It's a good thing we don't have to worry about pesky little things like Social Security and feeding the hungry anymore....
Posts: 880 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
I suppose I could see a somewhat decent argument in that the government is forcing a new standard in what has become a fairly ubiquitous communication technology and so it should help the affected populace access the new standard.
All the same, that's a heck of a lot of money for the government to spend to pay for people to access TV. There are better places for that money.
Posts: 2149 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I haven't read the article; I have attended Congressional hearings discussing the issue. One of the rationales that's often raised is that the TV is the de facto emergency communication technology in this country, the method by which the government can deliver homeland security alerts to the citizens. Thus having as many citizens as possible able to access the network is seen as a public good.
. . .of course, I don't own a TV in the first place, so I'm not sure how much I buy the argument, but it's there.
Posts: 650 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The one time I went to Congress, they were discussing the price of peanuts. Us third-graders weren't to impressed.
Posts: 2149 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was watching C-span a while back and for over an hour they debated weather or not to wear flowers on their lapels in commemoration of something or another.
Posts: 959 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Slightly worried about dante's comment there...
I suppose there's a couple of ways you can try to rationalize it, but it still doesn't make a ton of sense when you look at all the other issues that need attention.
Miro, how much were peanuts going for back then? Posts: 880 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You're right, if we hadn't been taxed in the first place, it'd be in our pockets where it belongs "There are better places for that money."
I personally think the government should be far less socialist. Let private corporations, religious organizations and the general public help those in need without government regulation.
And, if we had less money taken from us, it would help every market out by adding more cash to the markets themselves.
Free markets tend to take care of themselves.
Posts: 189 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Frankly, I think a MUCH more important issue when it comes to TV legislation is the availability of CableCard technology and tuners for PCs. And of course Congress hasn't ruled on that one, because none of them know what it is.Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
smitty - No clue. All I remember is my teacher explaining that though it may seem petty to us, the price of peanuts is very important to the people who grow them.
Posts: 2149 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
If it's for emergency purposes, change it from a $50 television voucher to a $10 clock radio voucher. Walmart, Walgreens, all those places sell them for that cheap.
Get your emergencies for cheaper, and wake up on time for work more often, kills two birds with one stone.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why bother dealing with money at all, when we could just deliver to those who are in need?
I think that we should scrap the concept of money in general, and switch to an anarcho-communist government.
Posts: 39 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
