# Does Sesame Street Actually \*Need\* Government Funding **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 5, 2012, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859 "2012-10-05T23:01:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![njtt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ecd19e/32.png) [@njtt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/njtt)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2012, 5:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859/41 "2012-10-07T05:23:46Z")
> [@Mangosteen](#): > > The USA is spending OVER ONE TRILLION DOLLARS more than it is taking in in revenue EVERY year! And now explain why this matters, taking into account the fact that all dollars are created by the U.S. government, so, if they wanted (I am not saying it is a good idea) they could pay off the debt tomorrow by simply issuing more money to themselves. National debts or deficits are _not_ analogous to private debts, and really ought not to be called by the same name. It is true that too much government debt, that increases over too long a period, is not a good thing for a country’s economy, but it is bad for reasons that are quite different from the reasons that private debt is bad. National governments, that control their own currency, cannot go broke or bankrupt, and too little government debt can be bad for the economy too. I am not saying that the debt is not a problem, but it is not nearly such an urgent problem as some people (for political reasons) like to make out, and cutting back government spending (or even increasing taxation) may not be the most effective way to reduce it. Indeed, they might well even make the debt grow more quickly, by further depressing an already sluggish economy. Also, ONE TRILLION DOLLARS, even when written in scary capitals, is really not very much money in relation to an economy the size of that of the United States. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2012, 5:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859/42 "2012-10-07T05:33:21Z")
FYI, [here](http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html) and [here](http://crfb.org/stabilizethedebt/) are interactive exercises in which you can try to balance the federal budget by increasing revenues or decreasing expenses. ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Colossus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dr.colossus/32/9423_2.png) [@Dr.Colossus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Colossus)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2012, 11:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859/43 "2012-10-07T11:04:44Z")
cripes, this. this, and his threat to kill the national endowment for the arts are alone enough reason for me to not vote for Romney. it’s easy to say “cut it, it’s useless…” but ask Kurdistan about arts and humanities and culture. one of the first things they did upon american invasion was restart cultural projects. it was the first time in over a decade they weren’t simply trying to survive under the Ba’athist regime. they finally had a chance to get back to culture and it was one of the first things they did. and often, cultural enrichments are not business-structured. business and humanities are rarely analogous. so PBS is great because it brings non-commercially viable but extremely culturally worth-while humanities projects to a national audience. the value is incalculable, especially if you are only measuring it in dollars and cents. the NEA is 150 million bucks. is this really america’s problem? ---
**Author:** ![Raguleader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/258eb7/32.png) [@Raguleader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raguleader)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2012, 11:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859/44 "2012-10-07T11:26:07Z")
> [@Mangosteen](#): > > We need across the board 25% cuts in EVERY department from Defense and Education to Housing and Commerce. If everyone gets cut, no one can complain that they are being singled out, but neither party has the balls to do it. Cut ALL Federal salaries by 25% and you’ll still find plenty of well qualified people to fill the positions if the present employees don’t want to work for $75, 000 a year instead of their present $100,000 a year salary. Then cut the payroll by 25% and that will leave plenty of people to do the work. Shit, I _wish_ I made $75,000 a year.😛 Granted, I get government-funded healthcare, housing, clothing allowance, education, and food allowance, so who knows, maybe it adds up. to somewhere up there. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2012, 11:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859/45 "2012-10-07T11:49:37Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Could you provide an example of these great local shows that would be eliminated? If they are so great, couldn’t advertising pay for a station to air them? If it wouldn’t, doesn’t that mean that nobody wants to watch them anyways? > > I could see this argument in 1965 with 3 stations on the air, but in today’s world with over 300 channels, the need is met. There are only a handful of educational programs on commerical television. No network that was originally designed to be educational still is. If we use the free market, people will choose not to be educated. The value of an educational program does not work on the same metric. If you release it to the free market, the market will dumb it down so it can get more money. Sure, not everyone may watch educational program, but those who do get a lot more value out of it as it is than everyone would altogether if the free market had its way. It’s another example of how money and value are not equivalent. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2012, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859/46 "2012-10-07T15:09:02Z")
I’ve got an idea. Increase the government payroll. Specially, hire a huge number of new IRS agents. We know that nine figures of owed taxes are not collected in any year and that each new IRS agent on average brings in far more than his or her salary by going after unpaid taxes. So double the size of the IRS. That would cut a huge hole in unemployment, as many jobs as are created the rest of the U.S. combined for a month, and actually make money for the government, cutting the deficit more than Mangosteen’s proposal. The winniest win-win of winningsville. What say you, anti-government types? ---
