I posted a note to Scott about the desire of the government to auction off the vhf bands to generate more money for the government rather than raise taxes. Your comment about the money is partially on target. There are other forces at work also and they relate to the various entertainment elements. The desire to integrate computers and TV driven by MS. The desire to have higher definition games. The desire to have higher definition movies in wide screen format and so on. The end product is in my opinion a total sham but you need to study the various issues in detail to understand them. A short note here is too hard to do. About 20% of the tv viewing audience receive only over the air (OTA) tv and these are mostly low income people who will probably be subsidized by the same government to make up for the lose of normal tv. They will most likely not get high def but a lower resolution picture but of higher quality. m moon
------ Original Message ------ Received: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 06:08:22 PM PDT From: Michael Palumbo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Subject: [USMA:38856] Re: Costly government mandates Your last sentence hits the nail on the head, Scott. In the case of HDTV, the mandate gives the corporations a new revenue stream; it's planned (and forced) obsolescence at its finest. The citizen has to pay, not the corporation. In metrication, it's exactly the opposite. Though, if you think about it, every citizen has to pay in a way by being forced to use an outdated and, frankly, difficult & impractical system of measure. So in both situations, we lose. Great. What we need is a way of spinning this so that it's not considered a money loser, but rather a money maker. If metrication is proposed as something that will streamline business, make global trade easier, and ultimately help to increase profits, you'll see acceptance. Americans generally don't care about interaction with the rest of the world, because they simply don't *have* any interaction with the rest of the world. But when it comes to money, they listen. Just my 2 pence. [they're worth more than cents ;)] -Mike Scott Hudnall wrote: > I was reading an article on high-definition televisions, and how the > US government has mandated that all TV stations broadcast in HD only > beginning in 2009. This will cost consumers several thousand dollars > each to replace a television set, or at minimum several hundred > dollars each to purchase a converter box. > > This is a costly mandate - yet we do not see a groundswell of > opposition or lobbyists trying to de-rail implementation of this > rule. The cost for the US to complete metrication in short order is > probably less than what it would cost for us to all replace our > televisions next year. So why is it that metrication is portrayed as > a costly endeavor, but making everyone buy new TV sets is not? I > guess it depends on who is paying the bill - consumers or > corporations. > > Sorry for the ranting. > > Scott >
