Wife and I having a little "spat" about donating money to public radio

we had the same spat, but I told her we HAVE to pay our taxes! Anyway.....

Big Johns johnson isn't so big now is it.

My first reaction was that the OP was being a cheap SOB as I'm a big Public Radio listener and supporter, but then I realized that he was from Minnesota, the home of Garrison Keillor, who is the bane of Public Radio and now I'm re-thinking it.

I don't believe it. Second page and Flagpole hasn't appeared to turn this into a thread about Flagpole.

Flagpoles can't type.

He knows its true wrote:

Big Johns johnson isn't so big now is it.

Not sure what you mean. If you want to pitch a fit over your wife's donations to public radio (or whatever) then go for it. I simply choose not to. How does this increase/decrease the public perception of the size of my "johnson".

You're really worried about $120 per year? My wife gives more than that per week to her church. I don't particularly buy into the cause, but y'know what? It's really not that much money. If it makes your wife happy to give ~30 cents per day to a radio station, what does it matter?

go grind some organs wrote:

If public radio can't make it on its own, maybe they should look into being non-public radio. You know, in the real world, where you either perform and turn a profit or you go under. The OP was correct in administering this valuable lesson, for which his wife should be grateful.

Would you care to explain how the world in which Public Radio currently operates is not the "real" world?

If anything it seems like you are the one living in a fantasy world, that happens to reside in a first year Econ textbook. In the real world collective action an altruism are realities you must face.

I have listened to public radio for years and enjoy many of the shows. The programming is excellent, but I donate very little, it's not necessary. Programming would change without out it, but it would not dissappear.

In my business I have bought spots from NPR in Boston (WBUR)...yes advertising, just like every other station. It's done differently, but it works the same way...big company pays to get it's name out there.

People should give what makes them feel good or if they want to carry around the smug little book bags, but it is not a private club or a subscription service, it's free.

Um, let me see if I understand your thinking: If your wife were to take on a lover, that would be okay as long as she didn't tell you and she managed to keep it successfully hidden from you, because whatever Mr. Pubic Radio is doing with her makes no difference in the service/product you, as a husband, get. Do I have that right?

To echo others here -- dude, be grateful your wife is a conscientious person, and just let this one go.

Left of the Dial wrote:

I have listened to public radio for years and enjoy many of the shows. The programming is excellent, but I donate very little, it's not necessary. Programming would change without out it, but it would not dissappear.

The more people like the OP's wife contribute to public radio, the fewer ads for your business we all have to listen to. Seems like a rational way to spend money to me.

Of course, if you don't feel like donating, that's fine. Like you said, it's entirely voluntary and there's no obligation to donate. But this thread wasn't started by someone saying "Everyone who listens to public radio MUST donate"; it was started by someone objecting to his wife making her personal choice to donate. Two very different questions.

Kcpi wrote:

My wife gives about $120/year to Minnesota Public Radio. She said she feels like she "should" donate because she enjoys public radio and listens to it often. I told her she should stop donating that money and put it to some better use. She didn't like that much. I told her to look at it this way: if you stop giving your money to public radio, nothing will change - you'll still be able to listen to all of your shows as you normally do. In other words, whether you donate or not makes no difference in the service/product you get.

What do you think?

What do I think? I think you're both a moron, a bad husband and most likely really lousy in bed. I think it's a fuc\king tragedy that someone like you have the right to be married while that same right is being denied gay and lesbian people, 99% of whom would make way better spouses than you. That's what I think.

There is nothing wrong with public radio and TV seeking donations. You are free to choose to donate to them or not.

I don't think for a second that public tax dollars should be spent on them though. It is just beyond the scope of what government should do, and in general, it is the poor subsidizing the rich.

Everyone. Thanks for the feedback.

When I say "spat," I hope I didn't imply we were having an argument. It was not an argument by any stretch. I think I've convinced her to reconsider her donations to public radio, but we'll see.

Spat--

1.A short cloth gaiter covering the instep and ankle.

2.A petty quarrel.

3.The spawn or larvae of shellfish, esp. oysters.

What were you trying to imply? Maybe you need to listen to more public radio to improve your vocabulary.

I do listen to just a little bit of public radio (Car Talk), but I will never pay for it!

Let's get some things straight (not all of these comments are to YOU...at least one is a comment to another poster who asked whether the money was hers or yours).1) When you are married, there is no "hers" and "his" money. I know some couples operate that way, but that is a recipe for disaster. Should be one checking account; all money goes into it and all bills paid from that account...no secret money or stashes.2) While generally speaking I think couples should agree on where they spend their money, $120 a year is not worth arguing about at all. Personally, if my wife came to me (and she sometimes does) and said, "Super HUGE biceps Flagpole, I'd really like to donate $120 to public radio because I listen to it and feel a connection to it" then I would have no problem supporting her in that. At SOME point there's a line if I disagree, but $120 ain't it.3) As a director of a not-for-profit track program and as a former employee at a not-for-profit company, I can tell you that every little bit helps. If everyone had your attitude, we would all withdraw and nothing would get done.4) Donating $120 a year makes your wife happy. What would YOU do with an extra $120 a year that is better than that?

Kcpi wrote:

My wife gives about $120/year to Minnesota Public Radio. She said she feels like she "should" donate because she enjoys public radio and listens to it often. I told her she should stop donating that money and put it to some better use. She didn't like that much. I told her to look at it this way: if you stop giving your money to public radio, nothing will change - you'll still be able to listen to all of your shows as you normally do. In other words, whether you donate or not makes no difference in the service/product you get.

What do you think?

"3) As a director of a not-for-profit track program and as a former employee at a not-for-profit company, I can tell you that every little bit helps. If everyone had your attitude, we would all withdraw and nothing would get done."

I do agree with this. Thankfully, not everyone has this attitude. That's why it doesn't matter when I don't give money to non-profits, etc.

So, you just want to rely on others and be a leach? Maybe you shouldn't pay your taxes (other than you'd be punished for that), because your little bit doesn't matter. Maybe you shouldn't vote. Maybe you shouldn't be nice and respectful to others, because others will do that.I'm not trying to get you to see my way. I am though trying to get you to see your wife's view, and hers is valid. You go tell her tonight that while you don't feel the way she does about donating money to Public Radio, that since $120 a year makes her happy, you're all in. She'll probably then do something for you that you can't do for yourself (this isn't WHY you support her donation, but fringe benefits are fringe benefits).

Kcpi wrote:

"3) As a director of a not-for-profit track program and as a former employee at a not-for-profit company, I can tell you that every little bit helps. If everyone had your attitude, we would all withdraw and nothing would get done."

I do agree with this. Thankfully, not everyone has this attitude. That's why it doesn't matter when I don't give money to non-profits, etc.