Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
My concern is that the more sponsorship NPR get's from private foundations and corporations, the more likely it is that they will be influenced by those entities. With government grants and funding, there is little chance that program content will be influenced.In my opinion, the federal government has no business subsidizing NPR.
As far as being biased to the left, most of the program content is not political. The exception is during election session where politics dominated the news. There are bound to be issues that some conservative will take issue with. The evangelicals will claim bias on any program dealing with evolution or creation. The right in general will take issue with most presentations dealing with global climate change.
and while i am a liberal, I think that if the table were turned, i wouldn't like the fed gvt funding it, one iota.
Except that I see the longer view about what they bring to the table (non-politically), that they would not be able to do in a commercial setting.
*shrug*
I'm torn on NPR. But I'm taking the view of lets start with the larger money wasting fish rather than the minnows.
A valid perspective, but I differ. The problem is that all these "little things" all have a common perspective and adding up the money is most of what our government spends.
NPR isn't just "$15 Million," it's a perspective that $15 Million is a "minnow" when someone like me who isn't worth a tenth of that is expected to pay for it.
and while i am a liberal, I think that if the table were turned, i wouldn't like the fed gvt funding it, one iota.
Except that I see the longer view about what they bring to the table (non-politically), that they would not be able to do in a commercial setting.
*shrug*
I'm torn on NPR. But I'm taking the view of lets start with the larger money wasting fish rather than the minnows.
well, that i agree with....we need to reduce the big gun departments, with all we got....first, before we worry about the minnows.
Except that I see the longer view about what they bring to the table (non-politically), that they would not be able to do in a commercial setting.
*shrug*
I'm torn on NPR. But I'm taking the view of lets start with the larger money wasting fish rather than the minnows.
A valid perspective, but I differ. The problem is that all these "little things" all have a common perspective and adding up the money is most of what our government spends.
NPR isn't just "$15 Million," it's a perspective that $15 Million is a "minnow" when someone like me who isn't worth a tenth of that is expected to pay for it.
But then I add in the things they are able to bring to the table that they would not be able to in a commercial setting.
So I'm torn on the approximately $25 a year that I send to NPR via taxes. The ROI to get it defunded is way low. I'd rather spend my energies elsewhere.
A valid perspective, but I differ. The problem is that all these "little things" all have a common perspective and adding up the money is most of what our government spends.
NPR isn't just "$15 Million," it's a perspective that $15 Million is a "minnow" when someone like me who isn't worth a tenth of that is expected to pay for it.
But then I add in the things they are able to bring to the table that they would not be able to in a commercial setting.
Such as?
As I said, it's a perspective issue.
If $15 Million is a "minnow" and you aren't worth $15 Million, well that's a problem.
Except that I see the longer view about what they bring to the table (non-politically), that they would not be able to do in a commercial setting.
*shrug*
I'm torn on NPR. But I'm taking the view of lets start with the larger money wasting fish rather than the minnows.
well, that i agree with....we need to reduce the big gun departments, with all we got....first, before we worry about the minnows.
Would that be Social Security, HHS, or Defense?
But then I add in the things they are able to bring to the table that they would not be able to in a commercial setting.
Such as?
Such as more intellectual and esoteric programming. Symphonic music, world music, regional perspectives, etc. Non-political. This type of programming wouldn't survive in a straight commercial setting.
As I said, it's a perspective issue.
If $15 Million is a "minnow" and you aren't worth $15 Million, well that's a problem.
Your math is off on that one. It's $15 million distributed among taxpayers. Or around $25 to $30 per annum per citizen.
I'm hard pressed to think of anyone that isn't worth that much. Maybe Uwe Boll.
well, that i agree with....we need to reduce the big gun departments, with all we got....first, before we worry about the minnows.
Would that be Social Security, HHS, or Defense?
since i am a DOVE, and anti military industrial complex influence, fraud and waste, the Department of Defense would be first....
social security tax funds are in surplus for the most part, and some reform and tweaking, spread over the future can shore it up for another 75 years....
as of right now, our deficit would be WORSE, without social security and their surplus they are pulling in, in Taxes.
Medicare...the pill bill primarily, will bring this country to its knees if we don't reform it.
Such as?
Such as more intellectual and esoteric programming. Symphonic music, world music, regional perspectives, etc. Non-political. This type of programming wouldn't survive in a straight commercial setting.
I disagree. Back in my college days I questioned why so much ethnic and diverse music groups seemed to be hell-bent on getting the attention of the "university" and not poor schlubs like me looking to book an opening band at a big party.
"That's how we get exposure, get in with the public radio people."
So no, it's not as you say (or at least it wasn't as you say). These types of culture could survive in a straight commercial setting if the promise of a government paycheck weren't there.
