House GOP Plans Death Panel for Elmo

#27
#27
MG1968 said:
I notice that anytime the GOP proposes spending cuts or even a reduction in the rate of growth, it is always viewed by the left as harming "the children". Why is this? Why resort to illogical, emotional arguments that often have little basis in reality? The title of this thread is a perfect example. So what if the CPB loses public funding? Does anybody in their right mind really think that Sesame Street is going off the air?
Click to expand...

Maybe because their lists always include funding cuts for education, arts, early education/after school programs, college tution assistance and anything else that doesn't have defense in the title.

Hey Beecher, where 'bouts in Cheatham Co. are you from?
 
Last edited:
#28
#28
CSVol said:
Maybe because their lists always include funding cuts for education, arts, early education/after school programs, college tution assistance and anything else that doesn't have defense in the title.

Hey Beecher, where 'bouts in Cheatham Co. are you from?
Click to expand...

Northern part.

Pleasant View/Joelton
 
#32
#32
oklavol said:
I like NPR and PBS. I would like to see it operate on its own though.
Click to expand...

I'm all for them operating on their own, but I feel as though they would turn out like History/Discovery Channels. NPR only relies on about 10% of their budget from the government. PBS costs a lot more to run so donations have to be a lot higher.
 
#33
#33
Bert_and_Ernie.JPG
 
#34
#34
VOLatile said:
Exactly why PBS should not get the ax.
Click to expand...

PBS should get the ax and should have gotten it years ago. If you want it on, solicit funds from your friends to make up the 10%. Get the Hollywood morons to contribute money that would have otherwise gone to polticians who would then turn around and take money from us for PBS... why not just cut out the middle man and half the money?
 
#35
#35
CSVol said:
Maybe because their lists always include funding cuts for education, arts, early education/after school programs, college tution assistance and anything else that doesn't have defense in the title.

Hey Beecher, where 'bouts in Cheatham Co. are you from?
Click to expand...

all things that can be better run by the states and local municipalities
 
#36
#36
oklavol said:
I like NPR and PBS. I would like to see it operate on its own though.
Click to expand...

They can't work "on their own" so to speak. They will necessarily devolve.

I think this is a wonderful debate actually. It seems in relative agreement these non-commercial entities provide superior programming. I would concur.

I would also hold up the example of the BBC as providing far superior news, documentary, even entertainment above the commercial outlets.

It's another instance where socialism provides a far superior product over "the market." That gets into a lot of tricky cultural questions (what would "the market" look like in an egalitarian culture, for instance?) At the very least, it is another instance where government does very, very well relative to the private sector.

I'm reminded of BBC coverage of the Italian World Cup with Pavorotti singing Nessun Dorma at the opening - would we even open the SuperBowl with Fanfare for the Common Man? - ever?.

Great debate. Good thread.
 
#37
#37
VOLatile said:
PBS is the only informative channel anymore where kids and adults can both learn anything. NPR only relies on 10% of it's budget coming from the government so I'm not really worried about them. However, I love Carl Sagan's Cosmos.
Click to expand...

why don;'t you tell your parents to donate more. obviously you don't have a job because you're so concerned about every liberal program.
 
#38
#38
utgibbs said:
I think this is a wonderful debate actually. It seems in relative agreement these non-commercial entities provide superior programming. I would concur.

It's another instance where socialism provides a far superior product over "the market."
Click to expand...

what are you using to measure this? Opinions aren't data.

I'm also pretty sure they take donations so feel free to pony up and cover the difference when they are no longer funded by tax dollars
 
#39
#39
VOLatile said:
I'm all for them operating on their own, but I feel as though they would turn out like History/Discovery Channels. NPR only relies on about 10% of their budget from the government. PBS costs a lot more to run so donations have to be a lot higher.
Click to expand...

What in your mind is the magic of government funds that results in good programming?

Why would running them as a not-for-profit with funding via donation and ad revenues not achieve the same result?
 
#40
#40
volinbham said:
What in your mind is the magic of government funds that results in good programming?

Why would running them as a not-for-profit with funding via donation and ad revenues not achieve the same result?
Click to expand...

It's mentality, for some reason liberals need to be ruled (not govern) they have no concept (or faith) in the private sector. they believe it's only good if the government is involved.

if our children's future depends on government funding for PBS, then our children are already screwed
 
Last edited:
#41
#41
utgibbs said:
They can't work "on their own" so to speak. They will necessarily devolve.

Why? What is the mechanism?

I think this is a wonderful debate actually. It seems in relative agreement these non-commercial entities provide superior programming. I would concur.

Based on what metrics? Are you cherry picking a few shows that you feel are superior (I've seen Seasame Street and Nova listed). What about the other 22 hours of daily programing? Is it all superior to commercial programming?

