comment by Frederic Daquin (U1734)
posted 25 seconds ago
I don't use the royal family for much. Rarely even talk to them. I want my tax to be reduced accordingly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah, but you do talk to them
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
Superb (U6486)
So you never watch the BBC, never visit the web site or use any of their services? Ever?
I don't believe you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I watch very little BBC when I watch Freeview, a tiny amount in fact that I could very happily live without if it meant not being forced to pay up to £150 per year to the BBC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you do watch it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A tiny amount and whatever tiny amount I do watch is because I know I'm being forced to pay £150 per year for it so I try to get a tiny modicum of value for that £150.
Otherwise no I'd never watch any BBC channels and I wouldn't miss them at all.
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 4 minutes ago
Also, as your own post pointed out, Superb - the licence is to operate the equipment not pay for the BBC. The fact that "over 90% of the license goes to the BBC" is neither here nor there really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure I follow. As the tv licence website states:
"Over 90% of the licence fee is spent on BBC TV channels, radio stations, BBC iPlayer and online services".
That's fairly self explanatory.
I pay over £30 a month for Sky Sports (probably) and only really watch the odd game of footy. I have the option to bin the whole thing, but I like to have the option.
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
Superb (U6486)
So you never watch the BBC, never visit the web site or use any of their services? Ever?
I don't believe you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I watch very little BBC when I watch Freeview, a tiny amount in fact that I could very happily live without if it meant not being forced to pay up to £150 per year to the BBC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you do watch it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A tiny amount and whatever tiny amount I do watch is because I know I'm being forced to pay £150 per year for it so I try to get a tiny modicum of value for that £150.
Otherwise no I'd never watch any BBC channels and I wouldn't miss them at all.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, such is life.
People with kids still help fund schools. People who don't drive still help fund the roads.
Ultimately it's about whether the BBC is of value to tax payer, not whether it's of value to the individual imo.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
Superb (U6486)
So you never watch the BBC, never visit the web site or use any of their services? Ever?
I don't believe you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I watch very little BBC when I watch Freeview, a tiny amount in fact that I could very happily live without if it meant not being forced to pay up to £150 per year to the BBC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you do watch it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A tiny amount and whatever tiny amount I do watch is because I know I'm being forced to pay £150 per year for it so I try to get a tiny modicum of value for that £150.
Otherwise no I'd never watch any BBC channels and I wouldn't miss them at all.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, such is life.
People with kids still help fund schools. People who don't drive still help fund the roads.
Ultimately it's about whether the BBC is of value to tax payer, not whether it's of value to the individual imo.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Schools and roads are a vital part of society and infrastructure. BBC television channels are not.
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 4 minutes ago
Also, as your own post pointed out, Superb - the licence is to operate the equipment not pay for the BBC. The fact that "over 90% of the license goes to the BBC" is neither here nor there really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure I follow. As the tv licence website states:
"Over 90% of the licence fee is spent on BBC TV channels, radio stations, BBC iPlayer and online services".
That's fairly self explanatory.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is self explanatory. Only ~90% of the licence fee goes to the BBC. Did you see what the the other 10% goes on?
Here is why I should pay no taxes:
Welfare - Got a job not a scrounger
Health - 100% healthy
State Pensions - Not old enough
Education - Educated
National Debt Interest - No debt
Defence - Can stand up for myself
Public Order & Safety - Again, I can look after myself
Transport - Bike
Business & Industry - I can sell my body if need be
Government Administration - Two made up words
Environment - Leaves literally grow on trees, don't need my money
Culture (e.g. sports, libraries, museums) - I don't consume culture
Housing and utilities (e.g. street lights) - Got a house
Overseas Aid - Charity begins at home, I don't give to charity
UK Contributions to EU budget - N/A because we won
Superb (U6486)
Fair point.
Parks? Libraries?
Where does the race to the bottom end?
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
Superb (U6486)
So you never watch the BBC, never visit the web site or use any of their services? Ever?
I don't believe you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I watch very little BBC when I watch Freeview, a tiny amount in fact that I could very happily live without if it meant not being forced to pay up to £150 per year to the BBC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you do watch it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A tiny amount and whatever tiny amount I do watch is because I know I'm being forced to pay £150 per year for it so I try to get a tiny modicum of value for that £150.
Otherwise no I'd never watch any BBC channels and I wouldn't miss them at all.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, such is life.
People with kids still help fund schools. People who don't drive still help fund the roads.
Ultimately it's about whether the BBC is of value to tax payer, not whether it's of value to the individual imo.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Schools and roads are a vital part of society and infrastructure. BBC television channels are not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Media and communication are infrastructure and a vital part of any civilised society.