Get $1 a head versus playing for free at the house on an intern of WBUR?
Your math is off on that one. It's $15 million distributed among taxpayers. Or around $25 to $30 per annum per citizen.
My math is just fine. You call $15 Million a year a "minnow." Well by that logic I'm an amoeba, all I want is a penny from every taxpayer. Can I have it?
I'm hard pressed to think of anyone that isn't worth that much. Maybe Uwe Boll.
The difference is that you choose, but then say it's fair that I pay for it also.
Such as more intellectual and esoteric programming. Symphonic music, world music, regional perspectives, etc. Non-political. This type of programming wouldn't survive in a straight commercial setting.
I disagree. Back in my college days I questioned why so much ethnic and diverse music groups seemed to be hell-bent on getting the attention of the "university" and not poor schlubs like me looking to book an opening band at a big party.
"That's how we get exposure, get in with the public radio people."
So no, it's not as you say (or at least it wasn't as you say). These types of culture could survive in a straight commercial setting if the promise of a government paycheck weren't there.
Get $1 a head versus playing for free at the house on an intern of WBUR?
My math is just fine. You call $15 Million a year a "minnow." Well by that logic I'm an amoeba, all I want is a penny from every taxpayer. Can I have it?
I'm hard pressed to think of anyone that isn't worth that much. Maybe Uwe Boll.
The difference is that you choose, but then say it's fair that I pay for it also.
I'm not talking about local concerts or bands.
*shrug* no one gets to directly choose where their tax money goes.
I disagree. Back in my college days I questioned why so much ethnic and diverse music groups seemed to be hell-bent on getting the attention of the "university" and not poor schlubs like me looking to book an opening band at a big party.
"That's how we get exposure, get in with the public radio people."
So no, it's not as you say (or at least it wasn't as you say). These types of culture could survive in a straight commercial setting if the promise of a government paycheck weren't there.
Get $1 a head versus playing for free at the house on an intern of WBUR?
My math is just fine. You call $15 Million a year a "minnow." Well by that logic I'm an amoeba, all I want is a penny from every taxpayer. Can I have it?
The difference is that you choose, but then say it's fair that I pay for it also.
I'm not talking about local concerts or bands.
Every single artist started local.
*shrug* no one gets to directly choose where their tax money goes.
Sometimes we do, hence the pressure to cut NPR's funding.
I'm not talking about local concerts or bands.
Every single artist started local.
*shrug* no one gets to directly choose where their tax money goes.
Sometimes we do, hence the pressure to cut NPR's funding.
Every single artist starts local, yes. However, I'm thinking specifically of music from across the world. Not American.
Would that be Social Security, HHS, or Defense?
since i am a DOVE, and anti military industrial complex influence, fraud and waste, the Department of Defense would be first....
Well on that we can agree and I'm a hawk.
Well, they will certainly serve as advocates for continued government financing but that does not mean that they will necessary support the policy of the administration. It is far more likely that they will be advocates for the special interest groups and corporation that donate money.My concern is that the more sponsorship NPR get's from private foundations and corporations, the more likely it is that they will be influenced by those entities. With government grants and funding, there is little chance that program content will be influenced.In my opinion, the federal government has no business subsidizing NPR.
As far as being biased to the left, most of the program content is not political. The exception is during election session where politics dominated the news. There are bound to be issues that some conservative will take issue with. The evangelicals will claim bias on any program dealing with evolution or creation. The right in general will take issue with most presentations dealing with global climate change.
The cattle have already left the barn on that one.
Plus, what is the virtue of government financing? Don't you think those who get their money from government would serve as advocates for it?
That's not a "free press" by any stretch of the imagination.
Would that be Social Security, HHS, or Defense?
since i am a DOVE, and anti military industrial complex influence, fraud and waste, the Department of Defense would be first....
Well on that we can agree and I'm a hawk.
There is so much to be saved by returning the DoD back to the model of efficiency it used to be. I'm on board with starting there. The DoD has become so bloated that it hampers the mission.
So we can agree there right?
I'd like to hear specifics on that, because "tweaking" doesn't fix a ponzi scheme.
as of right now, our deficit would be WORSE, without social security and their surplus they are pulling in, in Taxes.
Ah. Static view of economics. How have 2 years of increased Keynesian policy worked so far?
Medicare...the pill bill primarily, will bring this country to its knees if we don't reform it.
Why not just cut it?
Why is the right so afraid of the truth that NPR provides?
And why does the right care about the part time contributor to NPR being fired?
Answer, they don't. But is is a good false outrage topic for them.
I love the way the libturds think THEY get to define the playing rules. Fuck the hell off.
I love the way the bushtards think they get to define the playing rules. Go play with your dolls.
