• Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, the built environment, planning adjacent topics, and anything else that comes to mind. No ads, no spam, and it's free. It's easy to join!

Bill O'Reilly on Today's Fresh Air

Bill O'Reilly's sudden departure from the NPR studio shows that he...

  • Is a big crybaby

    Votes: 8 28.6%
  • Cannot take the heat

    Votes: 8 28.6%
  • Imploded upon impact

    Votes: 4 14.3%
  • Is a lying liar

    Votes: 8 28.6%

  • Total voters
    28
Status
Not open for further replies.

allan

Member
Messages
3
Points
0
El Feo said:
That just occurred to you? Geez, you're normally more on the ball than that. Tell, me, BKM, how many of your hard earned dollars does Rupert Murdoch extort from you in the form of taxes to pay for that biased "reporting"?

None, you say?

Sorry to jump into this on my first post, but I want to point out that the United States government does not fund NPR directly. According to their site:

The only direct government funding NPR receives is through competitive grants from government agencies for specific projects. Such grants are awarded by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the National Science Foundation, and the National Endowments for the Arts and the Humanities, and typically represent only 2% of total revenues.

Total revenue for NPR last year was $143,821,613, so 2% of that would be $2,876,432 (at least by my calculations).

Now, compare that to the $12.9 million dollar grant made to Rupert Murdoch's New York Post, or the fact that News Corp only pays a 6% tax rate, versus 31% for the Disney Corp (that equates to a savings of $300 Million).

So, yes, the government does take my money and give it to Rupert Murdoch.

That being said, I thought O'Reilly really did sound like a whiner. Especially, when he complained on his radio show how unfair it was for NPR to come after him. His audience is 4 times that of Terry Gross, he is not exactly suffering. In addition, there is a difference between O'Reilly and Franken -- O'Reilly sells himself as a truthteller, someone who is always honest (though he is clearly not). if someone is going to sell themselves that way, they have to expect that people are going to, as Bill would say, "call him on it". He was called on it, and he reacted like a three-year throwing a tantrum. It was a sad spectacle.
 

El Feo

Cyburbian
Messages
674
Points
19
allan said:
Sorry to jump into this on my first post, but I want to point out that the United States government does not fund NPR directly. According to their site:



Total revenue for NPR last year was $143,821,613, so 2% of that would be $2,876,432 (at least by my calculations).

Now, compare that to the $12.9 million dollar grant made to Rupert Murdoch's New York Post, or the fact that News Corp only pays a 6% tax rate, versus 31% for the Disney Corp (that equates to a savings of $300 Million).

So, yes, the government does take my money and give it to Rupert Murdoch.

First of all, I'd like to know who told you the New York Post received a $12.9 million federal grant. I'd like to see some backup for that.

Secondly, News Corp pays every penny in taxes that it owes. The "savings" over Disney's taxes is not a subsidy.

Respectfully, I'd like to say I think you're wrong.
 

BKM

Cyburbian
Messages
6,461
Points
29
Welcome, Allan, and thank's for bringing some research into this debate. You confirm a comment made to me by a lurking co-worker (who also noted the large sponsorships by such evil leftish institutions as Exxon/Mobile and Archers Daniels Midland).

The one caveat is that many NPR-carrying stations are housed at public (and private) universities. Do THESE taxpayer-supported institutions spend any of their ill-gotten thievery-at-knifepoint-from-the-taxpayers on NPR? I seem to recall incessant pledge drives, so...

El Guapo: touchee. Barney has always a "person of poundage" so the battle may be closer than I thought (politically incorrect statement removed)
 

el Guapo

Capitalist
Messages
5,986
Points
31
BKM said:
...(who also noted the large sponsorships by such evil leftish institutions as Exxon/Mobile and Archers Daniels Midland)...

If Chairman Mao was in charge and running NPR Exxon and ADM would lick his boots and grin. Exxon aint my pal. You can be conservative and believe most corporations are morally neutral to morally evil.
 

moose

Member
Messages
109
Points
6
allan said:
O'Reilly sells himself as a truthteller, someone who is always honest (though he is clearly not). if someone is going to sell themselves that way, they have to expect that people are going to, as Bill would say, "call him on it". He was called on it, and he reacted like a three-year throwing a tantrum. It was a sad spectacle.

Oooohhh... I like you. Welcome to Cyburbia.
 

allan

Member
Messages
3
Points
0
El Feo said:
First of all, I'd like to know who told you the New York Post received a $12.9 million federal grant. I'd like to see some backup for that.

Secondly, News Corp pays every penny in taxes that it owes. The "savings" over Disney's taxes is not a subsidy.

