you go-type deal without any regular commitments?

Re: Mobile phones scandal in the USA
 

T-mobile. If you buy $100 at a time the minutes are good for a year. That is about all I use. I think the scandal is that people get suckered into these contracts for yet another 30, 40, 50 or more per month.

I seem to recall that you had to pay by the minute for landline calls in the UK for ages. Isn't that why the internet took so long to catch on?

Re: Mobile phones scandal in the USA
 

I totally agree!

Whats even worse, is you have to pay to receive spam junk text messages.

Re: Mobile phones scandal in the USA
 

the real scam is charging by the min and by dialing not just when the call is picked up...

but meh...most of the PAYG's will let you keep the mins for a year if you buy a year card and they all tend to average out at about $10 a month that way, which ain't to bad.

Re: Mobile phones scandal in the USA
 

Not by the minute, and it didn't take off originally because there wasn't free phone dial up like in the US...

Re: Mobile phones scandal in the USA
 

I find it incredible that people think they need a cell phone

10% might......... 90% do not ...

Re: Mobile phones scandal in the USA
 

handy to have in the car in case of a break down, about the only time I ever use ours :lol:

Re: Mobile phones scandal in the USA
 

A disconnected one will still work on 911 calls

Re: Mobile phones scandal in the USA
 

Almost every carrier offers prepaid schemes, which is what you're looking for.

http://cellphones.about.com/library/bl_pt_q1.htm

Re: Mobile phones scandal in the USA
 

Hi:

You have me quite confused. You entitle your post as if there is some "scandal," but then you simply rant on about the difference between US and UK charging systems. That is somewhat misleading in my opinion.

That said, it should be noted that the calling party in the US is NOT charged a premium for calling a celluar phone. [In fact, with the number portability that mandated in the US recently, once can no longer readily tell what provider -- land or celluar -- one is dialing into.]

There was another discussion about this earlier, the way a communication system develops is often influenced by the size of the area covered and dealing with legacy issues.

Also, phone service in the US is privately owned but is heavily regulated as a "public utility" [like electricity, gas, water, etc.]. On top of that, there may be multiple levels of regulation. For example, when celluar service first came on line [1G service], the local municipalities were given the right to grant up to two licenses for installation of the hardware technology -- e.g. the towers. I remember starting out with a choice of "LACelluar" or "AirTouch." My AirTouch account has morphed over the years and is now part of VerizonWireless.

Unfortunately, in a heavily regulated area, change is slow to come and when it does come, the law of unintended consequences can kick in quite hard. Arnold Schawzenegger is can testify to that one.

Bottom line -- it is not a "scandal" -- it is just the way it is. You may not like and it will change and it is changing slowly.

Re: Mobile phones scandal in the USA
 

maybe miserable old men dont need cell phones....people with a social life and work find them very handy.....

Re: Mobile phones scandal in the USA
 

Here's one upside....

there's no extra charge to an overseas caller when they ring a mobile vs a landline here in the US. Not true the other way round, and the extra charge is huge. Given that more of my European friends don't even have landlines and only have mobiles it's very expensive for me to ring. And while some of us know that UK mobile numbers begin with 7, most Americans wouldn't and could possibly incur a huge bill by calling one.

Re: Mobile phones scandal in the USA
 

Nice link - gone in my favourites.... :thumbsup:

Re: Mobile phones scandal in the USA
 

Handy yes ..neccessity no !!

Re: Mobile phones scandal in the USA
 

It is a scandal because the phone companies are charging twice for the same thing. In order for this to have been agreed, people in Washington must have been paid big bucks.

Where in the modern world do you know where you have to pay to receive a call? Perhaps in some strange places, but this is the USA and not some far off outpost.
This was the point of my post, which I thought was pretty clear and not about "UK charging systems" - there is no "system" actually, but perhaps you mean tariffs, which is not what I was talking about.

It seems you confuse easy.