The Dean Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Its a matter of course for the Gov to buy people converter boxes? Frankly, yes. It was a matter of course for the government to make sure that We The People, who license the airwaves to businesses, are able to continue to receive these signals at no additional expense. The money collected from these businesses (as payment for leasing our airwaves) was used to make sure that the system continued to operate as it was intended. In reality, a $40 coupon wasn't the right way to go about this, IMO. The boxes should have been freely available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted January 12, 2009 Author Share Posted January 12, 2009 Could you rephrase the question? I can't break the code, as it is currently constructed. Are the folks historically in the know, cashing in by cravenly stoking the ignorance of the general population?... Been there done/doing that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Frankly, yes. It was a matter of course for the government to make sure that We The People, who license the airwaves to businesses, are able to continue to receive these signals at no additional expense. The money collected from these businesses (as payment for leasing our airwaves) was used to make sure that the system continued to operate as it was intended. In reality, a $40 coupon wasn't the right way to go about this, IMO. The boxes should have been freely available. Instead of the coupons I think it would've made more sense to give everyone a $40 tax credit. Saves the government money by not having to do the whole coupon thing with the overhead there, and then nobody complains about not getting a coupon. Of course not everyone gets a converter box either, so maybe it would've ended up costing more. Regardless, the government is making money from auctioning off the spectrum, so of course they should be paying for the transition. But let's get it done already - no more delays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Frankly, yes. It was a matter of course for the government to make sure that We The People, who license the airwaves to businesses, are able to continue to receive these signals at no additional expense. The money collected from these businesses (as payment for leasing our airwaves) was used to make sure that the system continued to operate as it was intended. In reality, a $40 coupon wasn't the right way to go about this, IMO. The boxes should have been freely available. ...and look at how well the Gov is doing handling that converter box thingy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Are the folks historically in the know, cashing in by cravenly stoking the ignorance of the general population?... Been there done/doing that? Still not sure what you are asking. If you are asking if this is a money-grab/boondoggle for electronics companies and TV stations and networks, I would say the answer is...maybe. It depends on how you want to interpret some of the moves. What it ISN'T, though, is a real upgrade for the average antenna-using household. I do not recall a real groundswell demanding digital TV, by general consumers. But, since our representatives not only approved the transition, it REQUIRED it, then supplying the converter boxes to those impacted by this "upgrade" is really the only option. I understand complaints about the changeover to DTV...but, given the changeover, I cannot understand opposition to the converter coupon program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Instead of the coupons I think it would've made more sense to give everyone a $40 tax credit. Saves the government money by not having to do the whole coupon thing with the overhead there, and then nobody complains about not getting a coupon. Of course not everyone gets a converter box either, so maybe it would've ended up costing more. Regardless, the government is making money from auctioning off the spectrum, so of course they should be paying for the transition. But let's get it done already - no more delays. No, a tax credit wouldn't likely help the households most in need of the coupon. Free converter boxes (2-3 per household) would have been the best option, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 ...and look at how well the Gov is doing handling that converter box thingy. All major changes have hiccups, gov't or otherwise. To think otherwise is to indulge in extraordinary naivety. But, with that said, the program worked like a charm, for me. No hiccup whatsoever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 I'm kind of broke right now--I can't really afford a tv. How 'bout a thermos? [singing] Oh, I'm picking out a thermos for you. Not an ordinary thermos, it's true. But the extra best thermos money can buy, with vinyl and stripes and custom right in... There are a lot of inaccuracies on this site that I will be happy to tolerate, but PLEASE DO NOT screw up the lyrics to The Thermos Song. "...with vinyl and stripes and a cup built right in." WTF is "custom right in" anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted January 12, 2009 Author Share Posted January 12, 2009 No, a tax credit wouldn't likely help the households most in need of the coupon. Free converter boxes (2-3 per household) would have been the best option, IMO. Hypothetical: Your 1040 instructions say this: "Would you like to have $100 from your tax return check taken to give a free TV converter box to others? If so, please check this box". Do you - personally - check that box? I'm aware of the "funding" for the program. I'm just curious if you are willing in stark terms to pay, up front and out of your immediate pocket, for populist schemes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Hypothetical: Your 1040 instructions say this: "Would you like to have $100 from your tax return check taken to give a free TV converter box to others? If so, please check this box". Do you - personally - check that box? Perhaps you could ask a stupider question? The money came from the lease fees of the airwaves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Where was my free money from the Govinmint when 8 tracks went to cassette, then to CD's. The Government subsidising this is complete Bullshiit. 