They definitely need to trim the fat. Salaries are obscene! 12,000 households to pay for Lineker! Nobody even watches match of the day for him! And half a million for a news presenter to read an auto cue. Still not sure £150 a year is worth it for the occasional David Attenborough gem.
comment by Automatic 4 Brexit (U7899)
posted 5 minutes ago
They definitely need to trim the fat. Salaries are obscene! 12,000 households to pay for Lineker! Nobody even watches match of the day for him! And half a million for a news presenter to read an auto cue. Still not sure £150 a year is worth it for the occasional David Attenborough gem.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a fair point.
The money that Shearer, Murphy etc. are on is a disgrace.
Yes but sometimes they have fit birds on a Question of Sport
The TV licence going up makes next too no sense. in an era where more people than ever are sacking off conventional TV for streaming youd think they would reduce it if anything.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 56 minutes ago
comment by Holland's big brother Europe (U1250)
posted 16 minutes ago
I pay a TV licence in Ireland, paid it in the Netherlands as well. I dont mind. But what irks me is that I have done away with all TV channels. I only have Netflix, Amazon, Disney+ and Apple TV. Yet I still have to pay the licence because I have a screen in the house, like a TV or Tablet.
That to me is the same as a mafia racket or extortion. I am not watching RTE ever. Why the fack do I have to pay the licence because I have a TV in the house? It facking infuriates me.
I am actually thinking if you take them to court over it, you might win.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is that accurate?
Certainly in the UK, you're allowed to use screens - it's only when you use them to access live TV or to stream BBC programs that you require the license, as I understand it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I looked it up, if you dont have a TV you dont have to pay, but from 2024 anyone with a screen has to pay, be it a laptop, tablet or phone. No exceptions. The reasoning is everyone should contribute to the provision of independent TV. Watch it or not is your choice.
*I thought that law was already in effect, but apparently it was delayed to due the complications of implementing and governing it. No shiiiiiit.
Holland's big brother Europe (U1250)
In the UK or somewhere or Ireland?
Sorry, in Ireland.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/no-way-to-avoid-it-everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-new-broadcasting-charge-941563.html
It is a license to operate a TV. Just because most of it goes to the BBC does not make it a BBC subscription.
Still haven't found out what the other 10% goes on. Everyone moaning about Lineker getting paid too much, etc, and no-one curious where the other ~£350m is going a year.
comment by Holland's big brother Europe (U1250)
posted 45 seconds ago
Sorry, in Ireland.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/no-way-to-avoid-it-everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-new-broadcasting-charge-941563.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How odd!
The Irish are facking odd!
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 1 hour, 36 minutes ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 4 minutes ago
Also, as your own post pointed out, Superb - the licence is to operate the equipment not pay for the BBC. The fact that "over 90% of the license goes to the BBC" is neither here nor there really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure I follow. As the tv licence website states:
"Over 90% of the licence fee is spent on BBC TV channels, radio stations, BBC iPlayer and online services".
That's fairly self explanatory.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is self explanatory. Only ~90% of the licence fee goes to the BBC. Did you see what the the other 10% goes on?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes it's in the TV licencing link I posted:
https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/topics/what-does-your-licence-fee-pay-for-top13
"Part of the fee also contributes to the UK broadband rollout, funding local TV channels and S4C, the Welsh language TV channel, as was agreed with the government as part of the 2010 licence fee settlement".
Over £100m to collect the fee.
And they have the nerve to word it "For every £1 taken in licence fee payments, just 3p is spent on collection"
"Just" 3%.
"The costs of administering the TV Licence are less than you might think."
No it fcuking isn't. It's much more that I might think.
I think people often miss a point in that the bbc provides unbiased news. This is the first step in Boris plan to basically destroy impartiality and basically turn news reporting to propaganda. It’s important to get that, most news outlets are politically bias, and without impartiality we could see repeats of 1930’s Germany.... just look up what that utter scuuumbag Dominic coussins wants to do with his ‘think tank’ if you don’t believe me. And he’s Boris advisor...
Let’s not forget that many of the techniques of broadcasting were pioneered by them. They have a lot of excellent content out with the standard stuff people associate them with like eastenders (shiiit) etc. Then you have radio etc, I player. I think they do a decent job, and am happy to pay for it.
But let’s face it, those complaining are happy to pay 40-90 quid a month for paid services Like I used to with ,sky which is 90% full of shiiit, and then filled with imports from America (literally the only good they do, none of which they make themselves) and sport which you have to pay top whack a month for. Movies not any better than amazon or Netflix which are about 7 quid a month.
Sign in if you want to comment
Tv licence decriminalisation
Page 3 of 4
posted on 5/2/20
comment by Frederic Daquin (U1734)
posted 25 seconds ago
I don't use the royal family for much. Rarely even talk to them. I want my tax to be reduced accordingly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah, but you do talk to them
posted on 5/2/20
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
Superb (U6486)
So you never watch the BBC, never visit the web site or use any of their services? Ever?
