[parker_mountain]

> luxury item (and an expensive monthly service bill)

Before applying any subsidies for low income people, you can get a perfectly usable smartphone for under $40 and unlimited data cell service (slow but usable for basic tasks) for $10/month. An iPhone, with service, can be had for a total of under $50/month.

These aren't luxury items anymore.

[ekianjo]

They should not be required for anything either.

[simondotau]

Neither should a bank account, or a car, or weather-appropriate clothes, but they can be pretty damn handy.

[throwaway2037]

Nice reply. I laughed. At the office, when I am asked "Do you really need it?" I sometimes answer: "I don't _need_ my left leg, but I really like it." Same for toilet paper in the stalls.

[ekianjo]

Bad analogies are bad analogies. You can still have two systems in parallel instead of requiring a single tool to do the job.

[simondotau]

Bad arguments are bad arguments.

Cash and bank accounts are two systems in parallel. Cars and public transport (or bicycles, or walking) are systems in parallel. Good clothing and poor clothing are systems in parallel.

A physical driver license and a digital driver license are systems in parallel. Banking/services on a mobile phone and visiting a physical store are systems in parallel.

Where is the bad analogy?

[barbazoo]

Interesting. It's easy to focus on public life catching up to technology, but we're also pretty good I'd say to stay backwards compatible. But who defines what should be minimally required anyway?

Pen and paper? Obviously. Smartphone? Internet? Phone?

[pasc1878]

Why is pen and paper required?

[xvector]

I would much rather a smartphone be required than pen and paper.

[andrew-dc]

I was kinda using 'luxury item' rhetorically more than specifically, but it seems to have derailed the main point. (Whoops. Live and learn.)

With that said, expecting anyone to shell out x dollars/month, so they can pay to park, or scan a QR code - rather than tapping a plastic card, or handing them a piece of paper - doesn't really feel like technological advancement.

For clarity, I believe there are many other things that Smartphones do, which definitively make life simpler. (I believe technology should make life easier, or better - or at least be useful.) And, I even think it makes sense to have certain utilities combined that don't really provide an advantage alone, such as: If you can pay with a phone and not need to carry another payment method, sure - why not just pay with a phone?

Again, the point I was trying to make originally was if you choose not to use a smartphone, you will run into situations where a stupidly simple process has been not supplemented (or improved), but totally replaced with 'you need a phone and data plan'.

< Disappointed Muhammad Sarim Akhtar Meme >

This is a real frustration point that anyone considering living without a smartphone will run into.

[watwut]

50$ a month is something that matter if your income is low

[parker_mountain]

I don't think you read my post. :) I offered an alternative option prior to the iPhone option - a new phone every year starts around $14 a month.

And that's before government subsidies, which can lower monthly service cost AND device cost to $0 - depending on state/income/age.