http://thehill.com/homenews/media/373434-trump-proposes-eliminating-federal-funding-for-pbs-npr
No thanks. I’m siding with Mr. Rogers
No thanks. I’m siding with Mr. Rogers
OT: Thoughts on the elimination of PBS and NPR in the new budget
- Thread starter tigers30cocks0
- Start date
In this day and age of 300 channels of entertainment, why in the world does the government need to fund two broadcast entities that can’t generate enough revenue to be self sustaining?
This is long overdue.
This is long overdue.
If you like it enough then contribute just like you do for cable, XM, streaming platforms. I listen to NPR occasionally and my kids watch PBS on Saturday mornings, but if it folded due to a lack of federal funding, I would listen to podcasts and stream Netflix instead.
hell, after the latest spending bill, im just glad to see a cut of anything...
They don't have advertising which makes for better TV. Sort of like the difference between watching the same movie on TCM compared to Fox or ABC
If you like either right wing or left wing talk radio then NPR is crap. But I sort of enjoy down the middle reporting myself.
The dependency of government is out of control.
Government has no business paying for entertainment/fictional information.
But those who look to the government for tax-payer-funded fictional entertainment are the same ones looking for solutions to their empty retirement accounts and paycheck to paycheck lifestyles.
If it ever happens, I'll enjoy a special bourbon to celebrate the demise of that elitist network full of disconnected pansies.
While the two options you listed have been absolute mainstays for decades, I don't see a functional role for government as necessary in this equation.
Parents (and in turn, networks) will gladly pay for kids' programming, while AHC, Discovery, etc. should fund Burns' genre (I certainly hope, anyway).
It’s like the pavilion getting torn down at myrtle beach. I wanted to get angry then I realized I hadn't seen it in over 30 years and had no effect on me what so ever.
I listen to it a few hours a week when I’m between episodes of podcasts. Some pretty decent science based segments.
It’s not for everyone, and that’s fine.
No reason for the taxpayer to be paying for this. They should be funded just like every other channel. This is long overdue.
This is coming from someone who has audited public radio and tv.
This is coming from someone who has audited public radio and tv.
It's a devisive issue that gets us arguing about pennies while both sides irresponsibly run up trillion dollar deficits.
No one is down the middle anymore
If it’s so great then sell ads and stand on your own, the free market will sort it out if allowed.
I think it's more about the principle of the matter. PBS and NPR mean a lot to a lot of people
I listen to classical music some . I've seriously never heard anything right wing on NPR . I am not for NPR being taxpayer funded . And sorry they do run commercials and " brought to you by ....."
PBS is great programmng for kids and olds
Good by me, why do we need gov. paid for channels anyway.
I like NPR. I won't be donating to see it stick around.
I used to watch Tavis Smiley on PBS. Likewise I won't be donating to see it stick around either.
I used to watch Tavis Smiley on PBS. Likewise I won't be donating to see it stick around either.
Love both NPR and PBS. A reasonable and appropriate use of taxpayer dollars and a cause worth gov't support. I both donate to SCETV and have included them, albeit minimally, in our will. There are plenty of other places to cut instead.
For instance, I've always contended if you got rid of the entire Dept. of Ed. at virtually every level (less so at the district level), that the impact in my classroom would be minimal at worst.
For instance, I've always contended if you got rid of the entire Dept. of Ed. at virtually every level (less so at the district level), that the impact in my classroom would be minimal at worst.
I listen to NPR all the time and donate annually. It's a great way to educate yourself.
Ask for donations from Big Bird... they sold rights for millions and public got nothing !!!
By the way I donate and think Listener Supported should mean just that. Lefties think that means they get a free ride.
By the way I donate and think Listener Supported should mean just that. Lefties think that means they get a free ride.
So if something means a lot to a lot of people (which is all subjective), then the government should fund it?
While they're at it, take the Post Office and Amtrak with them.
Agree with this. I support both because I enjoy a lot they have to offer and I don’t think they should be subsidized. I will, however be pissed if funding is pulled from that yet spent on a military parade. I know we have the strongest, best military in the world and don’t need to spend my taxes on a bush league parade. Save that for the countries with middle envy.
If you get smart listening to NPR, it makes a good case to shut down the department of education.
What exactly is the principle of the matter? It can be argued PBS was necessary back when we had three channels - ABC, NBC and CBS. But in the cable era, government supported TV/radio is just a waste of taxpayer money. End of story.
Good post. It's perfectly reasonable to support the programming on these networks while recognizing that it's a misappropriation of government funds to support them. Hopefully the scope of government continues to narrow.
Taxpayers should only be forced to fund essential government activities.
The fact that some think NPR is “down the middle” is testament to how askew the MSM truly is.
Please take amtrack! I took the family to the sugar bowl on amtrack from
Greenville. Another guy on the train with me wrote an epic description of how bad it was. My experience was similar but I am a shitty writer. Just awful. Hell.
