Massage Adagio

CBC - What is it good for?

moviefan

Court jester
Mar 28, 2004
2,531
0
0
That proof has been provided to you. You stubbornly refuse to accept that millions of people valuing something means it has value. Apparently you dislike the facts, but those are the facts. Millions. People. Value.
Quite the opposite -- I fully accept your assertion that CBC has such a large base of support that it doesn't need my tax dollars to keep it going.

If you think it's important to keep advertising off the CBC, why not look for other creative solutions? How about this: allow those of us who don't want to see our tax dollars simply funding other people's tastes in television and radio to apply for a full rebate for our share. CBC can make up the difference through fundraising.

Since the number of us who would seek the rebate is reportedly quite small (according to some posters on this thread), it wouldn't hurt the CBC and you would no longer have to worry about criticisms from people like me. Sounds like a win-win for everyone.

Think of it this way. I don't subscribe to al-Jazeera TV. From what I know about it, it doesn't sound like my three cups of tea. But since I'm not forced to pay for it, you don't see me posting comments complaining about it.

The CBC has millions of people who value it, according to you and others. More than enough support to allow it to stand on its own. And I can use the money I get back to support charities or other causes that are more important to me.
 

red

you must be fk'n kid'g me
Nov 13, 2001
17,569
8
38
Quite the opposite -- I fully accept your assertion that CBC has such a large base of support that it doesn't need my tax dollars to keep it going.

If you think it's important to keep advertising off the CBC, why not look for other creative solutions? How about this: allow those of us who don't want to see our tax dollars simply funding other people's tastes in television and radio to apply for a full rebate for our share. CBC can make up the difference through fundraising.

Since the number of us who would seek the rebate is reportedly quite small (according to some posters on this thread), it wouldn't hurt the CBC and you would no longer have to worry about criticisms from people like me. Sounds like a win-win for everyone.

Think of it this way. I don't subscribe to al-Jazeera TV. From what I know about it, it doesn't sound like my three cups of tea. But since I'm not forced to pay for it, you don't see me posting comments complaining about it.

The CBC has millions of people who value it, according to you and others. More than enough support to allow it to stand on its own. And I can use the money I get back to support charities or other causes that are more important to me.
i am ok with refunding you your share of the cbc funding if i can get back my share of the new fighter jet funding.
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,485
12
38
Terrific idea red, but only if it applies all over government expenditures on our behalf. I, for example, am pleased and proud to pay for our military, but I strenuously object to financing their costly and deadly adventures on the otherside of the world for hopeless and ill-defined objectives.

When we adopt voluntary payment all through the stuff we democratically decide to do, then we can do it for the CBC. Until then, get a party to make de-funding part of its platform. We note the Cons proudly boast they increased CBC funding.
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
79,966
8
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
Quite the opposite -- I fully accept your assertion that CBC has such a large base of support that it doesn't need my tax dollars to keep it going.
Here you are talking about how the CBC is FUNDED, rather than whether it has value.

If you think it's important to keep advertising off the CBC, why not look for other creative solutions?
Here you are talking about how the CBC is FUNDED, rather than whether it has value.

How about this: allow those of us who don't want to see our tax dollars simply funding other people's tastes in television and radio to apply for a full rebate for our share. CBC can make up the difference through fundraising.
Here you are talking about how the CBC is FUNDED, rather than whether it has value.

Since the number of us who would seek the rebate is reportedly quite small (according to some posters on this thread), it wouldn't hurt the CBC and you would no longer have to worry about criticisms from people like me. Sounds like a win-win for everyone.
Here you are talking about how the CBC is FUNDED, rather than whether it has value....

Throughout the rest of your post I saw you talking about how the CBC is FUNDED. Nowhere did you challenge that it has value to the public.

Debating with you is pointless while you continue to refuse the evidence provided to you that the CBC has value. Once you acknowledge that it is a program of immense value to the public we can talk about your view that it is being funded in an inappropriate manner.
 

blackrock13

Banned
Jun 6, 2009
40,084
1
0
Wigglee were you a big fan of Anne of Green Gables too? Privatize the CBC and let it stand on its own merits please. Taxpayers can't afford to keep it in this day and age. I love Hockey Night In Canada too. What else? HMMMM......

As reported in the Ottawa Citizen on March 17, 2011
This is the 75th anniversary of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. The CBC's budget is more than $1.5 billion with approximately $500 million coming from revenues.

The federal government should not be in the broadcasting business. With our main political parties lacking the intestinal fortitude to privatize this unnecessary money pit, afraid of paying the price at the ballot box, they ignore what needs to be done.

Canada can no longer afford unnecessary costly extras like the CBC. Now is the time to start the process toward the privatization of the CBC.

DALE BOIRE, Ottawa

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen


Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/business/Privatize/4453609/story.html#ixzz1Qgh0wlz1
Do you know how much it cost each Canadian? I'll help, $33, a case of cheap beer. Wow!
 

blackrock13

Banned
Jun 6, 2009
40,084
1
0
Red, are you sure the REDS on the opposite side of the north pole have your best interests at heart? The Russians are coming again and are up to the same dirty tricks they used during the cold war. The Russians are laying claim to the north pole's resources and the opening up of the Northwest Passage through the Artic Ocean. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/09/070917-northwest-passage.html

The new fighter jets are maybe expensive, but are definitely needed for Canada's defense of the North, one of our greatest assets. The Russians are very eager to take control of the North Pole. Don't be fooled by the REDS.

Sacrificing and privatizing the CBC would be a small price to pay, so CANADIANS can pay for the bigger defense of OUR TRUE NORTH STRONG AND FREE. Look at the big overall picture, not the small boob tube in your livingroom.
Every body get their tin hats out we got another one. The CBC does more than protect Canadians, It educates them informs them and make them feel as one. The Russian are not our enemy. Things like apathy, ignorance, and, here the tough one self worth are more important than 'trying' the repel the Ruskies.
 

moviefan

Court jester
Mar 28, 2004
2,531
0
0
Debating with you is pointless while you continue to refuse the evidence provided to you that the CBC has value. Once you acknowledge that it is a program of immense value to the public we can talk about your view that it is being funded in an inappropriate manner.
Fuji;

In post #138, you wrote:

I think the term "collective good" is a pretty weakly defined term that practically anything fits.
Fair enough. If I accept your premise that determining whether something serves the "collective good" or has public value is not practical, then there's no point me dragging it out. I'm not sure it's fair that you should be mocking me for accepting what you wrote.

I'm not being obstinate. I'm fully prepared to accept the CBC has value to "millions" of people -- maybe even to a majority of the country's population. All the more reason, in my mind, why it should be able to look to those people for support (since I assume most of those millions want it to continue to avoid commercial ownership) and stop being funded by taxpayers.
 

moviefan

Court jester
Mar 28, 2004
2,531
0
0
When we adopt voluntary payment all through the stuff we democratically decide to do, then we can do it for the CBC. Until then, get a party to make de-funding part of its platform. We note the Cons proudly boast they increased CBC funding.
I'm not suggesting Canadians have the right to opt out of paying for services government should provide. However, I don't think Canadians should have to pay for services that government doesn't need to provide.

No one is suggesting eliminating Canadians' access to entertainment, news, and current affairs programs. The only issue at stake is whether all Canadians should have to pay to support the tastes of a select audience (whether that audience is large or small). Canadians will continue to have access to entertainment, news and current affairs regardless of how we choose to vote on this issue.

I feel the CBC is a matter of taste, rather than a vital service. Thus, I believe it should be supported by its supporters, if you know what I mean.

As for the Cons and their increased funding for the CBC -- well, let's add my name to the list of people who are disappointed with the Harper government on that front.
 

blackrock13

Banned
Jun 6, 2009
40,084
1
0
I'm not suggesting Canadians have the right to opt out of paying for services government should provide. However, I don't think Canadians should have to pay for services that government doesn't need to provide.

No one is suggesting eliminating Canadians' access to entertainment, news, and current affairs programs. The only issue at stake is whether all Canadians should have to pay to support the tastes of a select audience (whether that audience is large or small). Canadians will continue to have access to entertainment, news and current affairs regardless of how we choose to vote on this issue.

I feel the CBC is a matter of taste, rather than a vital service. Thus, I believe it should be supported by its supporters, if you know what I mean.

As for the Cons and their increased funding for the CBC -- well, let's add my name to the list of people who are disappointed with the Harper government on that front.
That is because, for the 4th (?) time, you live in the GTA (I think), but outside the metropolitan centres, it's a totally different scenario. I don't how many time somebody in this thread has said and you can't or won't get it. Have you actually travelled in or live din some rural areas of this country, where the hog, beef and corn prices mean something and where you actually want on the spot local weather broadcasts? $33! I bet you bitch about $2 covers.
 

moviefan

Court jester
Mar 28, 2004
2,531
0
0
That is because, for the 4th (?) time, you live in the GTA (I think), but outside the metropolitan centres, it's a totally different scenario. I don't how many time somebody in this thread has said and you can't or won't get it. Have you actually travelled in or live din some rural areas of this country, where the hog, beef and corn prices mean something and where you actually want on the spot local weather broadcasts? $33! I bet you bitch about $2 covers.
You might want to re-read posts #104 and #129, a little more carefully this time.

I already said I was prepared to support public broadcasting in areas where there is no alternative. Trust me, that can be provided for a hell of a lot less than $1.5 billion per year.
 

blackrock13

Banned
Jun 6, 2009
40,084
1
0
You might want to re-read posts #104 and #129, a little more carefully this time.

I already said I was prepared to support public broadcasting in areas where there is no alternative. Trust me, that can be provided for a hell of a lot less than $1.5 billion per year.

Trust me, not much less than than your $1.5 million. You still need the staff at each local station and the relay stations. If you go the route of staffing from away you have down time and travel time to deal with and just how you felt the las time you cable went down. Try having your business depend on it. You don't have be that remote to be in that boat.

I have family who are farmers and tell me that end of the story and also have family that use to work for CBC but now makes more money doing the service for them as a sub contractor in the far north. He laughs when he hears that CBC saved money laying him off. All they did was eliminate liability.
 

red

you must be fk'n kid'g me
Nov 13, 2001
17,569
8
38
Red, are you sure the REDS on the opposite side of the north pole have your best interests at heart? The Russians are coming again and are up to the same dirty tricks they used during the cold war. The Russians are laying claim to the north pole's resources and the opening up of the Northwest Passage through the Artic Ocean. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/09/070917-northwest-passage.html

The new fighter jets are maybe expensive, but are definitely needed for Canada's defense of the North, one of our greatest assets. The Russians are very eager to take control of the North Pole. Don't be fooled by the REDS.

Sacrificing and privatizing the CBC would be a small price to pay, so CANADIANS can pay for the bigger defense of OUR TRUE NORTH STRONG AND FREE. Look at the big overall picture, not the small boob tube in your livingroom.
if you think 65 fighter jets will make a difference in what the russians do, then you are out of touch with reality.
 

Ceiling Cat

Well-known member
Feb 25, 2009
29,070
1,803
113
Whether you like the CBC or not, it is due for a change. Many of the thing that people deem necessary for rural people can get to them by internet. Sooner or later there will be a convergence of television and computer, the CBC will be a different animal in the future. It can not exist as it is.
 

moviefan

Court jester
Mar 28, 2004
2,531
0
0
Not much less than than your $1.5 million. You still need the staff at each local station and the relay stations. If you go the route of staffing from away you have down time and travel time to deal with and just how you felt the las time you cable went down. Try having your business depend on it. You don't have be that remote to be in that boat.
The number I cited was $1.5 billion, not million, and it could be done for a heck of a lot less.

Remember, you could still whack the National, Newsworld, the Nature of Things, the Age of Persuasion, etc. off the bill. I would actually propose establishing a new entity that focuses solely on programming for those remote areas, similar to the APTN station for aboriginals, and have the CBC supported solely by members.
 

blackrock13

Banned
Jun 6, 2009
40,084
1
0
The number I cited was $1.5 billion, not million, and it could be done for a heck of a lot less.

Remember, you could still whack the National, Newsworld, the Nature of Things, the Age of Persuasion, etc. off the bill. I would actually propose establishing a new entity that focuses solely on programming for those remote areas, similar to the APTN station for aboriginals, and have the CBC supported solely by members.
I did mean to type $1.5 B honest, my bad. Well my observations comes from people in the two businesses for a few generations, so I tend to take their observations over yours.

So, whack the international multi award winning Nature of Things. Now I know your out of touch. It's syndicated all over the world; read makes money for the Corporation. Like the Beachcomber for the tripe digital IQ crowd.
 

benstt

Well-known member
Jan 20, 2004
1,609
474
83
Whether you like the CBC or not, it is due for a change. Many of the thing that people deem necessary for rural people can get to them by internet. Sooner or later there will be a convergence of television and computer, the CBC will be a different animal in the future. It can not exist as it is.
CBC is both a content provider and delivery vehicle - TV, radio, etc. They have embraced the internet well as a new delivery vehicle.

For those who like CBC podcasts, check out Australia's ABC. Great content there too. Deutsche Welle, BBC, etc. All great places to get perspectives from these countries, beyond the 30 second sound bite. Great way for Canada to get our story out to the world, on the cheap.

Commercial radio is a wasteland for news and current affairs. The taxpayer funded model is key to the success of the CBC Radio content, to me. Otherwise, they will be doing what it takes to chase profits, and end up like all the rest.
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,485
12
38
Blackrock and Red seem to be out of touch with reality. Why not let the CBC stand on its own legs like other Canadian broadcasters do? Global does. CTV does. CBC can't? Give me a break.…edit…Who will defend Canadian Borders, but ourselves? Unless you would rather be RED than DEAD? But hey, you morons are already socialist pinkos?
Certainly not the TV-whores you mentioned who've been selling out to American producers for so long we hardly even notice anymore.

How odd that such a patriot wants more sellouts, not more Canadians telling Canadian stories. But feel free to cite their sales south of Flashpoint and such. Rather like third world girls coming to the source to sell their wares to the farangs at first world prices, their imitation American-style cop-culture violence kinda proves why we need media like the CBC.
 

lenharper

Active member
Jan 15, 2004
1,106
0
36
During the Second World War, Winston Churchill’s finance minister said Britain should cut arts funding to support the war effort. Churchill’s response: “Then what are we fighting for?”
 

blackrock13

Banned
Jun 6, 2009
40,084
1
0
Blackrock and Red seem to be out of touch with reality. Why not let the CBC stand on its own legs like other Canadian broadcasters do? Global does. CTV does. CBC can't? Give me a break. CBC uniting Canada? WTF? More Canadians watch foreign cable channels and satellite TV for the programming then CBC. So you can't force Canadians to watch sub par programming they don't like, AND charge them for it through corporate welfare taxation. PRIVATIZE THE CBC.

Blackrock if you don't think the ruskies are a real threat again then you're living under a rock, moron. Research the opening of the Northwest Passage in the Artic Ocean. The claims for resources are currently being disputed.

Feb. 27 2009 10:56 PM ET

Moscow hit back at Defence Minister Peter MacKay on Friday, calling the minister's comments about the flight of two Russian bombers a "farce," the Russian news agency Ria Novosti reported Friday.

The rhetorical sparring comes after two long-range Russian bombers flew near Canadian airspace in the arctic less than 24 hours before President Barack Obama visited Ottawa on Feb. 19 - an occurrence which MacKay called a "strong coincidence."

Two Canadian CF-18 fighters intercepted the Russian aircraft and MacKay warned Russia on Friday to "back off" from flying near the Canadian border.

The incident has ignited a fierce debate about territorial sovereignty as European nations, Canada and the U.S. squabble about claims in the arctic.

But Russia sent a clear response to MacKay's warnings.

"The Canadian defense minister's statements concerning the flights of our long-haul aircraft are totally unclear," a Russian military source said Friday, adding that the flight was routine.

"The countries adjacent to the flight path had been notified and the planes did not violate the airspace of other countries. In this light the statements by the Canadian Defense Ministry provoke astonishment and can only be called a farce," the source told Ria Novosti.

At a press conference Friday, Defence Minister Peter MacKay said the incident happened on Feb. 18.

"At no time did Russian airplanes enter Canadian airspace but within 24 hours of the president's visit here to Canada last week we did scramble two CF-18 fighter planes from Norad (North American Aerospace Defense Command) and Canada command," MacKay said.

The jets took off from Cold Lake, Alta., to intercept the aircraft, which has been reported as either a Tupolev Tu-95 bomber or its newer sister, the Tu-160.

"They met a Russian aircraft that was approaching Canadian airspace and, as they have done on previous occasions, they sent very clear signals that are understood that that aircraft was to turn around, turn tail, and head back to its own airspace -- which it did," MacKay said.

CTV's Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife said the plane was intercepted about 190 km northeast of Tuktoyaktuk, N.W.T.

"Obviously what they were doing was testing Canadian security knowing full well that all of our security attention would be focused in Ottawa around the president's visit," Fife said.

MacKay said similar incidents have happened in the past. However, he said the frequency of the incidents is increasing.

"For that reason, it puts the emphasis back on the importance of Norad, the importance of our being diligent in defending our airspace, exercising that sovereignty," he said.

"The most obvious way to do that is by using the equipment at our availability, using the existing systems that are there at Norad for this very purpose."

MacKay was in Ottawa Friday meeting with Gen. Walter Natynczyk, Canada's chief of defence staff, and Gen. Gene Renuart, the commander of Norad and USNORTHCOM, to discuss Canada-U.S. military relations.

Renaurt said it was vital that Canada and the U.S. maintain "the solid, integrated air defence posture that we have."

Political fallout widens

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Russian intrusions are a "real concern" to his government.

"We will continue to respond, we will defend our airspace," Harper told reporters in Saskatoon.

A Russian air force spokesman said Friday that the flight was planned in advance and was part of routine patrols.

Canadian navy Lt. Desmond James, a spokesman at Norad headquarters in Colorado Springs, Colo., told The Canadian Press that the Russians include long-range flights as part of their training.

"On our part, we go up to make sure they know that while they are doing their training, we do know that they're there and we are watching, prepared to respond should they decide that they're going to alter their course in a threatening manner," James said.

"We have to let the Russians -- any aircraft -- know that we are in a position to respond."

Norad spokesperson Michael Kucharek said it is not atypical to see Russian aircraft engaging in training exercises so close to Canadian airspace.

"This has happened quite often, this is a pattern that we generally see through Russian exercises of this type," he told CTV Newsnet on Friday afternoon.

He estimated that Norad had seen Russian fighters undertaking similar training exercises at least 20 times "over the course of the last couple of years."

During the Cold War, Russian aircraft frequently entered into North American airspace and were often escorted back to international air space by Canadian and American jets.

Brewing international dispute

After the Soviet Union collapsed, the flights were suspended but have resumed in recent years as Russia tries to push its claim on the Arctic.

In total, five countries claim parts of region -- Russia, Canada, Norway, Denmark, and the United States.

Canada has claimed the Northwest Passage.

"The Russians have been very strict about following international rules but they're going right up to the limits," Rob Huebert, with the University of Calgary's Centre for Military and Strategic Studies, told CTV Newsnet Friday.

"If in fact we see the Americans pushing us on the Northwest Passage and ultimately somehow it becomes accepted that it's an international strait I would suspect you'd be seeing Russian bombers coming through the Northwest Passage."

Last summer, then-foreign affairs minister David Emerson said recent actions of Russia in the Far North were of "great concern" to the government.

He said Canadian officials had "seen much increased activity in terms of Russian overflights of Canadian airspace."

Emerson also said the Americans were seeing the same thing around Alaska.

With files from The Canadian Press

Hey morons, do you expect Canadian polar bears to repel Russian bears in the future? Get real. Ít's a good thing the Americans are still co-operating with NORAD in defense of the Canadian North and Alaska. Should Canada just pay the Americans for all of our defense requirements like the Saudis did against Iraq? The American military is facing budget cuts and they don't work for Canada pro bono. Canada HAS to take a stand for OUR TRUE NORTH STRONG AND FREE. Will pussies like Blackrock and Red stand up for Canada or turn tail and hide at the CBC in Toronto. The world is facing economic chaos again and how things work out is still unknown. The U.S.A. may default on its debt. Greece will default eventually anyways. The E.U. will break up. The riots in Greece are happening now. Everything is being shutdown by the unions in Greece now. Transportation is at a stand still. Forget about your Greek vacations to the Isles. Who will defend Canadian Borders, but ourselves? Unless you would rather be RED than DEAD? But hey, you morons are already socialist pinkos?
Nice C&P, but a citation more than ' fromCanadian Press' would be really helpful. Having lived in the far North and talked to/worked with those responsible for repelling the 'Red Horde', it's possible yes, but probable no. With what we have or could have available with absolute no slight on the Canadian men and women. Ou job would probably boil down to locate and delay, certainly not repel until the US in Alaska an the North US arrive in strength.. What's wrong with Government run Broadcasting. The BBC is also a world renown award winning operation that reflects The UK more completely and successfully than ITV and Sky.

Christ, now I'm a commie pinko. I wish you guys would get it straight. I've been called someone from every point in the political spectrum, some more than once. It's been well documented over the last few 1000 post, I'm nowhere near a commie, but you being here for 3 months, wouldn't know that. So it basically shows that you roll out claims and accusations based on no knowledge whatsoever.

As far as giving it all ove to the US, no way, we must have a presence, if only for the fact that we know the ground better than anyone else. The facts that you suggest tell me you know only what you read, quick on kitchy phrases, but with no first hand experience, and what you appear to read is clearly one sided.

Do you know Markvee?
 
Toronto Escorts