[mythtv-users] US Gov gives $80 credit towards purchase of HD equipment??
ckotting at wideopenwest.com
Mon Mar 19 17:06:12 UTC 2007
A lot of the push here is for public safety reasons. Not just the set-top
box program, but the transition to digital broadcast itself. A big chunk
the spectrum that is being freed up is being dedicated to establishing
wireless broadband for public safety and first responder communications.
On the set-top box issue, this isn't new. The reason US TVs use NTSC color
(rather than better designs that existed at the time) was than existing B&W
sets would still work with an NTSC color signal.
As for why the credit can't be used towards a digital-capable set,
the "target market" for the set-top box credits is those who wouldn't be
able to afford a new set. The reason that they are being offered to
everyone is that it is expected to be less expensive (both in $ and
political terms) to do that than to set up a system to identify and enforce
who is too destitute to buy a new set.
Not allowing the credits to be used to reduce the cost of a digital set is a
way to have some "self policing" in place (if you want a digital set and can
afford it, go get one), as is the limitation that one set-top box only gets
one credit applied to it (there are two $40 credits per household, you're
expected to use them to get 2 $40 - $50 boxes, instead of combining them
into one %80 box for free).
On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 10:00:07 -0600, Brian Wood wrote
> On Mar 19, 2007, at 9:47 AM, Peter A. Daly wrote:
> > The government is, by implication, calling a TV a "necessity" and not
> > a luxury. Not long ago a telephone was a "luxury" and we now have
> > programs to aid the poor in obtaining this "necessity of life", at
> > least for emergency purposes.
> > I disagree. What they are saying is people should be able to fully
> > expect the TV's they currently own to work as is until they
> > physically fail. That was the expectation when they were
> > purchased. I've watched some of the CSPAN hearing on this, and
> > that is the rational.
> > If the government implements something to cause TV's to fail
> > prematurely for whatever reason, they feel (and rightly so) they
> > have an obligation to "fix" the sets they cause to break before
> > their normal end of life.
> > My understanding is they want this spectrum back for a number of
> > reasons, only some of which related to TV. Either way, the real
> > issue of the credit relates to the breaking of current sets that
> > are not yet at end of life, and the owners who expect them to
> > continue to work.
> Then why not allow the credit to be used towards the purchase of a
> digital-capable set?
> Many states have laws which now require the replacement of
> automobiles which would otherwise be quite capable of continuing in
> life, not directly perhaps but NJ, for example, has stated publicly
> they they want to get any car over 10 years old off the road.
> Laws in NYC have "broken" fireplaces which once worked but are now
> illegal to operate.
> Cellular carriers have rendered analog phones that once cost many
> $$$ useless even though they still operate as designed.
> Record companies have made expensive turntables into costly lazy-susans.
> Microsoft makes perfectly serviceable computers unusable to most
> Nothing runs forever.
> But I do see your point, and it is well taken.
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users at mythtv.org
More information about the mythtv-users