Obama, I Loves Ya, but STFU about DTV

The BBQ Pit
121

To those of you asking for a delay, keep in mind that it has already been delayed. The original target date was 2006. The law which set this firm date was passed three years ago.

Delay it five more years. There will still be people with analog tuner sets who will be unemployed and not able to afford a converter box.

For the past year and a half, my local news has had adverts about Feb. 17, 2009 being the cut off date and posting links as to where to go to get your $40 coupon. I saw some boxes selling for exactly $40. Free. What more should society do to accomodate a switch?

Honestly. Does the federal government have to send someone to your home and escort you to the store?

What about installation? What about a 90 year old woman who can’t connect the box? Nobody thought of that. We need another huge federal program to install converter boxes in people’s homes.

What if your TV does not have remote control and you are disabled? Never fear, government channel changers will be dispatched to your home to change the channel for you…

What if you are incontinent, do not have TIVO, and don’t want to miss an important part of a program to change your adult diaper? Don’t worry, the feds will…

122

Not around here - locally several groups are advertising their willingness to help people such as the elderly and disabled install new boxes and, if necessary, antennas.

123

I certainly agree with that last statement. Regarding mass transit in Chicago: they are going bankrupt, and they are cutting way back on service.

But that’s beside the point. I didn’t want to get too personal, but you have complaining all over the place about how hard it is for the poor, that no one understands, that there are no jobs, etc. etc. You haven’t yet addressed the fact that yes, there are many, many people who NEED their cars to get to work (the fabulous mass transit in Chicago aside, as it doesn’t help people who don’t live in the Chicago area), and you would think that with your first-hand knowledge of how tough it can be, you want to make it harder & more expensive for people to get driver’s licenses. And, inexplicably, you want to ensure that at least the folks who can’t drive anywhere to get a job are at least entertained at home with their TVs. I understand that in your particular situation, you could make it work if you didn’t have a car. But do you think it would be reasonable for the government to put that hardship on you?

124

FTR, I linked to the Nielsen data earlier in the thread.

A phased rollover could work in less dense areas of the country I think, but according to the microdata on the Nielsen site, it looks to me like those are the areas where the readiness is the least. So maybe it would work, maybe not, I’m not sure.

125

This reminds me so much of the situation in many schools, where the smart kids are penalized by having to go slower, so the slow kids can keep up. It’s a manipulation of human compassion that often results in everybody being left behind.

So, 6.8% can’t do it right now, for reasons ranging from being poor to being lazy. That means that 93.2% are ready for the transfer. Is it fair to keep so many behind?

Many people, including Broomstick, talk about how this or that “isn’t fair”. On this one, can I use the “it’s not fair” excuse? Or does that only apply to the downtrodden?

126

It’s not so much that it isn’t “fair” as the fact that it is much more burdensome for some than for others. Is that fair or not? I suppose it depends on how you look at it. I do think that many people don’t understand that this change really is a pain in the ass for some of us. That doesn’t mean it shouldn’t happen, and yes, some times you just have to put up with stuff for the greater benefit of all (something a few posters don’t understand with a “fuck you, I got mine” attitude particularly promoted by some of the fans of Ayn Rand)

But, between reception issues, the coupon fiasco, and so on I’m not convinced that this is truly a benefit to the average American. Seriously, I’ve yet to see how opening up bandwidth is going to benefit the average person when, apparently, it’s all been auctioned off to the highest bidder i.e. corporations who will then turn around and charge as much as they possibly can for its use.

127

Who do you think IS financing those (coupons for) DTV boxes? That would be catsix and the rest of us taxpayers.

128

I was in an Adequate Purchase earlier this week, and they had them stacked in piles in this store. Hundreds of them. Maybe thousands. If you can’t find one locally, let me know, I can send you one.

129

Don’t you understand how the economy works? Splitting the current television stream into many streams is going to increase the opportunities for media companies to sell new programming, advertising, news production and even wi-fi and other interactive uses. People have to be hired to fill those positions, right?

With programming, you need to purchase programs, which in turn hire actors, production staff and labor. Advertisers need the same kinds of production tools, and so do news operations. With something like wi-fi, a company can create millions of new jobs, from development to manufacturing to installation.

Sure, you can hate on corporations all you want, but the fact is that corporations are the ones who create jobs, be they small non-profits or giant, hulking eeeee-vil behemoths.

I hope they charge all that they can get for those new signals - I’ve heard a lot of people have lost jobs, and they’re just getting by now.

130

I’m sorry - what made you think I’m NOT paying taxes? Federal taxes were withheld from my unemployment benefits (while I was still receiving them). I pay sales tax. I still have to fill out a 1040 by April 15.

And, I remind you - until 15 months ago I was earning quite a nice salary and paying 20% and more of my income in Federal, state, and local taxes. So… please, let’s discard this notion that I am somehow not paying taxes. I’m not paying as much in actual dollars as many here, and not as much as I once was, but I most certainly AM a tax payer, even now.

Yes, I mentioned that some people make so little as to not pay taxes, but I do not happen to be in that group.

Second - if society/government/voters had decided NOT to subsidize this you wouldn’t hear a peep out of me. What pisses me off is that promises were made and were not kept.

131

Creates opportunities - it does not automatically create jobs. Just like handing over $750 billion to the finance sector of the economy created an opportunity to increase lending, lower interest rates, ease foreclosures, etc. etc. but did not actually result in ANY of that. Examples have already been given in this thread of companies that bought bandwidth and never used it. What’s to stop companies from buying bandwidth as a future investment but not actually using it for years, waiting until the economy improves before starting new ventures? That does exactly jack shit for people needing jobs.

