Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Desperate HousewivesFollow

#1 Nov 12 2005 at 10:59 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Le Tribune de la Chicago wrote:
WASHINGTON -- While considering slashes in Medicaid and student loan programs, Congress is about to set aside up to $3 billion to help millions of Americans with old non-digital television sets buy converter boxes.

Each converter box is expected to cost the government $40 to $60, but supporters of the legislation don't want to take any chances of being accused of denying Americans their right to a TV picture when broadcasting goes all digital.

Depending on how much money is allocated, the funding would go to purchase as many as 60 million "set-top" electronic boxes to make it possible for old, broadcast-only TV sets to continue receiving a picture when the broadcasting industry converts to all-digital transmission as soon as the end of 2008. Conservative groups have criticized the proposed expenditure as a giveaway, but the TV provision has received less attention because it is included in deficit-reduction legislation that has generated an uproar in the House for its spending reductions in programs affecting the poor, such as Medicaid and food stamps
Source

Three billion dollars set aside to make sure people can watch television. I know *I* can't think of any better way to spend $3,000,000,000.

"The potential for consumer outrage over one day waking up and finding out that you are simply incapable of receiving local news, information about a hurricane or tornado alert, or entertainment programs, is enormous," said Dennis Wharton, a spokesman for the National Association of Broadcasters.

It's called a radio. They sell them for as little as $5 at the Wal-Mart. Granted you can't get The Real O.C. on it, but we all have to make sacrifices. Perhaps the National Association of Broadcasters would like to take up a collection to make sure the nation's television viewing goes uninterrupted.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#2 Nov 12 2005 at 11:01 AM Rating: Good
*****
18,463 posts
Show me.... HATER!
#3 Nov 12 2005 at 11:12 AM Rating: Decent
They've been running stories on this for years now...

We should have people in office that say "***** you guys" to this kind of stuff instead of... oh, lets say education.
#4 Nov 12 2005 at 11:18 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Sevenwords wrote:
They've been running stories on this for years now...
I assume that by "this" you mean the switch to digital and not the spending plan.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#5 Nov 12 2005 at 11:24 AM Rating: Excellent
***
1,863 posts
The word "right" has an awfully broad interpretation. The constitution must have all kinds of provisions I never noticed.
#6 Nov 12 2005 at 11:30 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Holy motherfu[/i]cking sh[i]it. Way to go, there, tax-and-spend Republicans, you braindead idiots.

Truly television is the only true American religion, and as such has taken its rightful place as the opiate of the masses. We don't even need to give 'em bread anymore; the circus is plenty.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#7 Nov 12 2005 at 4:55 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,829 posts
I pointed this out to my husband and he said that this is actually going to turn a profit for the government. The reason the gov't is pushing to convert to digital by 2008 is so that they can sell all the analog "real estate" for what will come to many, many billions of dollars, which is sort of hinted at here:

Quote:
"It certainly has elements of paying a bribe, but oftentimes paying a bribe is the better part of deficit reduction," countered Barry Bosworth, a Brookings Institution economist. "By making this payment, they [Congress] will free up a spectrum that can be sold for money."

There is big money to be made in the transition from analog to digital television, Gatusso said, adding that many companies have their eye on buying some of the spectrum so they can offer new wireless and broadband services. That will be the biggest corporate payoff, he said.


IF and only IF the resulting profit was used to bolster the programs that are now desperately suffering, then I can see this as being a potentially good thing. But somehow, I doubt that's gonna happen. It will probably instead be used to subsidize another tax cut for the wealthy.

#8 Nov 12 2005 at 5:11 PM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Where's the part about the desperate housewives?

/disppointed
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#9 Nov 12 2005 at 6:00 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,919 posts
edit edit: bah. I completly missed ambrya's post. ignore this one it says the same thing. Of course i could just nuke hers and claim the server ate it, but i wouldn't do that... much

Well, it's not all as bad as it seems. The plan is to completly stop all standard analog TV wavelength broadcasts and switch them over to the "smaller" Digital bandwidths, then turn that whole analog signal range over to the cell phone companies for something on the order many more than 3 billions in FCC licenses and taxes. The Cell phone companies are already engaged in a bidding war over the new bandwidth, but they can't take it over until every analog tv broadcast is converted to digital, meaning that 90 percent of the TV sets in the country won't work without the box.

3 billion sounds like a whole hell of alot of money initially, but it actually makes sense if you factor in their return on investment that they get from making that wavelength range available.

edit: the plan was also concieved in the clinton era in case anyone was curious.

Edited, Sat Nov 12 18:19:57 2005 by Kaolian

Edited, Sat Nov 12 18:15:26 2005 by Kaolian

edit edit edit: editing is fun!

Edited, Sat Nov 12 18:16:28 2005 by Kaolian

Edited, Sat Nov 12 18:r^2x4:25 2005 by teh Easterbunny

Edited, Sat Nov 12 18:27:08 2005 by Kaolian
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#10 Nov 12 2005 at 8:16 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Dread L0rd Kaolian wrote:
3 billion sounds like a whole hell of alot of money initially, but it actually makes sense if you factor in their return on investment that they get from making that wavelength range available.
Three billion is a hell of a lot of money. I fail to see how the government isn't able to sell off the wavelengths without buying everyone a converter. One isn't really required to do the other at all.
Quote:
edit: the plan was also concieved in the clinton era in case anyone was curious.
Sure, during the Republican dominated Congress! Smiley: grin

Actually, I don't care who came up with it, it's still stupid. If you want to watch TV in 2008, you still have over two years to save up enough for a new television. Get cracking.