**Author:** ![SmartAlecCat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/67e7ee/32.png) [@SmartAlecCat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmartAlecCat)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2012, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859/47 "2012-10-07T15:18:42Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > …each new IRS agent on average brings in far more than his or her salary by going after unpaid taxes. No cite, but I suspect that scaling would not be linear.. [But I do like the idea of adding more staff to IRS..] ---
**Author:** ![Raguleader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/258eb7/32.png) [@Raguleader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raguleader)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2012, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859/48 "2012-10-07T15:51:45Z")
Alternately, invade the Cayman Islands and nationalize the banks. Of course, then we’d be hearing “No blood for revenue!” (disclaimer: That is a joke.) ---
**Author:** ![Leo\_Bloom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leo_bloom/32/10377_2.png) [@Leo\_Bloom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Bloom)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2012, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859/49 "2012-10-07T15:58:18Z")
All I can say is thank God USA doesn’t have a BBC-type set-up. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2012, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859/50 "2012-10-07T15:59:31Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > There are only a handful of educational programs on commerical television. No network that was originally designed to be educational still is. If we use the free market, people will choose not to be educated. > > The value of an educational program does not work on the same metric. If you release it to the free market, the market will dumb it down so it can get more money. Sure, not everyone may watch educational program, but those who do get a lot more value out of it as it is than everyone would altogether if the free market had its way. > > It’s another example of how money and value are not equivalent. So how does funding PBS solve this problem? Are you suggesting that the idiot public who would not receive program X on a commercial channel because advertisers deem it to be so poor that nobody would watch it, would nonetheless watch it on the government channel? Even when they can hit the remote and watch shows about aliens on other channels? ---
**Author:** ![MsWhatsit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eb8c5e/32.png) [@MsWhatsit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsWhatsit)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2012, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859/51 "2012-10-07T16:28:43Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > So how does funding PBS solve this problem? Are you suggesting that the idiot public who would not receive program X on a commercial channel because advertisers deem it to be so poor that nobody would watch it, would nonetheless watch it on the government channel? Even when they can hit the remote and watch shows about aliens on other channels? Yep. Another type of programming might bring even _more_ viewers, but since PBS isn’t beholden to advertisers they don’t have to worry about that, and can continue broadcasting programs that some people watch and enjoy, even if they could get a larger audience by targeting the lowest common denominator. ---
**Author:** ![Raguleader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/258eb7/32.png) [@Raguleader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raguleader)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2012, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859/52 "2012-10-07T16:44:51Z")
I’m starting to think that broadcast television is an obsolete medium anyways. The way towards the future for some of these shows might just end up being internet shows. Starting to see more than a few of those as it is, shows that would never happen on traditional TV, but which just work on the internet. Hell, I just helped finance two video games, a museum, a broadway musical, and two graphic novels on Kickstarter and Indiegogo in the last few months, so the path to the donors is still there even if the TV station isn’t. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2012, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859/53 "2012-10-07T17:10:52Z")
> [@MsWhatsit](#): > > Yep. Another type of programming might bring even _more_ viewers, but since PBS isn’t beholden to advertisers they don’t have to worry about that, and can continue broadcasting programs that some people watch and enjoy, even if they could get a larger audience by targeting the lowest common denominator. Could you or anyone give me one program as an example? Give me one show that the History Channel, A&E, TLC, Discovery, or the Science Channel wouldn’t pick up because nobody would watch it, yet it is still worthwhile to be broadcast through deficit funding by the federal government. ---
**Author:** ![MsWhatsit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eb8c5e/32.png) [@MsWhatsit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsWhatsit)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2012, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859/54 "2012-10-07T17:41:44Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Could you or anyone give me one program as an example? Give me one show that the History Channel, A&E, TLC, Discovery, or the Science Channel wouldn’t pick up because nobody would watch it, yet it is still worthwhile to be broadcast through deficit funding by the federal government. Your premise is flawed. The premise isn’t that “nobody” would watch it. The premise is that they could make more money by broadcasting, say, twelve straight hours of Pawn Stars. My example is Masterpiece Theatre, since you asked for an example, though. ---
**Author:** ![Mangosteen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Mangosteen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangosteen)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2012, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859/55 "2012-10-07T18:24:02Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > Read Dewey Finn’s post again. And again and again and again until it sinks in. Your proposal would cut no more than 1% out of the budget (and that’s using the ridiculous assumption that government salaries are 100% of government spending in the everything else category), and yet do tremendous amounts of harm to to huge numbers of everyday people, not just those who work for the government who would be thrown out of work, but for all the people on whose behalf they work. We know this is true because when Gingrich shut the government down under Clinton, it turned out that all those overpaid, unnecessary