8 tracks had to be the worst technology - nothing like that pause and then thunk noise in the middle of a song. BTW you should move on to an ipod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted January 12, 2009 Author Share Posted January 12, 2009 Perhaps you could ask a stupider question? The money came from the lease fees of the airwaves. Your reply chose to exorcise these words from my post... "I'm aware of the "funding" for the program". What a stupid omission, eh? Q.E.D. You want others to defray your Marxist leanings...not your cash, not out of your own personal pocketbook... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Your reply chose to exorcise these words from my post... "I'm aware of the "funding" for the program". What a stupid omission, eh? Q.E.D. You want others to defray your Marxist leanings...not your cash, not out of your own personal pocketbook... I omitted nothing. Those words weren't there when I replied. I simply replied and responded w/o editing your post. Strange, no? Well, to answer your question, which has nothing to do with this situation, "No, I wouldn't pay an extra $100 for that." I certainly might designate $100 of my tax burden for that purpose, though. I'm not sure how this is Marxist, when the money used to pay the lease is used to fund the converter program. You must really hate that the gov't funds the armed services, builds roads, etc. The availability of over the air TV is seen as a VITAL public necessity. I would think you would applaud the gov't for having those who benefit from the change pay for the converter boxes for citizens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acantha Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Frankly, yes. It was a matter of course for the government to make sure that We The People, who license the airwaves to businesses, are able to continue to receive these signals at no additional expense. The money collected from these businesses (as payment for leasing our airwaves) was used to make sure that the system continued to operate as it was intended. In reality, a $40 coupon wasn't the right way to go about this, IMO. The boxes should have been freely available. Did the government pay for the rabbit ears to begin with? Edit: ...and the TV's? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cugalabanza Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 There are a lot of inaccuracies on this site that I will be happy to tolerate, but PLEASE DO NOT screw up the lyrics to The Thermos Song. "...with vinyl and stripes and a cup built right in." WTF is "custom right in" anyway? I don't know. Please forgive me. I googled the lyrics not trusting my memory. Then I did a quick paste without really checking it. You're right--it's a grievous error. Please accept my apology. Steve Martin deserves better. You deserve better. The discerning readers of TSW deserve better (the non-discerning ones can choke on their pizza in a cup for all I care). Please believe me when I say that I will do better in future posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Did the government pay for the rabbit ears to begin with? Edit: ...and the TV's? No, and the government didn't pay for the boxes, either. They simply ran the program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted January 12, 2009 Author Share Posted January 12, 2009 I omitted nothing. Those words weren't there when I replied. I simply replied and responded w/o editing your post. Strange, no? Well, to answer your question, which has nothing to do with this situation, "No, I wouldn't pay an extra $100 for that." I certainly might designate $100 of my tax burden for that purpose, though. I'm not sure how this is Marxist, when the money used to pay the lease is used to fund the converter program. You must really hate that the gov't funds the armed services, builds roads, etc. The availability of over the air TV is seen as a VITAL public necessity. I would think you would applaud the gov't for having those who benefit from the change pay for the converter boxes for citizens. My post was at 2:03. Your reply was at 2:06. That gave me 3 minutes to keep aware, re-think, recall my post, edit it, than re-post it. Right... Mr. Jack Dawkins, you have spoken... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artful_Dodger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 My post was at 2:03. Your reply was at 2:06. That gave me 3 minutes to keep aware, re-think, recall my post, edit it, than re-post it. Right... Mr. Jack Dawkins, you have spoken... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artful_Dodger Well, you can call me a liar, but I didn't adjust the quoted text, when I replied. Maybe it was a glitch in the system. As I said, "Strange, no?" I never saw that last line, until you pointed it out in your response. Doesn't really matter though, as the point remains, the converter program was paid for by the lease holders, not the gov't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 No, a tax credit wouldn't likely help the households most in need of the coupon. Free converter boxes (2-3 per household) would have been the best option, IMO. Everyone files a tax return... Why wouldn't it have helped the households most in need...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted January 12, 2009 Author Share Posted January 12, 2009 (edited) Well, you can call me a liar, but I didn't adjust the quoted text, when I replied. Maybe it was a glitch in the system. As I said, "Strange, no?" I never saw that last line, until you pointed it out in your response. Doesn't really matter though, as the point remains, the converter program was paid for by the lease holders, not the gov't. You inebriated liar. Consistent, though... a domani. time stamp added. Edited January 12, 2009 by stuckincincy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts