For years, I have believed that we should understand that Iran is in a low-scale war, fought mostly by proxies, with the US (and the UK). And, of course, Israel.
And has been, since 1979.
The US has not been particularly good at such wars in the last century. One great handicap in such wars is our preference for quick solutions. (Early in the Vietnam War, when American voters were asked, in an open-ended question, what we should do, many said "win or get out", rather than giving a dove or hawk response.)
The arm chair generals and admirals here can probably think of strategies for that low-scale war, but it is, in my opinion, difficult to find a strategy that will keep the support of the American people for the years required, as divided as we are.
Remove dependence on oil. Then Iran becomes a small country with an interesting history. The current leadership are unable to create anything beyond a resource extraction economy. So economic collapse will end up with them being turfed out.
Have preached Death To The West for decades, that will become an unpopular pose.
Just buy an electric car and wait.
The eclipse of the petro states isn’t coming fast enough. As the nonsense at the climate summit starkly demonstrates. If anything, Saudi Arabia, with its outsize, money based influence, and sociopath leader, is more dangerous to the world than Iran.
But the Thatcher consensus won’t be at an end until something is done to address the evisceration of local government, and the long running sores of housing, and privatised monopolies.
Oh for the love of God, this stuff isn’t hard. The line he needed was “the Tory Party doesn’t accept former leaders of other parties”. You don’t even have to attack his beliefs.
Since 2015 there has been a Tory MP who was a former (acting) leader of UKIP.
Amusingly in 2015 he beat Nigel Farage, then the current leader of UKIP in South Thanet.
For years, I have believed that we should understand that Iran is in a low-scale war, fought mostly by proxies, with the US (and the UK). And, of course, Israel.
And has been, since 1979.
The US has not been particularly good at such wars in the last century. One great handicap in such wars is our preference for quick solutions. (Early in the Vietnam War, when American voters were asked, in an open-ended question, what we should do, many said "win or get out", rather than giving a dove or hawk response.)
The arm chair generals and admirals here can probably think of strategies for that low-scale war, but it is, in my opinion, difficult to find a strategy that will keep the support of the American people for the years required, as divided as we are.
Remove dependence on oil. Then Iran becomes a small country with an interesting history. The current leadership are unable to create anything beyond a resource extraction economy. So economic collapse will end up with them being turfed out.
Have preached Death To The West for decades, that will become an unpopular pose.
Just buy an electric car and wait.
The eclipse of the petro states isn’t coming fast enough. As the nonsense at the climate summit starkly demonstrates. If anything, Saudi Arabia, with its outsize, money based influence, and sociopath leader, is more dangerous to the world than Iran.
Following the short exchanges on Dubai yesterday, an aspect that I find interesting is that the model 'cities of the future' they are trying to create in the Middle East are almost out of a 1950s USA techno-dreamland, and about a century out of date.
I don't think that's a viable post-oil future.
They can arguably create a future by exporting solar energy as one future pillar, but that will depend on Governance being resolved, intra-ME wars being surpassed, the Middle East no longer being a failed region, and an investment in distribution reminiscent of the establishment of telegraph networks in the late 19C.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
For years, I have believed that we should understand that Iran is in a low-scale war, fought mostly by proxies, with the US (and the UK). And, of course, Israel.
And has been, since 1979.
The US has not been particularly good at such wars in the last century. One great handicap in such wars is our preference for quick solutions. (Early in the Vietnam War, when American voters were asked, in an open-ended question, what we should do, many said "win or get out", rather than giving a dove or hawk response.)
The arm chair generals and admirals here can probably think of strategies for that low-scale war, but it is, in my opinion, difficult to find a strategy that will keep the support of the American people for the years required, as divided as we are.
Remove dependence on oil. Then Iran becomes a small country with an interesting history. The current leadership are unable to create anything beyond a resource extraction economy. So economic collapse will end up with them being turfed out.
Have preached Death To The West for decades, that will become an unpopular pose.
Just buy an electric car and wait.
The eclipse of the petro states isn’t coming fast enough. As the nonsense at the climate summit starkly demonstrates. If anything, Saudi Arabia, with its outsize, money based influence, and sociopath leader, is more dangerous to the world than Iran.