Respectfully, I'd like to say I think you're wrong.

Sure, I assumed you would. The information came from a New York Times article entitled "Post Gets $24.4 Million in Incentives to Stay in New York" published July 21, 1998. I don't know that there is a web accessible version of it.

As far as the second point, the $300 Million is a subsidy, why should News Corp be given a different tax rate than other media companies -- it seems like a subsidy to me.

But if an 80% reduction in tax rate is not something you consider a subsidy, I am sure I can find other examples if you like.
 

BKM

Cyburbian
Messages
6,461
Points
29
If Chairman Mao was in charge and running NPR Exxon and ADM would lick his boots and grin. Exxon aint my pal. You can be conservative and believe most corporations are morally neutral to morally evil.

Careful, El Guapo. They will be expelling you from the Republican Party pretty soon.

Seriously, I read an interesting book by one of Thatcher's former advisers (False Dawn) who spent much of the book attacking NEO-Conservatism as having nothing to do with "traditional" conservatism at all. His claim is that Neo-Con Free Market Absolutism is fundamentally un-conservative.

Interesting book.
 

BKM

Cyburbian
Messages
6,461
Points
29
why should News Corp be given a different tax rate than other media companies -- it seems like a subsidy to me.

That ain't a subsidy, Allan.

That's called "I know and influence Congressmen and Administration officials, I help write the tax code for the good of all, and I only incidentally benefit from it."
 

El Feo

Cyburbian
Messages
674
Points
19
allan said:
Sure, I assumed you would. The information came from a New York Times article entitled "Post Gets $24.4 Million in Incentives to Stay in New York" published July 21, 1998. I don't know that there is a web accessible version of it.

As far as the second point, the $300 Million is a subsidy, why should News Corp be given a different tax rate than other media companies -- it seems like a subsidy to me.

But if an 80% reduction in tax rate is not something you consider a subsidy, I am sure I can find other examples if you like.

Fair enough - points conceded, I think - were the grants fed or state (maybe this is an issue for NY taxpayers)? But be careful making the NYT your primary source ;). What say we form a right-left coalition to get rid of corporate welfare entirely - from ag subsidies to News Corp grants.

And BKM, you, Allan and lurker are helping make my point. If NPR can be 98% privately funded, why not 100%? As EG (and Adam Smith) notes, those corporations ain't in the business for my good - but their funding is a hell of a lot more palatable than gov't funding (direct or indirect) is in my book.
 

moose

Member
Messages
109
Points
6
El Feo said:
If NPR can be 98% privately funded, why not 100%?

NPR: National Private Radio (gives me the heebie geebies just to think about it.)
 

allan

Member
Messages
3
Points
0
El Feo said:
What say we form a right-left coalition to get rid of corporate welfare entirely - from ag subsidies to News Corp grants.

And BKM, you, Allan and lurker are helping make my point. If NPR can be 98% privately funded, why not 100%? As EG (and Adam Smith) notes, those corporations ain't in the business for my good - but their funding is a hell of a lot more palatable than gov't funding (direct or indirect) is in my book.

I am not completely against corporate welfare -- let's face it corporations bring jobs and keep the economy strong. I am against corporate welfare for News Corp, because the news industry is the one industry that is forced, by its nature, to use American workers. Corporate welfare that is used judicously to help keep Americans working benefits everyone.

I also think there is benefit in continuing the public funding of CPB (which assists with both PBS and NPR). CPB funds programming that is important, but would not normally be funded -- having the government back them up helps to fill the gap between what they can raise and what is needed to keep the organizations running. With the advent of cable PBS has lost some of its punch, but NPR is as important as ever, where else on the radio can you listen to an hour long interview with the guy who wrote "Hacking Matter" or "Beyond Fear"?

Shows that I, in particular, try to listed to are Morning Edition, The Kojo Nnamdi Show and Marketplace -- none of which are particularly liberal.

Bringing it back to the original topic, the level of discourse on NPR is much greater than that of other radio shows -- including the Bill O'Reilly show. It bugs me when I listen to his show, and he tells outright lies while the whole time proclaiming he is in a "no-spin zone".

Anyway, it is late and there is only 1.5 hours left in Friday anyway...so I will let it go, sorry to drop in on your conversation like this and I hope I did not stir up too much trouble ;).
 

El Feo

Cyburbian
Messages
674
Points
19
allan said:
I am against corporate welfare for News Corp, because the news industry is the one industry that is forced, by its nature, to use American workers.

tcjenn.jpg


Thanks on behalf of Peter Jennings for conferring American Citizenship on him. ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top