If The National TV Broadcasters think that ending Free Over the Air TV is going to serve them as a way to coerce us into subscribing to any kind of pay TV in order to be able to watch their programming, they are dead wrong.
TELEVISION IS NOT A NECESSITY TO HUMAN SURVIVAL, WE CAN CONTINUE LIFE WITHOUT IT. It is a want not a need. It can be ditched just like most people have ditched their telephone landlines for other free or more economical methods of voice communication. The day they do this will be the last time I'll ever watch TV. I can understand that the present business model of free over the air broadcast is no longer working for their wallets, but in this economy struggling consumers are doing everything they can to stretch their dollars and spend them in things that really matter like rent, food, clothing, transportation, etc... If anything I will not waste my time seeing commercials trying to sell me things I don't need. I'll pop some corn in the microwave and watch a DVD movie at my own leisure. I'll open a traditional game board or a deck of cards and play like I used to years ago. There are always more constructive and active ways to participate and spend free time doing, other than sitting in front of a rectangular box.
Let's use some simple logic. If the low interest rate has created the "bubble" why are we still have even lower interest rate? Will there be another bubble? Yes or No.
The high interest rate is the cause of the Subprime Woe. The low interest rate stimulated the economy in both times and prevented another Great Depression.
Student 1 of Post-Science
Most disasters are better than the Great Depression. The constraint of the silver standard caused the Rome Empire to fall, the gold standard contributed to the Great Depression. Post-science asks what crisis might be caused by the constraint of the dollar standard?
Student 2 of Post-Science
Please visit Post-Science Web Site:
http://www.postscience.com
Anne, This is an excellent post. I like doctors to, after all they help us stay healthy. However doctors should not be able to charge whatever they want. Many people assume it's all the insurance companies fault. But is it fair for one doctor to charge $100 for a general exam, and another doctor in the same city to charge $300 for the exact same service? That is why most insurance companies research the average fee charge in an area for that service and may only pay for the average fee charged. Doctors could charge a lot less and still make plenty of money. If government regulated what doctors can charge it would cut cost for insurance companies, and employers and the savings would be past on to the consumer. I wish people would spread the awareness. I am not out to defend insurance companies. However consumers need to know the truth. The health care crisis in America is not all the insurance companies fault.
Yes, we need health care reform. But the current Senate and House bills will not solve our problems.
The answer? Try this simple idea? Increase utilization of HSAs, tax incentives for preventative measures and tax credits towards deductibles on health plans.
Much cheaper and more effective than the ideas being discussed now. The uninsured? Provide basic coverage with mandatory preventative benefits.
Not to break anyone's heart, but not only am I a regular reader (and money contributor) here and somewhat progressive, but... gads...I also smoke! And it just so happens that I know an environmental scientist that smokes.
Can you imagine? Shocking!
Personally, although I am not a big fan of smoking in general (and wish I didn't), I agree with Ms. Weaver wholeheartedly, not to mention that just because the act of smoking is not a "progressive thing to do" it does not necessarily meant that it is a "conspiracy" or that someone was "paid off".
If The National TV Broadcasters think that ending Free Over the Air TV is going to serve them as a way to coerce us into subscribing to any kind of pay TV in order to be able to watch their programming, they are dead wrong.
TELEVISION IS NOT A NECESSITY TO HUMAN SURVIVAL, WE CAN CONTINUE LIFE WITHOUT IT. It is a want not a need. It can be ditched just like most people have ditched their telephone landlines for other free or more economical methods of voice communication. The day they do this will be the last time I'll ever watch TV. I can understand that the present business model of free over the air broadcast is no longer working for their wallets, but in this economy struggling consumers are doing everything they can to stretch their dollars and spend them in things that really matter like rent, food, clothing, transportation, etc... If anything I will not waste my time seeing commercials trying to sell me things I don't need. I'll pop some corn in the microwave and watch a DVD movie at my own leisure. I'll open a traditional game board or a deck of cards and play like I used to years ago. There are always more constructive and active ways to participate and spend free time doing, other than sitting in front of a rectangular box.
Not to break anyone's heart, but not only am I a regular reader (and money contributor) here and somewhat progressive, but... gads...I also smoke! And it just so happens that I know an environmental scientist that smokes.
Can you imagine? Shocking!
Personally, although I am not a big fan of smoking in general (and wish I didn't), I agree with Ms. Weaver wholeheartedly, not to mention that just because the act of smoking is not a "progressive thing to do" it does not necessarily meant that it is a "conspiracy" or that someone was "paid off".
Pages