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.
If a powerful enough lobby wanted to oppose it, you can be sure that
the US public
would be hearing and reading about how the government is:
<highly exaggerated voice tone>
*forcing them to buy new televisions or spend hundreds to keep their
old ones working
*dictating to the public "Even though we know you don't want this,
you have no choice.
You will do this because we say so"
</highly exaggerated voice tone>
There's been hardly a ripple over this change, with a few mentions in
the
media from time to time. A lot of people still don't even know about
it.
