first of all, there is a difference between whether the US Congress should legislate who ABC can have as a sponsor for a TV show (where in the Constitution or any federal document does the government have control over private advertising on media? Freedom of the Press comes to mind) and a study on the costs or benefits of certain public/private collaboratives. I referenced a study which outlines the costs of a certain profitable business' operation to our tax base- and extrapolated it to all businesses that operate with such a model.
To your question about the validity of "democratic studies"
I don't knock out any study ... though some souces are more balanced than others. Facts are facts...when presented as such (though few sources present pure facts). What I haven't seen are facts of any kind which refute the findings of this study, or show that WM-style pay structures are actually NOT costing taxpayers money.
If we're to invalidate work by one party, we must invalidate the work of both - which makes recent voted on THE REFUGE invalid, in fact most of the work being done on Terry Schiavo, social security, homeland security, etc. are invalid as they are Republican led and organized efforts in an imbalanced Congress.
Simply because a study is funded by a party or a branch of congress doesn't make it wrong or untrustworthy. If that were so, then everything we hear from GW and the Republicans about social security, should be eliminated from the debate as well...leaving us with NO sources of information (knock out both sides and what are you left with?
Again, I ask you to present a solution, not simply attack the foundation or facts you don't agree with.




Bookmarks