To HD or not to HD? That is the question

So my husband and I have been having an ongoing debate about whether the high definition route is the way to go, and if, ultimately, the cost is warranted. You can probably figure out which side of the fence I'm on. If my husband were this super duper sports fanatic, there would be no question. But let's be honest, he's not. And as most household budget belts are tightening up, to spend the extra few bucks (or hundred if you count the year's total), what's the worth?

We've had the debate with our friends, family and neighbours and if we were to go the democratic route (which we are not, because they really don't get a vote, it's purely for consensus information), the vote would be for HD. Apparently, it's unquestionable quality, in picture and in sound. That's really not the debate, it's whether the cost would warrant the difference, given the choice and frequency of our programming. So, here we have it. Both sides of the debate, when last night, the answer was pretty clear. Right there in front of us. We were watching the news when I made a comment about how it was funny they made a simple mistake on a photo caption. There, on our plain, non-HD, screen, was the word "sistor". Or would it that "o" actually have been a clear "e" had we actually had the HD channel? And the debate continues..

Anyone know any great deals to get HD around here?