Aren't we already paying enough to read online news?
Today's poll question, I guess testing the water to find new ways to charge us, is asking would we pay to view online news? But aren't we already paying enough, through electricity costs and monthly internet plans, just to be able to view online news?
- Steve DLv 71 decade agoBest Answer
The problem with your theory is that we are not paying the folks delivering the news...you are paying the electric company and your ISP - that's like saying that we shouldn't pay for our cars since we already pay taxes to build the roads and maintain them and we pay for the gas to move the cars. One way or another, we will end up paying for the content (ad supported, subscription, or some other form of payment) or the providers will go bankrupt and we won't get the content (at least via Internet).
- LoriLv 44 years ago
A great post! And almost believable.. if we were all uneducated liberal sheep who haven't had a thought of our own in the passed two decades.. - Obama is increasing debt at about 500% of the rate Bush did, he's pushed for even more spending ( IE Obamacare ) that will make these deficits permanent. - Clinton NEVER had a balanced budget, not once. Federal debt increased EVERY year of the Clinton administration. That debt was to the social security trust fund instead of the Chinese, but it's still money we have to pay back. - The president has absolutely no say on what's in the budget. None. It's grade school government stuff here.. you really should understand how this works. Spending bills start in the house, then go to congress. The president can veto.. but they can't add or subtract from it. Yes, it is our future... and don't you think that's worth you getting an education and learning to think for yourself instead of just spewing these kinds of lies and ignorance?
- 1 decade ago
Well, I don't think sites like google and yahoo would charge for their news section since they generate tons of revenue already off of ads. And if you are going to newspaper sites I wouldn't be opposed to pay since you have to pay to get it delivered to begin with. I think if all sources of online news required you to pay that would be too wrong. As for your cost for internet and a computer, etc. that's not a valid argument - one is not connected to the other. Do you tell the electricity company, why do I have to pay your bill when I'm already paying a mortgage for a home that makes it possible for me to be your customer?