Best Of

Per Telegraph:
"Benefit claimants could receive free television licences under sweeping BBC reforms being considered by Lisa Nandy, the Culture Secretary."
So the actual license payer will not just be stumping up for Trump's amour propre

Why not just give everyone a free TV licence?

That's the 'fund from general taxation' option. Then like schools, hospitals etc it's free at the point of delivery.

The BBC themselves want a digital tax. On ISPs.

Because that way the tax will be hidden from the public. Whose bills for internet connections will go up, of course.

Then all the BBC has to do is ask for more free money every year.

That sounds ok. But I think I prefer general taxation. Or do I? Not sure. So long as we don't lose the BBC. I value it highly.

The basic problem is - why a digital tax?

That’s a tax on every business or person online.

Because subscription rates are dropping along with use rates.

But why tax people online, rather than an extra tax on retired accountants?

The latter would cause a lesser reduction in economic activity.

The more you spread the cost the easier it is to pretend that it isn’t actually that big and that we’re all funding it and watching together. They seem to believe that if they wish hard enough and wait long enough all of their opponents will somehow just drop dead and that they won’t have to actually think about what people want to watch rather than what they want to make.

I honestly don't mind them being a bit patriarchal and making what they want to make. I just wish it was also less shit.

Somewhere in my fevered imagination - there is a great big Terry Gilliam-style angry 'Zardoz-meets-Lord-Reith' head being asked to approve any simpering, feeble-minded project from a 'commissioning editor' about their latest pet idea. Zapped with lasers at the first hint of an eye-roll from the god-head.

I'd pay good money to watch that, now that I think about it. Any commissioning editors around?

Paternalistic ... patriarchal is someone else (the odd presenter aside).

Per Telegraph:
"Benefit claimants could receive free television licences under sweeping BBC reforms being considered by Lisa Nandy, the Culture Secretary."
So the actual license payer will not just be stumping up for Trump's amour propre

Why not just give everyone a free TV licence?

That's the 'fund from general taxation' option. Then like schools, hospitals etc it's free at the point of delivery.

The BBC themselves want a digital tax. On ISPs.

Because that way the tax will be hidden from the public. Whose bills for internet connections will go up, of course.

Then all the BBC has to do is ask for more free money every year.

That sounds ok. But I think I prefer general taxation. Or do I? Not sure. So long as we don't lose the BBC. I value it highly.

The basic problem is - why a digital tax?

That’s a tax on every business or person online.

Because subscription rates are dropping along with use rates.

But why tax people online, rather than an extra tax on retired accountants?

The latter would cause a lesser reduction in economic activity.

The more you spread the cost the easier it is to pretend that it isn’t actually that big and that we’re all funding it and watching together. They seem to believe that if they wish hard enough and wait long enough all of their opponents will somehow just drop dead and that they won’t have to actually think about what people want to watch rather than what they want to make.

I honestly don't mind them being a bit patriarchal and making what they want to make. I just wish it was also less shit.

Somewhere in my fevered imagination - there is a great big Terry Gilliam-style angry 'Zardoz-meets-Lord-Reith' head being asked to approve any simpering, feeble-minded project from a 'commissioning editor' about their latest pet idea. Zapped with lasers at the first hint of an eye-roll from the god-head.

I'd pay good money to watch that, now that I think about it. Any commissioning editors around?

Back to his lawyerly brilliance:

“Every time I go to pull a lever, there are a whole bunch of regulations, consultations, arms-length bodies that mean the action from pulling the lever to delivery is longer than I think it ought to be"

https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2000594550599864781

If only he was the PM with a large majority, who might be in a position to actually do something about the regulatory and bureaucratic overload?

Having a large majority doesn't free you from public law obligations around due process, consultation, taking full account of objections and so on.

Now, you could loosen some of those constraints - but that in itself is a project that detracts from your main agenda. Further, rather like the filibuster in the US, a sensible politician realises majorities come and go, and reducing friction for yourself today does so for your opponent tomorrow.

Having a large majority does however allow you to legislate to change any laws you wish.

Per Telegraph:
"Benefit claimants could receive free television licences under sweeping BBC reforms being considered by Lisa Nandy, the Culture Secretary."
So the actual license payer will not just be stumping up for Trump's amour propre

Why not just give everyone a free TV licence?

That's the 'fund from general taxation' option. Then like schools, hospitals etc it's free at the point of delivery.

The BBC themselves want a digital tax. On ISPs.

Because that way the tax will be hidden from the public. Whose bills for internet connections will go up, of course.

Then all the BBC has to do is ask for more free money every year.

As someone who uses zero BBC services I would object vehemently to such a tax unless it was strictly to fund a limited set of core BBC services; news reporting, public service program making, etc. If the beeb want to continue making soap operas and game shows they should sell subscriptions or advertising to fund them.

Carry on. Object vehemently. Should I object vehemently to university subsidies as I use zero university services? Or adult social services which we fortunately don't use?

Taxation doesn't work like that.

Nothing to stop you objecting though.

Universities and social services benefit the country as a whole. BBC game shows do not.

NYT article: The Trump administration intervened to get Andrew Tate released from custody in Romania.

Mr. Tate and his brother, Tristan, swaggering influencers in the so-called manosphere, had been under criminal investigation in Romania since 2022, accused of coercing women into pornography. Andrew was also accused of rape and of having sex with and beating a 15-year-old. The brothers, American and British citizens, had been barred from leaving Romania while prosecutors built their case.
Now, in a Jan. 14 text message, Mr. Tate indicated that help was on the way.
“I had word from The Trump admin that theyre on top of things,” Mr. Tate wrote to someone close to him, in a message reviewed by The New York Times. “Ive been told ill be free soon but Trump needs to see me in Miami,” he added.
The next month, an extraordinary order came down from the highest levels of the Romanian government, a Times investigation found. The prosecutors were told to find a compromise with the Tates. Despite their misgivings, they lifted the travel restrictions, a move that Romania’s prime minister thought would appease the Trump administration.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/10/us/andrew-tate-barron-trump-romania.html

(No full article link - sorry.)

I think millions of us are really going to enjoy the collapse of Trumpworld. Sadly he will probably be too gaga to know the depths of contempt he faces.

Per Telegraph:
"Benefit claimants could receive free television licences under sweeping BBC reforms being considered by Lisa Nandy, the Culture Secretary."
So the actual license payer will not just be stumping up for Trump's amour propre

Why not just give everyone a free TV licence?

That's the 'fund from general taxation' option. Then like schools, hospitals etc it's free at the point of delivery.

The BBC themselves want a digital tax. On ISPs.

Because that way the tax will be hidden from the public. Whose bills for internet connections will go up, of course.

Then all the BBC has to do is ask for more free money every year.

As someone who uses zero BBC services I would object vehemently to such a tax unless it was strictly to fund a limited set of core BBC services; news reporting, public service program making, etc. If the beeb want to continue making soap operas and game shows they should sell subscriptions or advertising to fund them.

@PippaCrerar

EXCL: An agreement to rejoin Erasmus – the EU’s student exchange programme – set to be announced on Wednesday as part of UK government’s drive towards closer relations with Brussels.

https://x.com/PippaCrerar/status/2000992877443231788?s=20

Is this where we give the EU what they want and they fuck us up the ass.

SKS would pay full price for a Dominos pizza

Brexit was just a spiteful destruction of opportunity voted for by people who'd had their time and had no plan for the aftermath.
It's been left to the people who voted against it to make the best of the mess left behind, turns out that means trying to recover the benefits at greater cost as was said at the time.
Suck it up.

You are deluded.