DTV Coupons have run out

[stockstar1138]

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/20...-coupons_N.htm

sorry, didn't know if this has already been posted.

if you want to cry about the sorry state of many, read the comments.

[camper]

After reading some of those comments, all I can envision is some big fat man sitting on the couch eating a bucket of fried chicken and complaining about how he can't "watch m'stories" anymore without the government protecting his 'right' to sit and watch TV without a free $40.

These vouchers were a BAD idea.

camper

[stockstar1138]

Originally Posted by camper

After reading some of those comments, all I can envision is some big fat man sitting on the couch eating a bucket of fried chicken and complaining about how he can't "watch m'stories" anymore without the government protecting his 'right' to sit and watch TV without a free $40.

These vouchers were a BAD idea.

camper

govt. is making bank and so are dtv conversion box suppliers. you know how much all that bandwith is worth the govt. is auctioning off and using.

least they could do is provide coupons, but the whole system was a total mess and really opened up the opportunity for a black market to flourish for a short period of time.

[DetroitSportsFan]

In this area, Comcast is advertising basic cable for $20 per month.

[Forrestandjen07]

charging for that box is stupid

if the Fcc or whatever wanted to force the switch from analog to digital

The FCC should pay the $40 bill for everyone who needed a box

[Forrestandjen07]

Originally Posted by DetroitSportsFan

In this area, Comcast is advertising basic cable for $20 per month.

ok?

[stockstar1138]

Originally Posted by DetroitSportsFan

In this area, Comcast is advertising basic cable for $20 per month.

so people living on a fixed income should pay $240/yr. for cable vs. under 100 fro DTV convertors that should last a while.

[stockstar1138]

Originally Posted by Forrestandjen07

charging for that box is stupid

if the Fcc or whatever wanted to force the switch from analog to digital

The FCC should pay the $40 bill for everyone who needed a box

thats what they attempted to do, they failed miserbly in their assessment on the situation.

1. I believe they thought more people would just get a TV that supported digital signals that actually did.

2. They did not estimate in people who got coupons even though their TVs are fine, because they were confused.

3. They did not estimate people who got the coupons who didn't plan on using them in an attempt to make a quick buck.

4. They did not estimate people helping out others even though they themselves were covered. (IE. I have an HDTV, my neighbor has 4 analog TVs, he's limited to two coupons + he'll have to buy 2 seprate ones, so to save my buddy some money, ill just get two myself and give them to him.)

5. People got them in anticpation that they might cut cable/sat in the future due to personal finances.

6. People have cut personal finances and cable and the govt. in initial figures did not include them, but now they are in the pot of people who still rely on OTA analog.

[camper]

The fundamental problem, is that watching TV is not a right!!

Besides--people getting TV from off-air have to buy antennas just to get a signal, so they're accustomed to having to making a one-time purchase. Now they get to make another one. They're getting TV essentially for free, so they can suck it up and buy a $40 box on their own.

If you can't afford a $40 box in the year-or-so that TV stations have been talking about it, then perhaps you should be finding a job to make up the $4.00 per month you could have socked away instead of watching Oprah. And if that's not an option, emergency signals will still be broadcast over radio, and even the poorest of the poor has a radio.

camper

[stockstar1138]

Originally Posted by camper

The fundamental problem, is that watching TV is not a right!!

Besides--people getting TV from off-air have to buy antennas just to get a signal, so they're accustomed to having to making a one-time purchase. Now they get to make another one. They're getting TV essentially for free, so they can suck it up and buy a $40 box on their own.

If you can't afford a $40 box in the year-or-so that TV stations have been talking about it, then perhaps you should be finding a job to make up the $4.00 per month you could have socked away instead of watching Oprah. And if that's not an option, emergency signals will still be broadcast over radio, and even the poorest of the poor has a radio.

camper

I agree wholeheartly that watching TV is not a right, but i think the govt. should provide converter boxes and paid for 100% of it to those who really need it and those who don't. This is due to the fact that the govt. is making $$$ with selling and/our using the analog waves for their own personal gain.