I don't believe you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I watch very little BBC when I watch Freeview, a tiny amount in fact that I could very happily live without if it meant not being forced to pay up to £150 per year to the BBC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you do watch it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A tiny amount and whatever tiny amount I do watch is because I know I'm being forced to pay £150 per year for it so I try to get a tiny modicum of value for that £150.
Otherwise no I'd never watch any BBC channels and I wouldn't miss them at all.
posted on 5/2/20
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 4 minutes ago
Also, as your own post pointed out, Superb - the licence is to operate the equipment not pay for the BBC. The fact that "over 90% of the license goes to the BBC" is neither here nor there really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure I follow. As the tv licence website states:
"Over 90% of the licence fee is spent on BBC TV channels, radio stations, BBC iPlayer and online services".
That's fairly self explanatory.
posted on 5/2/20
I pay over £30 a month for Sky Sports (probably) and only really watch the odd game of footy. I have the option to bin the whole thing, but I like to have the option.
posted on 5/2/20
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
Superb (U6486)
So you never watch the BBC, never visit the web site or use any of their services? Ever?
I don't believe you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I watch very little BBC when I watch Freeview, a tiny amount in fact that I could very happily live without if it meant not being forced to pay up to £150 per year to the BBC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you do watch it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A tiny amount and whatever tiny amount I do watch is because I know I'm being forced to pay £150 per year for it so I try to get a tiny modicum of value for that £150.
Otherwise no I'd never watch any BBC channels and I wouldn't miss them at all.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, such is life.
People with kids still help fund schools. People who don't drive still help fund the roads.
Ultimately it's about whether the BBC is of value to tax payer, not whether it's of value to the individual imo.
posted on 5/2/20
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
Superb (U6486)
So you never watch the BBC, never visit the web site or use any of their services? Ever?
I don't believe you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I watch very little BBC when I watch Freeview, a tiny amount in fact that I could very happily live without if it meant not being forced to pay up to £150 per year to the BBC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you do watch it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A tiny amount and whatever tiny amount I do watch is because I know I'm being forced to pay £150 per year for it so I try to get a tiny modicum of value for that £150.
Otherwise no I'd never watch any BBC channels and I wouldn't miss them at all.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, such is life.
People with kids still help fund schools. People who don't drive still help fund the roads.
Ultimately it's about whether the BBC is of value to tax payer, not whether it's of value to the individual imo.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Schools and roads are a vital part of society and infrastructure. BBC television channels are not.
posted on 5/2/20
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 4 minutes ago
Also, as your own post pointed out, Superb - the licence is to operate the equipment not pay for the BBC. The fact that "over 90% of the license goes to the BBC" is neither here nor there really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure I follow. As the tv licence website states:
"Over 90% of the licence fee is spent on BBC TV channels, radio stations, BBC iPlayer and online services".
That's fairly self explanatory.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is self explanatory. Only ~90% of the licence fee goes to the BBC. Did you see what the the other 10% goes on?
posted on 5/2/20
Here is why I should pay no taxes:
Welfare - Got a job not a scrounger
Health - 100% healthy
State Pensions - Not old enough
Education - Educated
National Debt Interest - No debt
Defence - Can stand up for myself
Public Order & Safety - Again, I can look after myself
Transport - Bike
Business & Industry - I can sell my body if need be
Government Administration - Two made up words
Environment - Leaves literally grow on trees, don't need my money
Culture (e.g. sports, libraries, museums) - I don't consume culture
Housing and utilities (e.g. street lights) - Got a house
Overseas Aid - Charity begins at home, I don't give to charity
UK Contributions to EU budget - N/A because we won
posted on 5/2/20
Superb (U6486)
Fair point.
Parks? Libraries?
Where does the race to the bottom end?
posted on 5/2/20
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
Superb (U6486)
So you never watch the BBC, never visit the web site or use any of their services? Ever?
I don't believe you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I watch very little BBC when I watch Freeview, a tiny amount in fact that I could very happily live without if it meant not being forced to pay up to £150 per year to the BBC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you do watch it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A tiny amount and whatever tiny amount I do watch is because I know I'm being forced to pay £150 per year for it so I try to get a tiny modicum of value for that £150.
Otherwise no I'd never watch any BBC channels and I wouldn't miss them at all.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, such is life.
People with kids still help fund schools. People who don't drive still help fund the roads.