I would also hold up the example of the BBC as providing far superior news, documentary, even entertainment above the commercial outlets.

Same question, are you talking about across the board or the best of BBC vs the best of another option? What is your metric other than you like it better?

It's another instance where socialism provides a far superior product over "the market." That gets into a lot of tricky cultural questions (what would "the market" look like in an egalitarian culture, for instance?) At the very least, it is another instance where government does very, very well relative to the private sector.

A huge leap with no support. If the product were so superior why do so many other networks routinely beat PBS in the ratings? Are you suggesting all programming should be via the socialism model? PBS has always been an outlier in terms of approach and popularity and save a show or two it is routinely blasted in the ratings by market mechanism approaches.

I'm reminded of BBC coverage of the Italian World Cup with Pavorotti singing Nessun Dorma at the opening - would we even open the SuperBowl with Fanfare for the Common Man? - ever?.

Yes, the country is clamoring for more opera but the market simply won't deliver :blink:

Great debate. Good thread.
Click to expand...

What I see in this post is "I think the programming is better so socialism is the answer". Such wonderful real world data.
 
#43
#43
the bbc runs more trash reality tv than abc/nbc/fox combined. i do like Ladette to Lady though. :)
 
Last edited:
#44
#44
utgibbs said:
They can't work "on their own" so to speak. They will necessarily devolve.

I think this is a wonderful debate actually. It seems in relative agreement these non-commercial entities provide superior programming. I would concur.
Click to expand...
These two paragraphs contradict one another.

The only legitimate measure of "superior" is popular support and approval, right? If they cannot stand on their own then they are not "superior" since even those who like their programming (folks like you, I never watch it and seldom listen to NPR) are not willing to sacrifice their own money to keep it going.
It's another instance where socialism provides a far superior product over "the market."
Click to expand...
No. This is simply another instance of liberals wanting something "good" paid for with OPM. If you want it. You pay for it. Get your greedy, thieving fingers out of my wallet.

That gets into a lot of tricky cultural questions (what would "the market" look like in an egalitarian culture, for instance?) At the very least, it is another instance where government does very, very well relative to the private sector.
Click to expand...
How so? Do you really think all voices are heard on NPR or PBS? They fired Juan Williams for goodness sake.

I'm reminded of BBC coverage of the Italian World Cup with Pavorotti singing Nessun Dorma at the opening - would we even open the SuperBowl with Fanfare for the Common Man? - ever?.

Great debate. Good thread.
Click to expand...

Translation: "I am an elitist snob who thinks the low brow common man should pay for things I find socially uplifting and worthwhile whether he values them or not".
 
#46
#46
BeecherVol said:
Ah, "river rat" eh?
:)
Click to expand...

AWESOME - that's eactly what my Father-in-law says! They live on the hill up past the flooded elementary school and, being circled by the Harpeth, couldn't get out for 2 days after the big flood.
 
#48
#48
volinbham said:
What in your mind is the magic of government funds that results in good programming?

Why would running them as a not-for-profit with funding via donation and ad revenues not achieve the same result?
Click to expand...

See above.

It hasn't happened yet. I suppose quantum theory leaves a chance it [consistent, high quality commercial programming] might just pop into existence one day. I think it happens sometimes. After all, commercial TV created "Northern Exposure" and "Buffy the Vampire Slayer." It just cannot maintain the consistent high standards.

I think the Discovery Channels are a perfect example of how quality degenerates under the supremacy of commercial values.
 
#49
#49
utgibbs said:
See above.

It hasn't happened yet. I suppose quantum theory leaves a chance it [consistent, high quality commercial programming] might just pop into existence one day. I think it happens sometimes. After all, commercial TV created "Northern Exposure" and "Buffy the Vampire Slayer." It just cannot maintain the consistent high standards.

I think the Discovery Channels are a perfect example of how quality degenerates under the supremacy of commercial values.
Click to expand...

Why? What is it that naturally leads to this lack of quality?

Were the Discovery channels previously government supported then not and suddenly programming slid? Could it be that across the Discovery network the quality is the same if you take the best from multiple channels? How do you account for the hours of crap programming on PBS? Is every hour a golden nugget?

Do you believe HBO churns out poor quality? They have consistently produced high quality programming. Why aren't they subject to this magic failure of non-governmental support?
 
#50
#50
CSVol said:
AWESOME - that's eactly what my Father-in-law says! They live on the hill up past the flooded elementary school and, being circled by the Harpeth, couldn't get out for 2 days after the big flood.
Click to expand...

Thats what we called em in school.:)

They got hit hard with the Harpeth. Ashland City got hit hard with the Cumberland. Hard to imagine both of those getting that high.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top