http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/03/13/MNGRHOK7S01.DTL
Is that much tax money really well spent upgrading peoples TV's?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bread_and_circuses
... guess so
1.5 Billion government dollars to upgrade peoples TV
- Thread starter Andrew Green
- Start date
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/03/13/MNGRHOK7S01.DTL
Is that much tax money really well spent upgrading peoples TV's?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bread_and_circuses
... guess so
I think the real reason is probably rather insidious and pernicious than Bread and Circus. Why else would the government want to have everyone connected to digital networks?
CoryKS
Senior Master
If I remember correctly, it has to do with rights management. Broadcasters will be able to tag programs as 'read-only' or 'copy once' or some trash like that.
One and a half billion of our dollars to make sure that the broadcasters' business model is successful. If Viacom, the MPAA and Fox want us all to have their TVs let them pay for the damned things. There's no reason why they should be suckling off the Federal teat while veterans lie in their urine at Walter Reed and little children die of brain infections for want of a $50 tooth extraction. We have a deteriorating infrastructure that will cost 1.5 trillion to get back into marginal shape according the the Civil Engineering societies. And the money is going to this?
Forgey about hunger and forget about medical and forget about helping the elderly, lets make sure we can have proper televisions.
Well, if they're going to waste my money, I'll take a widescreen HDTV rather than a converter. Thanks.
Shuto
Purple Belt
A chicken in every pot and a digital TV in every home.
It's a good thing that they mandated color TV as well. Oh, wait, they didn't. Consumer demand made it the standard, not govt mandate.
It's a good thing that they mandated color TV as well. Oh, wait, they didn't. Consumer demand made it the standard, not govt mandate.
Ray
Master Black Belt
I got a thousand channels and they all suck!
When I was a kid in So Cal, we had 7 VHF and I don't know how many UHF stations. That was plenty. Plus we didn't have a remote, so when you put something on - you pretty much watched it.
For about a year in 1980, we went without a TV...me, my wife and my kids read books (imagine that) and did other things that seemed more productive than sitting in front of a glowing screen... I suppose we did spend an inordinate amount of time in the evening looking at a fire in the fireplace as we talked with one another.
When I was a kid in So Cal, we had 7 VHF and I don't know how many UHF stations. That was plenty. Plus we didn't have a remote, so when you put something on - you pretty much watched it.
For about a year in 1980, we went without a TV...me, my wife and my kids read books (imagine that) and did other things that seemed more productive than sitting in front of a glowing screen... I suppose we did spend an inordinate amount of time in the evening looking at a fire in the fireplace as we talked with one another.
Dude, ain't that the truth! I can only stand so much... if you take out all the crap channels, I might actually have 20. Even with those, there are large chunks of the day they only show crap about diets, exercise and silly legal shows
blah...my opinion on the money spent? I think its a joke. Give me the 1.5 billion and the world will be a better place
They already have one. You can catch it on C-SPAN. :lol:
