|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
If Romney gets elected and cuts funding to PBS will you be bothered?
With the many programs and educational shows through this network, will you find yourself willing or wanting to support/donate?
Although PBS does have some nice concerts and programs, I will not be bothered by the loss of Big Bird. If it comes down to being in debt or being without Big Bird, I have no problems saying good-bye to PBS.
I've done business with CPB and related operations. It's like dealing with the Kremlin before the collapse of the USSR. Despite ceaseless denials, it is an entrenched institution of ideologues and partisans. Public funds should not go to any such organization. Taxpayers who disagree with its political agenda should not be compelled to support it.
Private contributions are another matter. Anyone who wants is, and will remain, free to give to PBS. No one, however, should be forced to do so.
Exactly what is the political agenda of PBS? Is their agenda of educating our youngsters, appreciating the arts, understanding other people, races or cultures, or is it simply acceptance of others that bother you? I don't see your point.
You might were you to spend more time watching its politically prejudiced news and commentary programs with an open eye, and less time thinking up insults couched as questions to toss at people who don't view the world through your filters.
No way. I'd much rather buy bombs with that money so we can blow up more kids in other countries. Go Romney!
Defunding PBS whilst expanding military spending is trading Big Bird for bombs, so it is about priorities, not spending reductions.
So says the wise sage junk peddler. Like I said you may want to try a grownup answer rather than that left wing speak.
Put forth an argument Frog. I've told you on numerous occasions that I don't waste time on your insults or simplistic labels. You are, quite simply, beneath me.
Not in the least. PBS needs to learn how to stand on its own two feet and not mine and other taxpayers. We have a fiscal crisis and don't need to be borrowing money from China to be buying Big Bird's bird seed.
At least for Sesame Street, they make a lot of money on their own and get relatively little government funding compared to their total operating expenses.
I just wrote a Hub about it and Sesame Productions could own PBS if they desired.
Funding by the federal government to PBS amounts to 1/100th % of the budget. Chump change compared to what it will cost taxpayers with less regulations on Wall Street, the banking industry and oil and gas companies.
Thats a BBC show so it will continue....
I guess on a more serious note, no, I won't be bothered. I would, however, be concerned about the national deficit since cancelling funding for PBS will do nothing to that.
We need to stop being a Nanny State.
I'd gladly support PBS. I have in the past.
The government should stop trying to be everything to everyone. Bureaucrats getting their fingers on the pulse of money flow leads to corruption not only financially, but managerially.
The government in any civilized society has an obligation to support the arts and education simply because of the overarching benefits that accrue. Citizens become better informed and more aware of their similarities and differences when exposed to divergent ideas and expressions of them, which naturally makes them more qualified to analyze candidates and their positions. Critics on the left and right disagree on the amount of support the government should provide. Eliminating funding for PBS would therefore be a gross disservice to the population, including children, especially when Sesame Street's cost is $4 million in a multi-trillion dollar budget.
What's next on the chopping block? The National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities? Just because a program doesn't generate revenue shouldn't mean it has no intrinsic value, but I guess that's the difference in an MBA vs. an MFA.
We are having to go down to the necessities in case you haven't noticed. We're $16 trillion in debt and counting. Your thoughts are splendid but the reality we now face doesn't jive with any of that.
Actually cutting 0.00000025% from the debt will not get the country down to necessities. China's holdings of US debt arose when we had to borrow to support 2 unfunded wars that were "off budget," not lining Big Bird's nest.
So let me see here. We have to start somewhere and start with things we can't afford. Things like giving Sesame Productions $1 million in Stimulus money. Things like letting PBS stand on its own feet and not ours.
Sesame Street DOES generate revenue. It will do just fine without a subsidy. The Big Bird attack line is a campaign canard.
Cutting PBS funding is representative of cuts that Romney would consider making across the board to other social and educational programs, so demonstrates a significantly different set of spending priorities. That's not a canard at all.
For me personally, No. But, For children that learn so much from watching the educational programs, Yes. It would be a shame for the next generation of children to miss out on all of the great programs that PBS provides. I would also gladly donate to PBS for the children.
Given I'm planning for children, and getting the assistance required for that to happen, I wouldn't want my children missing out on the experiences I had watching Seasame St - but if it does get cut, I guess Seasame Street could buy PBS outright anyway.
The problem I have with all this is the idea that Mitt would get elected. I'm pretty sure America can't be that stupid 3 times (electing Bush twice was....not clever.). Obama and America are in the fiscal position they are in because of Bush....don't do it again!
by Will Apse5 years ago
Well if the office is the President of the US, 1 or 2 is not enough.Story from a few weeks ago:Gingrich told ABC News Mitt Romney came out on top during the GOP primaries because “In the end, he had, I think, sixteen...
by screaming6 years ago
Yet he managed not to serve in that war!
by Cape Wind Girl6 years ago
By Alex Seitz-Wald on Oct 3, 2011 at 11:10 am"Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) told Fox News host Mike Huckabee this weekend that he would support an amendment to his state’s constitution to define life...
by The Medicine Man5 years ago
What Will Happen if Mitt Romney Is Elected President?
by Dr Billy Kidd6 years ago
Presidential candidate Mitt Romney said last week that Obama has a secret agenda for his second term. I'm wondering what that is. Romney did not say. Or is this the old psychological trick of projecting your fault on...
by JOC4 months ago
What's your take?Here's how I see it. Both sides are playing politics right now. By allowing CHIP to run out and Trump rescinding DACA, that gave the GOP bargaining in legislation. The Dems are using...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.