While they like to call themselves "Progressives", liberals sure are unwilling to let go of archaic public institutions. They are always the loudest in opposition to doing away with or downsizing the US Postal Service--no matter how much money it loses in an ever more digital world. They plead on behalf of the dwindling number of Americans without internet access. Or they propose ludicrous plans to use the USPS as a bank for low-income people--or a short-tem lender. The real reason they want to keep the Post Office as large and bloated as possible is because that preserves a sizeable public employee union and pension.
Liberals also oppose the downsizing of public libraries in an age were more people read and access their information electronically. Better for communities to continue to maintain, heat and cool oversized buildings constructed in the early 1900's with bloated public employee staffs. Again, they suggest "repurposing" libraries as "community organizing centers" with rows of bookshelves replaced by "gathering rooms", "performance spaces" and "internet cafes".
And now they are putting on the battle gear to "save" the Public Broadcasting System. The Trump Administration is the latest to attempt to de-fund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Liberals continue to claim that the programming on PBS cannot be found anywhere else on the 450+ cable channels that come into your home--or on the millions of Youtube, Hulu, Vimeo, AppleTV or GoogleTV channels as well. It also ignores the biggest trend in TV consumption--cord cutting--and not even watching most of your shows on an actual TV attached to an antenna or cable.
They always trot out the Sesame Street characters as being on the "chopping block"--but production of those shows is now done by HBO. PBS basically airs "reruns". And don't forget the "quality programming you won't find anywhere else" like "NOVA"--which contains the same information as most shows on Nat Geo or the Science Channel--or "America's Test Kitchen"--which is exactly like everything on the Food Channel, or Cooking TV--except the host chefs on PBS are incredibly boring. Oh and the huge PBS hit "Downton Abbey"? You could have watched that on BBC America too.
PBS doesn't even live up to its "commercial free" claims anymore--and hasn't for years. They just save all the commercials for the start and end of the show--instead of spreading them out throughout the show. Plus, they take money from such "evil corporations" as Exxon/Mobil, Chevrolet and BP.
And when they say "nobody else would produce shows like this" they are wrong about that too. You don't think ESPN or the MLB Network would have paid Ken Burns to produce the "Baseball" documentary? In fact, the "30 For 30" series on ESPN has won numerous Emmys and an Oscar this year.
Yes, PBS costs us just $1.35 per person as taxpayers. But think of how much more "progress" we would make as a country if that money went to getting us closer to landing a man on Mars--than making sure "Sewing With Nancy" doesn't have to become a video blog.