digitaltv
I may not defend my neighbor's television habits, but I defend to the death his right to watch it
Filed in archive IPTV by martino on December 8, 2005
BlogPicture
There is no need to come up with additional puns or insights. Click on the link to read the entire article, but here are the best excerpts.

(excerpts from George Will's article 'The Inalienable Right to a Remote')

Feeling flush with (other people's) cash, the Senate has concocted a novel way to spend $3 billion: create a new entitlement. The Senate has passed -- and so has the House, with differences -- an entitlement to digital television.


If this ... becomes law, everyone who owns old analog television sets ... will get subsidies to pay for making those sets capable of receiving digital signals.


... this story illustrates the timeless truth that no matter how deeply you distrust the government's judgment, you are too trusting


Why is this a crisis? Because ... by April 2009 broadcasters must end analog transmissions and the government will have auctioned the analog frequencies for various telecommunications purposes. For the vast majority of Americans, April 2009 will mean . . . absolutely nothing. Nationwide, 85 percent of all television households (and 63 percent of households below the poverty line) already have cable or satellite service.


.. Today a digital-capable set with a flat-screen display can be purchased from -- liberals, please pardon the mention of your Great Satan -- Wal-Mart for less than $460. But compassionate conservatism has a government response to the crisis ...


... The $990 million House version of this entitlement -- call it No Couch Potato Left Behind -- is (relatively) parsimonious: Consumers would get vouchers worth only $40 and would be restricted to a measly two vouchers per household. The Senate's more spacious entitlement would pay for most of the cost -- $50 to $60 -- of the converter boxes. But there is Republican rigor in this: Consumers would be required to pay $10. That is the conservatism in compassionate conservatism.


... defenders of this entitlement argue that taxpayers will not be burdened by its costs because the government's sale of the analog frequencies will yield perhaps $10 billion.


Think about that: Because the government may get $10 billion from one transaction, taxpayers are unburdened by government's giving away $3 billion with another transaction...


Simply amazing. Maybe we can get Congress to underwrite VOD content next!



Permalink: I may not defend my neighbor's television habits, but I defend to the death his right to watch it
Tags: digital  television 
Trackback: http://publish.creative-weblogging.com/publish/mt-tb.pl/12084
img Addthis img Ask img Blinklist img del.icio.us img Digg img Fark img Facebook img Google img Lycos img Ma.gnolia Add this page to Mister Wong Mr Wong img Netscape img Netvousz img Newsvine img Reddit img StumbleUpon img Slashdot img Tailrank img Technorati img Wink img Yahoo

Vote for I may not defend my neighbor's television habits, but I defend to the death his right to watch it:

  • Currently 7.00/10
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
Rating: 7.00 out of 2 vote(s) cast.
Subscribe
Share It
RSSrss
See all blog subscribe options
Google google
What is RSS?
Yahoo! yahoo
Addthis Subscribe using any feed reader!
Bloglines Bloglines
Newsletter

TwitterFollow us on Twitter!