Quantcast

Comments about ‘Letter: Sesame Workshop needs no stimulus grant’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Oct. 19 2012 12:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

Agree Vicky,

Lets get rid of ALL taxpayer subsidies for businesses. I am fine with stopping funding for NPR. But, in doing that, lets get rid of subsidies for Oil and tax writeoffs for corporations.

If we cut out ALL taxpayer subs to business, the lobbying would be reduced greatly.

And, until we get the money out of our politics, nothing else really matters.

Let me say that again.

UNTIL we get ALL the BIG money, (corporate, union and private) out of our election process, NOTHING else matters and NOTHING will change. We will continue to have our politicians bought and paid for.

Stop picking and choosing which tax subsidies should go. ALL or NOTHING. I choose ALL.

ugottabkidn
Sandy, UT

The problem is not the programming. The subsidies are not for the programming. They are for the private stations providing PBS services in lower populated areas. Areas that would not have access to the PBS programming. Not everything of value is provided privately. There is no free enterprise with monopolies dominating everything from banking to communication. What would our world be with only WalMarts to shop?

pragmatistferlife
salt lake city, utah

First of all the Corporation for Pulic Broadcasting is a creation of Congress and funded by congress for the express purpose of encourgaging public broacasting..so of course the CPB gets most of it's money from the government. Secondly NPR, PBS, are radio and television networks formed by the CPB and only receive part of their funding (around 15%) from CPB. The rest comes from prvate fund raising.

Sesame Street is a non profit educational program and it's only connection to federal funds is through the PBS stations it airs on and amounts to something like 1% of its budget. So this letter is a bunch of noise about nothing.

Public Broadcasting is probably one of the single most important things this country can do to help promote an informed electorate

Kent C. DeForrest
Provo, UT

So, Vicki, I assume you also oppose the $12 billion in subsidies that government gives to oil companies?

Roland Kayser
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Mr. Romney says he will cut government by 3-1/2% of GDP, or about 500 billion dollars, but the only cuts he has actually described are to NPR and Planned Parenthood. In terms of government spending those two programs consume the equivalent of the change you keep in your car's ashtray. In other words, virtually meaningless.

I'm open to voting for a candidate who will cut federal spending, but not for a candidate who won't tell us what spending.

Christian 24-7
Murray, UT

What is missing in all these comments is that PBS was just an EXAMPLE of what should be considered for a reduction or elimination of government funding. The list of what the federal government meddles in, either by funding or regulating, is as monstrous as the budget.

It is not about PBS and Big Bird. That is just a distraction.

The whole point Romney was making was that we need to look at the budget item by item and decide if each is worth going further in debt to fund it.

The problem is that as soon as any candidate, or already elected person, suggests any place to consider a trim or cut, the interest parties start the attacks on that person.

As far as I am concerned, we need to put the whole budget on the table and look for every possible place to trim or cut, and do it with the good of the country as a whole as the top priority. If we don't, we will just spend and borrow our way to being the latest world power to mightily fall.

lcg
Bluffdale, UT

The biggest problem is the question - why is the government funding any kind of radio or television? When the government is involved in this kind of enterprise bias is certainly suspect and has proved to be so in the case of PBS. If the amount of PBS funding is so small certainly it won't be missed. Roland - the president is not a dicttor and can;t make decisions on what can or can;t be funded. Romney understands that - unlike Obama who runs the government by illegal executive orders. Romney know that all cuts must be decided by congress but I agree with Christian. 'It is not about PBS and Big Bird. That is just a distraction.The whole point Romney was making was that we need to look at the budget item by item and decide if each is worth going further in debt to fund it.The problem is that as soon as any candidate, or already elected person, suggests any place to consider a trim or cut, the interest parties start the attacks on that person.'

pragmatistferlife
salt lake city, utah

So lcg, and christian..if that's what Romney meant..why didn't he say it? Obama has actually said that very thing on almost every single stump speech. He uses the words not usefull. Secondly lcg executive orders are not illegal. Every President uses them. This is just more of the right wing babble and hate mongoring.

Christian 24-7
Murray, UT

Well pragmatistferlife, Romney does say that, but you won't listen this time either. He made the case for making cuts throughout the budget, and he was ASKED at the debate for examples. He had 2 minutes, so clearly covering every federal budget item was not an options, so he put 2 examples on the table. Then commenced all the criticism, which is partly why he was pressed for examples. There are so many people who don't really want to look at solutions. They just want to complain and blame.

Do you want to look for solutions? Or just find a reason to hate someone?

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

"Big Bird" or my family? Which is more important? To the liberals, Big Bird rides high. He is the one to save. His/her interests are the one to save.

When did we ever give "Big Bird" pre-emptive status over our families? When did we tell government to sacrifice us so that "Big Bird" could live?

DVD
Taylorsville, 00

We need an alternative to what a few rich CEOs think that Americans should consume. PBS provides an alternative to them. I place my vote for continuing to fund PBS and other entities like it. I place my vote for continued taxation to support them. I also vote to maintain or even increase taxation for schools and even state-supported courses in college.

DougS
Oakley, UT

Our constitution says that government(s) should "protect and defend" its citizens. Where does authority for controlling their education and welfare come from?

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments