on 7/18/05 4:42 PM, Kunga at Kunga at FutureMedia.org spake thusly: > Great. I am thinking of the underclass that doesn't have enough > income to support cable or satellite. They are millions. You think > it's right for congress to take away analog broadcasting from these > downtrodden? Get a grip. The "underclass" (betraying your bourgeois mindset) can afford basic cable. It's not a luxury, it's a necessity. Not that the broadcasters care about that particular demographic: if you can't afford to buy Oldsmobiles and Marlboros, the broadcasters could care less about your demographic. The number of folks watching over-the-air broadcast TV is dropping year by year. By 1/1/09, all that will be left watching o-t-a analog will be folks who have long been marginalized. There will be a trillion dollars sitting on the table by 11/1/09, money to pay for the frequencies the analog o-t-a broadcasters will be giving up. Get the TV broadcasters off, hold the auction, and the adventure in Iraq is paid for in full. So do we get cash to pay for Iraq (and/or pay down the national debt and/or fix Social Security) or do we let a few thousand folks watch "Golden Girl" reruns in analog?