Ultimately it's about whether the BBC is of value to tax payer, not whether it's of value to the individual imo.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Schools and roads are a vital part of society and infrastructure. BBC television channels are not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Media and communication are infrastructure and a vital part of any civilised society.
posted on 5/2/20
They definitely need to trim the fat. Salaries are obscene! 12,000 households to pay for Lineker! Nobody even watches match of the day for him! And half a million for a news presenter to read an auto cue. Still not sure £150 a year is worth it for the occasional David Attenborough gem.
posted on 5/2/20
comment by Automatic 4 Brexit (U7899)
posted 5 minutes ago
They definitely need to trim the fat. Salaries are obscene! 12,000 households to pay for Lineker! Nobody even watches match of the day for him! And half a million for a news presenter to read an auto cue. Still not sure £150 a year is worth it for the occasional David Attenborough gem.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a fair point.
The money that Shearer, Murphy etc. are on is a disgrace.
posted on 5/2/20
Yes but sometimes they have fit birds on a Question of Sport
posted on 5/2/20
The TV licence going up makes next too no sense. in an era where more people than ever are sacking off conventional TV for streaming youd think they would reduce it if anything.
posted on 5/2/20
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 56 minutes ago
comment by Holland's big brother Europe (U1250)
posted 16 minutes ago
I pay a TV licence in Ireland, paid it in the Netherlands as well. I dont mind. But what irks me is that I have done away with all TV channels. I only have Netflix, Amazon, Disney+ and Apple TV. Yet I still have to pay the licence because I have a screen in the house, like a TV or Tablet.
That to me is the same as a mafia racket or extortion. I am not watching RTE ever. Why the fack do I have to pay the licence because I have a TV in the house? It facking infuriates me.
I am actually thinking if you take them to court over it, you might win.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is that accurate?
Certainly in the UK, you're allowed to use screens - it's only when you use them to access live TV or to stream BBC programs that you require the license, as I understand it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I looked it up, if you dont have a TV you dont have to pay, but from 2024 anyone with a screen has to pay, be it a laptop, tablet or phone. No exceptions. The reasoning is everyone should contribute to the provision of independent TV. Watch it or not is your choice.
posted on 5/2/20
*I thought that law was already in effect, but apparently it was delayed to due the complications of implementing and governing it. No shiiiiiit.
posted on 5/2/20
Holland's big brother Europe (U1250)
In the UK or somewhere or Ireland?
posted on 5/2/20
Sorry, in Ireland.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/no-way-to-avoid-it-everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-new-broadcasting-charge-941563.html
posted on 5/2/20
It is a license to operate a TV. Just because most of it goes to the BBC does not make it a BBC subscription.
Still haven't found out what the other 10% goes on. Everyone moaning about Lineker getting paid too much, etc, and no-one curious where the other ~£350m is going a year.
posted on 5/2/20
comment by Holland's big brother Europe (U1250)
posted 45 seconds ago
Sorry, in Ireland.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/no-way-to-avoid-it-everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-new-broadcasting-charge-941563.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How odd!
posted on 5/2/20
The Irish are facking odd!
posted on 5/2/20
posted on 5/2/20
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 1 hour, 36 minutes ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 4 minutes ago
Also, as your own post pointed out, Superb - the licence is to operate the equipment not pay for the BBC. The fact that "over 90% of the license goes to the BBC" is neither here nor there really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure I follow. As the tv licence website states:
"Over 90% of the licence fee is spent on BBC TV channels, radio stations, BBC iPlayer and online services".
That's fairly self explanatory.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is self explanatory. Only ~90% of the licence fee goes to the BBC. Did you see what the the other 10% goes on?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes it's in the TV licencing link I posted:
https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/topics/what-does-your-licence-fee-pay-for-top13
"Part of the fee also contributes to the UK broadband rollout, funding local TV channels and S4C, the Welsh language TV channel, as was agreed with the government as part of the 2010 licence fee settlement".
posted on 5/2/20
Over £100m to collect the fee.
And they have the nerve to word it "For every £1 taken in licence fee payments, just 3p is spent on collection"
"Just" 3%.
"The costs of administering the TV Licence are less than you might think."
No it fcuking isn't. It's much more that I might think.
posted on 5/2/20
I think people often miss a point in that the bbc provides unbiased news. This is the first step in Boris plan to basically destroy impartiality and basically turn news reporting to propaganda. It’s important to get that, most news outlets are politically bias, and without impartiality we could see repeats of 1930’s Germany.... just look up what that utter scuuumbag Dominic coussins wants to do with his ‘think tank’ if you don’t believe me. And he’s Boris advisor...
Let’s not forget that many of the techniques of broadcasting were pioneered by them. They have a lot of excellent content out with the standard stuff people associate them with like eastenders (shiiit) etc. Then you have radio etc, I player. I think they do a decent job, and am happy to pay for it.
But let’s face it, those complaining are happy to pay 40-90 quid a month for paid services Like I used to with ,sky which is 90% full of shiiit, and then filled with imports from America (literally the only good they do, none of which they make themselves) and sport which you have to pay top whack a month for. Movies not any better than amazon or Netflix which are about 7 quid a month.
Page 3 of 4