Edited, Sat Nov 12 22:22:37 2005 by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#11 Nov 12 2005 at 10:07 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
Elinda wrote:
Where's the part about the desperate housewives?

/disppointed

The black guy in the basement killed that little girl.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#13 Nov 12 2005 at 11:13 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
I don't care about the money; the money is chump change. What I care about is the glorification of the idiot box that serves to keep people anesthetized.

Television is not a necessity. I know that's probably a difficult concept for some people to grasp, but it's true.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#14 Nov 12 2005 at 11:34 PM Rating: Good
Yeah, television is trash.

Now teh internetz. THAT is vital, something we can live without. Hell, I wouldn't be able to download my TV shows without my broadband...
#15 Nov 13 2005 at 12:55 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,829 posts
Samira wrote:
I don't care about the money; the money is chump change. What I care about is the glorification of the idiot box that serves to keep people anesthetized.

Television is not a necessity. I know that's probably a difficult concept for some people to grasp, but it's true.


Yes, but what possible advantage could there be for the government NOT to glorify the idiot box. The TV lets them tell people who the bad guys are, and without being told who the bad guys are, people might just God forbid start to wonder themselves who the bad guys are. Sometimes, the "bad guy" is even the TV. I mean, how many times has some government chump gotten on the tube and told you to blame violent television for the latest kid-goes-on-a-rampage-with-a-gun incident, while somehow neglecting to mention that they themselves just voted down another gun control law?

You have it right when you say TV keeps people anaesthetized...but of all possible parties, no single entity benefits MORE from the people being anaesthetized than the people in power, so of COURSE they are going to make sure the populace has their TV. TV is the gladiator fights of the 20th and 21st centuries. Provide a spectacle to divert the people's attention from how corrupt the power structure is. The government would be in deep sh[i][/i]it without it, because people might, God forbid, begin thinking. Dangerous stuff, this "thinking." Sometimes it leads to...*gasp*...action.


#16 Nov 13 2005 at 8:18 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
18,463 posts
TStephens wrote:
Yeah, television is trash.

Now teh internetz. THAT is vital, something we can live without. Hell, I wouldn't be able to download my TV shows without my broadband...

Smiley: laughSmiley: laughSmiley: laugh


I don't care what anyone thinks of me. I heart my little luxuries. Nothing like coming home from a long day and zoning out while fingding out about the crusades and the plague, then watching Danny Bonaduce self-destruct.
So relaxing!

Edited, Sun Nov 13 08:27:51 2005 by Atomicflea
#17 Nov 13 2005 at 6:31 PM Rating: Good
*****
16,160 posts
Bread and circuses, people, bread and circuses.

Totem
#18 Nov 13 2005 at 7:53 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Or bread and circuits, in this case.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#19 Nov 14 2005 at 1:04 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,919 posts
On a related note, the heatsync for a Geforce FX 5900 ultra with the fan off makes for an excellent bread toaster.
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#20 Nov 14 2005 at 10:14 AM Rating: Decent
Ambrya,

Quote:
IF and only IF the resulting profit was used to bolster the programs that are now desperately suffering, then I can see this as being a potentially good thing. But somehow, I doubt that's gonna happen. It will probably instead be used to subsidize another tax cut for the wealthy.


Because we know the poor are paying all the taxes with their vast wealth. Are you still upset that independently wealthy gentlemen such as myself can afford the nicer things in life? Well as long as I'm buying some less advantaged citizen a television I can sleep soundly. Granted this is another misuse of public funds; apparently I was the only one who noticed that "conservatives" were the opponents of this.

Achileez

#21 Nov 14 2005 at 11:24 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Conservative groups opposing it, yes. GOP, not so much.

The GOP leadership yanked the budget bill from the floor on Thursday because leaders had failed to gather enough votes to pass it, and its outlook is now uncertain. Some of the House's spending cuts could be killed to make the bill more palatable, but there is no indication that the television provision is in jeopardy.
[...]
Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), one of the GOP moderates who protested provisions in the deficit-reduction act, had high praise for the television subsidy. "The economic development aspects of this bill are vastly understated," he said.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#22 Nov 14 2005 at 11:33 AM Rating: Decent
Jophed,

You do understand what the upper case R represents don't you? Isn't it amazing what we learn with each passing day.

Achileez
#23 Nov 14 2005 at 11:50 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
You do understand what the phrase "had high praise for the television subsidy" means, yes? The one given by Mr. Capital R?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#24 Nov 14 2005 at 12:25 PM Rating: Default
Jophed,

=)

maybe I would do better to actually read some of your posts...

Achileez

#25 Nov 14 2005 at 12:26 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I doubt it but there's always hope!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#26 Nov 14 2005 at 3:33 PM Rating: Decent
**
291 posts
Best part of all of this is that PBS was the first station to start broadcasting in HD.
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 224 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (224)