132

So provide some links to folks eager to invest in the new technology! Even a bunch of techies talking shit would be more convincing than a pdf from the office of Senator Joe Fucking Leiberman. (Extra points awarded if you’re able to summarize the Golden Future That Awaits Us All.)

I’m a science fiction fan! PROVE that the Brave New World will be worth the trouble. (In my case, a very small inconvenience. But I know there are others who will find the change a bigger problem–even if you deny their right to live.)

133

So you keep reminding us. So if you weren’t always poor then you likely have a DVD player hooked up to your TV. You likely have several.

So head down to your local library and stock up on DVDs. Free, instant entertainment. DVDs won’t be made obsolete by the DTV changeover. They don’t give a shit what kind of TV you have. With a little juryrigging, I could hook a DVD player up to the wood paneled TV my grandma still has from the 70s.

You also obviously have an Internet connection, so you can get all of your local, national and international news from your PC. If that goes away, you could always find news through AM radio (I have no less than 8 devices that can act as a radio in my house, I’d assume that number is actually rather low).

You’re bitching about a problem that you think you have that you don’t even have. If I was an unfeeling bastard, I could paraphrase one Mr. Eric Cartman about poor people being stupid, but I won’t because “There but for the grace of god go yadda yadda yadda…”

134

Agreed.

“And the trees were all kept equal… by hatchet, axe, and saw.”

135

Nope, have exactly one, which, I’m happy to say, plays both DVD’s and VCR tapes.

I have just one AM/FM radio in the house.

It’s not just about me – there are, of course, people far worse off than myself who do not, in fact, own either a VCR or DVD player, who do not own a radio, etc. What I have the biggest issue with is the rather cavalier attitude that $40 could not possibly be of consequence to anyone. There are a lot of people for whom $40 is a week and half of food, or the co-pay on a vital prescription, and who have little or no money to spare. Saying “oh, just read books!” is fine for me but not so for someone visually impaired. Someone always chimes in and points to something, declaring it a luxury or frivolous because it’s OK to dictate to poor people in a way that it is not OK to dictate to anyone else. That’s why I have said for a long time that poor people are second class citizens at best in the US and the past year has only confirmed that for me. Even before I was laid off I was aware of the desperately poor, now I am more so.

In one respect I do have an advantage over many poor people in that I have not always been poor and when I was middle class I bought high-quality items and regularly upgraded the technology around the household. We did not accumulate an excess of things such as radios or TV’s because when we acquired new items of that sort we either donated the old to charity or outright gave them to poor people we knew personally. Thus, we have 1 TV, 1 DVD/VCR player, 1 AM/FM radio, etc. We did wind up with two computers, but we’ve had to cannibalize one to keep the other going. Personally, I don’t understand why anyone would own more TV’s than there are people in the household or a radio in every room but perhaps multiple appliances is important to them in a way it is not important for me. In any case, I do have some assets that are of high quality that, if I were truly starting over in life, I would simply not be able to have on my current meager earnings.

Of course, then I get - “How can you claim to be poor when you own X?” I bought it when I wasn’t poor, of course. You are not required to hand in your quality stuff when your income drops (although at a certain point you may wish to sell it in order to convert it to money to spend on something else).

Personally, back when I was doing much better I didn’t mind the government subsidy/converter coupons, although I did wish there was means testing for them. But then, I’m one of those squishy liberal types who don’t mind helping out the less fortunate.

136

State and local taxes are just that, and have nothing whatsoever to do with the TV coupons. Glad to hear you’re making enough to pay (not merely have withheld) federal income taxes. The money for the boxes comes from taxpayers such as yourself, not some mythical government money fairy. Which is why your comment about another poster “not being obligated” to subsidize one for you is incorrect.

137

I do not understand this “withheld” thing you speak of :stuck_out_tongue: - most of the meager funds I have earned this year were as a freelancer/independent contractor. Aside from unemployment, no one withheld anything for me and thus I have had to hold some money in reserve in anticipation of April. Even if I wind up not obligated to pay anything else I will still have to hand over dollars for social security - and I will have to yield TWICE as much for that as people who have more typical paychecks do since, being self-employed, I must pay both the employee and the employer share.

Fact is, I am below the poverty line… and yet still pay taxes at ALL levels. If I had kids I might have additional tax credits and so forth but I don’t. But do you hear me bitching about subsidizing other people’s children? No - because I know that it is to the benefit of ALL of us that the next generation grow up educated, healthy, and so forth.

I meant obligated in some sort of moral sense. Fact is, if people had been paying attention and were outraged when the coupon program was proposed they could have contacted their representatives and told them to vote against it. They didn’t. So there you have it.

Again - I have already stated that I do not mind assisting the poor, and held that view even when I wasn’t poor.

138

Like state and local taxes, SS tax has nothing to do with it. From the circumstances you describe, you’re likely in the group of ~35% of the population that pays NO federal income taxes. Having cleared that up, can you explain why the rest of should be subsidizing anybody’s TV?

139

Bullshit. Social Security IS a Federal level tax. That “poor people don’t pay Federal taxes” is a smoke screen for those who would further burden those of the lowest wealth. Poor people DO pay taxes, on all levels. They don’t pay as much, but then they don’t have as much. Really, at the end of the day taxes is paid is taxes paid and from the viewpoint of the one paying is all money he/she doesn’t have anymore.

That aside, I really don’t know what my tax liability will be this year. I haven’t figured it out yet.

Finally - as I said, back when I was earning a very nice income - above the US average - I was content to subsidize the coupon program. Since I was will to do it, and given that I was paying plenty of taxes I did subsidize it. Why should YOU? Because I did. Because if I still had my old job I would still be paying for it. If I am willing to do it why should I excuse you?

140

Neither I nor Ayn Rand promote that attitude. It’s more like “fuck you for trying to take what’s mine by force instead of working for it yourself.”