Those who qualify:

- The elderly who are living on tight incomes.
- Those who qualify for disability
- Those who have served our country
- Those who have jobs and are living in poverty

Those who don't;

- The elderly that have massive nest eggs that are penny pinchers and refuse to upgrade.
- Those who are unemployeed and not actively searching for a job.
- People that don't live in poverty, but have money to pay a one time $40/TV charge.
- and probably more.

[Purplegrasshopper]

Originally Posted by stockstar1138

I agree wholeheartly that watching TV is not a right, but i think the govt. should provide converter boxes and paid for 100% of it to those who really need it and those who don't. This is due to the fact that the govt. is making $$$ with selling and/our using the analog waves for their own personal gain.

Those who qualify:

- The elderly who are living on tight incomes.
- Those who qualify for disability
- Those who have served our country
- Those who have jobs and are living in poverty

Those who don't;

- The elderly that have massive nest eggs that are penny pinchers and refuse to upgrade.
- Those who are unemployeed and not actively searching for a job.
- People that don't live in poverty, but have money to pay a one time $40/TV charge.
- and probably more.

You must be a Democrat. Enough with the socialist mindset that the government owes us something. How about taking some personal responsibility for your life and take care of yourself instead of expecting a bailout. Is that such a foreign concept? I guess it is in this welfare state we now live in. After all, why bother to get a job and work hard when you can have 10 kids, do nothing, get free housing, and use your free food stamps to buy pizza and beer?

[stockstar1138]

Originally Posted by Purplegrasshopper

You must be a Democrat. Enough with the socialist mindset that the government owes us something. How about taking some personal responsibility for your life and take care of yourself instead of expecting a bailout. Is that such a foreign concept? I guess it is in this welfare state we now live in. After all, why bother to get a job and work hard when you can have 10 kids, do nothing, get free housing, and use your free food stamps to buy pizza and beer?

no very conservative.

the govt. is making money off of selling analog bandwith, money will be used even more poorly if they handled it all, give some back to the people.

im not willing to give a box to the lazy or to people who can afford it (hey i bought a 4 figure TV, least they can do if they want to be stuck in the stone age is pony up $40/tv), only to the people who really, truly need it and deserve it. lazy people and the irresponsible don't qualify for one. people looking to rip the govt. off don't get one either.

tv is not a right, but people who have barely enough for medicine and food have a 20 year old TV and the govt. says were selling the bandwith this tv operates on for profit. i think they should receive a portion of the govts. profits so that they're already aged TV can continue to function, because they can't afford even a cheap wal-mart one that accepts a digital signal.

its a shame chuches and charities have failed, along with people helping and giving to one another. if people would have just been there to help out the guy next to them, the govt. wouldn't have so much power today.

id rather have my taxes cut and buy a converter box for my grandma, but unfortuanetly the person down the street would rather put spinners on his car with his savings.

[Purplegrasshopper]

Originally Posted by stockstar1138

no very conservative.

the govt. is making money off of selling analog bandwith, money will be used even more poorly if they handled it.

im not willing to give a box to the lazy or to people who can afford it (hey i bought a 4 figure TV, least they can do if they want to be stuck in the stone age is pony up $40/tv), only to the people who really, truly need it and deserve it. lazy people and the irresponsible don't qualify for one. people looking to rip the govt. off don't get one either.

So you actually think our government is "making money" off of selling bandwidth? Must be the same as them making money off our income taxes, huh? If the government is making money, why does our national debt continue to grow every single day?

And how do you define "truly need" and "deserve"? You can't. Because those terms are so subjective that every single person will have a different answer.

Instead of trying to figure out ways to deliver hand-outs and freebies to our "less privileged," how about trying to figure out ways to change our culture and society so that we wouldn't produce such less privileged people in the first place?

[stockstar1138]

Originally Posted by Purplegrasshopper

So you actually think our government is "making money" off of selling bandwidth?

you think they are auctioning it off for a loss?