government employees mattered in real peoples’ lives. And that was a minimal disruption, not the permanent one you envision. > > Government employees are simply not the problem. Neither is the deficit: a good economy will cut that just as it did under Clinton, and would have continued to do so under Bush except for the tax cuts and spending increases he made. > > What’s dire is the general ignorance of what government actually spends money on, the undervaluation of government employees and government programs, and the selfishness of wanting money spent on themselves but not on “Them.” Did you read what I said? I called for a 25% reduction in ALL Federal spending, across the board. This wouldn’t make a difference? ---
**Author:** ![SmartAlecCat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/67e7ee/32.png) [@SmartAlecCat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmartAlecCat)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2012, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859/56 "2012-10-07T18:58:06Z")
> [@Mangosteen](#): > > Did you read what I said? I called for a 25% reduction in ALL Federal spending, across the board. This wouldn’t make a difference? Sure. 25% of poor people wouldn’t get their food stamps, 25% of the weather forecasts wouldn’t happen, 25% of the elderly just wouldn’t get their SS checks, 25% of bridges needing federal funds to repair would just collapse, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Mangosteen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Mangosteen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangosteen)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2012, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859/57 "2012-10-07T19:00:11Z")
> [@njtt](#): > > And now explain why this matters, taking into account the fact that all dollars are created by the U.S. government, so, if they wanted (I am not saying it is a good idea) they could pay off the debt tomorrow by simply issuing more money to themselves. > > National debts or deficits are _not_ analogous to private debts, and really ought not to be called by the same name. It is true that too much government debt, that increases over too long a period, is not a good thing for a country’s economy, but it is bad for reasons that are quite different from the reasons that private debt is bad. National governments, that control their own currency, cannot go broke or bankrupt, and too little government debt can be bad for the economy too. > > I am not saying that the debt is not a problem, but it is not nearly such an urgent problem as some people (for political reasons) like to make out, and cutting back government spending (or even increasing taxation) may not be the most effective way to reduce it. Indeed, they might well even make the debt grow more quickly, by further depressing an already sluggish economy. > > Also, ONE TRILLION DOLLARS, even when written in scary capitals, is really not very much money in relation to an economy the size of that of the United States. Following your kind of thinking that “we owe the money to ourselves, so debt doesn’t matter”, why don’t you suggest that the Federal government print up $100,000 for every man, woman and child in the country and give it to them, tax free. We’d all be rich and live happily ever after. “Economics in One Lesson” by Henry Hazlitt. ---
**Author:** ![Leaffan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leaffan/32/299_2.png) [@Leaffan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaffan)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2012, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859/58 "2012-10-07T19:05:46Z")
> [@SmartAlecCat](#): > > Sure. 25% of poor people wouldn’t get their food stamps, 25% of the weather forecasts wouldn’t happen, 25% of the elderly just wouldn’t get their SS checks, 25% of bridges needing federal funds to repair would just collapse, etc. No. 100% of the above would do with 25% less. I think it’s a good starting point. Oh, and introduce a federal sales tax while you’re at it. ---
**Author:** ![SmartAlecCat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/67e7ee/32.png) [@SmartAlecCat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmartAlecCat)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2012, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859/59 "2012-10-07T19:15:36Z")
> [@Leaffan](#): > > No. 100% of the above would do with 25% less. I think it’s a good starting point. Oh, and introduce a federal sales tax while you’re at it. Ok, you tell me, what effect do you think a 25% “across the board” cut would have. Start with the 6% of the federal budget we pay as interest on the debt.. Have you found a way to cut that by 25%? ---
**Author:** ![Mangosteen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Mangosteen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangosteen)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2012, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859/60 "2012-10-07T19:25:34Z")
> [@SmartAlecCat](#): > > Sure. 25% of poor people wouldn’t get their food stamps, 25% of the weather forecasts wouldn’t happen, 25% of the elderly just wouldn’t get their SS checks, 25% of bridges needing federal funds to repair would just collapse, etc. No, everyone gets their food stamps, just 25% less. Churches and local food banks would help out. Weather forecasts??? Are you kidding? How many PRIVATE forecasting companies are making these that are just as accurate as the Federal government’s? Shut the whole Fed weather service down 100%! Social Security is a program that people paid into and is not paid for from the General Fund and would not be cut. Highway funds could be easily cut by 25%. Ever see how many guys are just standing around at the Federal Highway construction sites? There is no more money to spend or even borrow. “Paying” for things by printing fiat paper dollar bills backed by thin air will end badly for the USA. Its been tried before in many other countries throughout history. > **[Hyperinflation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation#United_States)** > > Empirical methods > Prescriptive and policy > In economics, hyperinflation is a very high and typically accelerating inflation. It quickly erodes the real value of the local currency, as the prices of all goods increase. This causes people to minimize their holdings in that currency as they usually switch to more stable foreign currencies. Effective capital controls and currency substitution ("dollarization") are the orthodox solutions to ending short-term hyperinflation; however there are signif... [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-sesame-street-actually-need-government-funding/636859.md?page=4)