Posted on 12/11/2007 6:38:30 AM PST by Cagey
WASHINGTON (AP) - More than one in eight households have cell phones but lack traditional landline telephones, according to a federal study released Monday that tracks the country's growing dependence on wireless phones.
The data, reported twice a year, suggested that the number of households relying solely on cell phones may be growing more slowly than it had in the past. But the researchers said the slowdown might be due to changes in their survey, including altering the order of some questions and some of the wording.
"We don't know how much reflects reality and how much reflects changes in the questionnaire," said Stephen Blumberg, senior scientist at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and an author of the report.
The report released Monday showed that for the first half of 2007, 14 percent of households had cell phone service but no landline telephones. That was less than 1 percentage point over the second half of 2006 - not a statistically significant difference.
For the second part of 2006, the increase in those households had been about 2 percent over the previous six-month period.
The growth of families reachable only by cell phone has been of special interest to the telephone industry, providers of 911 emergency services, and public and private polling organizations.
Pollsters typically rely on random calls to households with landline telephones, but some have begun reaching out to cell-phone users, which is more expensive and makes it harder to ensure their samples are truly random.
The federal data showed once again that young, poor, male and Hispanic people are likelier to have only wireless telephone service.
Nearly one in five Hispanic adults - 18 percent - have cell phones but no landline phones, the survey showed. That was up from 15 percent in the last half of 2006.
In addition for the first half of 2007,
_11 percent of white adults and 14 percent of black adults had only cell phone service.
_Roughly three in 10 people age 18 to 29 had only wireless telephones - more than double the portion of those age 30 and older who rely only on cell phones.
_14 percent of males and 12 percent of females only had cell phone service.
_About one in five poor people have only cell phones, about double the percentage for those who are not poor.
_59 percent of households have landlines and cell phones, and 24 percent have only landlines.
The National Health Interview Survey, conducted by the CDC, involved in-person interviews with people in 15,996 households conducted from January through June of this year.
I remember those:) With the exception of the past year, I ‘ve had maybe 3 telemarketing calls in the previous 8 years. In the past year I got about 4 unique sales calls (and many repeats) but those have stopped.
having a cell phone can be much cheaper than owning a landline. if i was poor, i would probably opt with the cell phone only over having a landline too.
Prepaid phones are often very inexpensive, and you can’t run up a big bill because once the minutes run out, the phone doesn’t work until you buy more. Very up-front. There’s also no long-term commitment to a monthly bill, which is a big plus for those who aren’t financially stable.
A cell with a major provider with a longterm contract would be a different thing, of course.
I'm among this percentage. Haven't had a landline in three years. Haven't missed it once.
My cheapo cell phone costs $80 a year, has never given me a problem over 3 years of use, and I’ve dropped it plenty of times so it came apart in 4 pieces, but it always worked. The service is never interrupted, there are no contracts or commitments.
All they ask is that I buy a $20 phone card every 3 months, that’s the $80. The phone itself cost around $30.
I think poor people could deal with that!
My land line costs $25 a month, more or less. Doesn’t have all the features of the cell phone, no caller id, no portability, no voice mail, no text messaging, no alarm clock, etc.
OK WTF is the CDC conducting studies on Cell Phone usage?
Exactly what horrific cell phone based disease have my tax dollars gone toward preventing?
That’s exactly why I mentioned my headache. Another waste of time and money.
Did your phone company require that you get voice service in order to have DSL?
I will never be without a real phone.
Until they improve quality of sound and consistency, and make a FULL SIZE phone instead of these teeny tiny things I can hardly hold with my hand, and don’t reach my mouth anyway, I will continue having 1. It’s reliable and doesn’t ever go in & out and sound like a teleconference. Even the remote phones inside the house are better than cellulars. (Actually, my ancient 1 is best - many of the modern 1s are almost as poor as cell phones.)
And I’m “young”.
I find the landline convenient, but then I’m home most of time. When I’m not home, usually others are, and I have my cell phone so they can call me!
Well, I guess I still fit their notion of young, but the hubby doesn’t...we aren’t poor, I’m not male, and neither of us are Hispanic, and we have excellent credit...BUT we haven’t had a landline in over a year. Hubby had to have a cell phone for work, and it turned out that the long distance was cheaper than on the landline. The real zinger was the do not call list...we got spam calls ALL THE TIME! So, we added our number to the list...and got spam charity calls ALL THE TIME! I prefer to give on my own...being asked really turns me off. The only spam we’ve gotten on our cell phones is some Mexican guy who calls hubby about once a day and babbles in Spanish...at first hubby was nice and told the guy he had the wrong number...but the dude doesn’t seem to understand English.
LOL that’s ignorant.
For a landline you may be required to pay a deposit, not to speak of a definite monthly bill. A pay as you go cellphone is cheap and you buy minutes when you can afford it.
Some of this survey is a no-brainer; transient people or those without steady income are going to take the more flexible and cheaper route.
As for your DVD player comment, you can get them relatively cheaply nowadays, and owning a DVD player and renting movies is alot cheaper than paying for cable or satellite TV or going to a theater.
I hope you always have plenty of money because you don’t know much about getting by with less.
We have to keep our landline for the DSL.
It’s a bit like the cable company charging more for internet service to people who don’t buy their cable TV package.
Bunch of scam artists ...
Cell phones are extreme personal tracking devices. When a crime occurs it's possible for the police to get a list of most everyone that was within the cell at the time. It's amazing that not only the government has everyone wearing a personal tracking device, but that people also pay $50/month for the privilege!
Poor people have more fluid living arrangements, often moving from apartment to apartment. Landlines don’t make good sense.
Sounds like you need a cell-modem then so you can ditch dialup.
And he's a SENIOR scientist. Just think if he were a junior scientist.
Where do you live that this would be possible? Sure, the police might be able to get a list of who was within the range of a tower here, but that would only be two or three hundred thousand people.
yep, if my phone is on they can find the phone.
But if you pay for a landline they know where you live, and that’s a little different. They (the government) is losing the ability to determine where I live.
Voting, taxes, eligibility for lots of things is determined by where you live.
Sounds like your husband could use the language lesson in this thread. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1926720/posts
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.