Must be the same as them making money off our income taxes, huh? If the government is making money, why does our national debt continue to grow every single day?

The national debt grows everyday because the govt. spends more than it takes in income taxes. not rocket science. They chronically waste money on special intrests and other stuff.

And how do you define "truly need" and "deserve"? You can't. Because those terms are so subjective that every single person will have a different answer.

guidelines need to be set by the politicians, none were set, thats why we have this problem. its ultimately up for them to decide, i was just saying my idea.

they want to give away freebies to the lazy and the cons, then wonder why they don't have any money.

Instead of trying to figure out ways to deliver hand-outs and freebies to our "less privileged," how about trying to figure out ways to change our culture and society so that we wouldn't produce such less privileged people in the first place?

there will always be less priviledged people in every society. the american society is absolutely amazing in terms of how well even the poor live.

[camper]

Originally Posted by stockstar1138

nits a shame chuches and charities have failed, along with people helping and giving to one another. if people would have just been there to help out the guy next to them, the govt. wouldn't have so much power today.

Quite the opposite. Churches & charities have done more than government programs have. Government is completely and totally inneficient when it comes to providing aid and assistance. Ask anyone who went through the katrina where the main source of aid came from, and you won't hear government.

camper

[stockstar1138]

Originally Posted by camper

Quite the opposite. Churches & charities have done more than government programs have. Government is completely and totally inneficient when it comes to providing aid and assistance. Ask anyone who went through the katrina where the main source of aid came from, and you won't hear government.

camper

of course the churches and charities have done better (not that hard to beat the govt. in helping ppl out), my point was the reason the govt. felt it had to get involved in the first place was because the churches and charities did not have the financial backings that they should have had.

if the people who could, would always just donate 10% we could massively cut govt. social programs, which would massively cut waste. the problem is the allure of a higher quality of life for temselves is just too great to donate to others.

probably should stop talking about this before a mod yells at me for being political thought.

dtv coupons have run out fyi, but who cares because we all have hdtvs and blu-ray players

[DrinkMore]

Originally Posted by Forrestandjen07

charging for that box is stupid

if the Fcc or whatever wanted to force the switch from analog to digital

The FCC should pay the $40 bill for everyone who needed a box

Why should someone else have to pay for your lack of technological advance? Explain that to me please? If you can not afford to upgrade your tv or buy your own converter out right and you need it to be subsidized by the government, you obviously have priority issues or other not normal circumstances.

Buy a new tv already. Jeesh. If your that hard up, your butt should not be sitting in front of a tv to begin with now should it?

People and priorities these days. Tsk tsk.

[camper]

Originally Posted by stockstar1138

if the people who could, would always just donate 10% we could massively cut govt. social programs, which would massively cut waste. the problem is the allure of a higher quality of life for temselves is just too great to donate to others.

I agree with this premise 100%, but the reason government gets involved in collecting 'involuntary charitable contributions' in the form of taxes is because some well-meaning people believe the government should provide EVERYTHING to its people, and that those with the most should give the most whether they choose to or not (which is ironic in a republic which espouses personal freedom above all else).

But really, when a government --any government-- takes control of a service or program they RARELY give it up.

camper

[dialog_gvf]

Originally Posted by camper

Quite the opposite. Churches & charities have done more than government programs have. Government is completely and totally inneficient when it comes to providing aid and assistance. Ask anyone who went through the katrina where the main source of aid came from, and you won't hear government.

Some of the first rescuers into New Orleans were Vancouver BC firemen.

VOLUNTEERISM.

The government sets up a bureaucracy and siphons on a considerable percentage of the funds to pay the employees administering the funds and spending. A proper charity is using volunteers and is stretching every donated dollar to the limits.

Gary

[Marquoz]

Originally Posted by dialog_gvf

Some of the first rescuers into New Orleans were Vancouver BC firemen.

VOLUNTEERISM.

Gary

And to them, a BIG hearty THANK YOU!