Following the short exchanges on Dubai yesterday, an aspect that I find interesting is that the model 'cities of the future' they are trying to create in the Middle East are almost out of a 1950s USA techno-dreamland, and about a century out of date.
I don't think that's a viable post-oil future.
They can arguably create a future by exporting solar energy as one future pillar, but that will depend on Governance being resolved, intra-ME wars being surpassed, the Middle East no longer being a failed region, and an investment in distribution reminiscent of the establishment of telegraph networks in the late 19C.
Is that possible?
That’s a rather less important question than how much damage they can do in the meantime.
To answer your question, far as Saudi is concerned, the availability of almost free energy through solar ought to ensure they remain a fairly prosperous society, irrespective of other questions. Their influence ought though to be much reduced within a decade or two.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
Starmer should announce he’ll abolish the license fee, and fund the BBC from general taxation.
The issue there I think is that it reduces distance from political control, and makes it more of a political football - which is exactly what imo we DON'T want.
A license fee type setup and taxatiion funding are the main models in Europe, with license fees dominant in Western Europe. France is just replacing there's with a VAT levy - part of that may well just be normal Macron political-stuntery.
I think what I would like to see is the BBC grabbing hold of this debate, rather than it being defined by kneejerks from washed up attention-seeking politicians, such as the Prime Minister.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
Starmer should announce he’ll abolish the license fee, and fund the BBC from general taxation.
The issue there I think is that it reduces distance from political control, and makes it more of a political football - which is exactly what imo we DON'T want.
A license fee type setup and taxatiion funding are the main models in Europe, with license fees dominant in Western Europe. France is just replacing there's with a VAT levy - part of that may well just be normal Macron political-stuntery.
I think what I would like to see is the BBC grabbing hold of this debate, rather than it being defined by kneejerks from washed up attention-seeking politicians, such as the Prime Minister.
The Conservatives seem to be trashing every institution that makes the country a pleasant place to be.
A hostile environment for migrants is evolving into a hostile environment for everybody.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
Starmer should announce he’ll abolish the license fee, and fund the BBC from general taxation.
The issue there I think is that it reduces distance from political control, and makes it more of a political football - which is exactly what imo we DON'T want.
A license fee type setup and taxatiion funding are the main models in Europe, with license fees dominant in Western Europe. France is just replacing there's with a VAT levy - part of that may well just be normal Macron political-stuntery.
I think what I would like to see is the BBC grabbing hold of this debate, rather than it being defined by kneejerks from washed up attention-seeking politicians, such as the Prime Minister.
ONO. I committed heresy.
There's -> theirs.
("Effing AI keyboards", he lied through his teeth.)
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
Starmer should announce he’ll abolish the license fee, and fund the BBC from general taxation.
The issue there I think is that it reduces distance from political control, and makes it more of a political football - which is exactly what imo we DON'T want.
A license fee type setup and taxatiion funding are the main models in Europe, with license fees dominant in Western Europe. France is just replacing there's with a VAT levy - part of that may well just be normal Macron political-stuntery.
I think what I would like to see is the BBC grabbing hold of this debate, rather than it being defined by kneejerks from washed up attention-seeking politicians, such as the Prime Minister.
You mean more if a football than the Tories have recently rendered it ?
It is an interesting problem, as you’d still need to entrench multi year funding to at least reduce control by the government of the day - and at the same time come up with a better means of oversight.
The license fee model if surely dead, though, if it can be used, as just happened, to impose a big cut in funding after the settlement has been agreed. It’s seriously unpopular, and has just lost any advantages it might have in terms of independence from state control.
Note the BBC current leadership is largely the creation of the last decade of Tory government, so they’re unlikely to step up as you wish.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
Starmer should announce he’ll abolish the license fee, and fund the BBC from general taxation.
The issue there I think is that it reduces distance from political control, and makes it more of a political football - which is exactly what imo we DON'T want.
A license fee type setup and taxatiion funding are the main models in Europe, with license fees dominant in Western Europe. France is just replacing there's with a VAT levy - part of that may well just be normal Macron political-stuntery.
I think what I would like to see is the BBC grabbing hold of this debate, rather than it being defined by kneejerks from washed up attention-seeking politicians, such as the Prime Minister.
You mean more if a football than the Tories have recently rendered it ?
It is an interesting problem, as you’d still need to entrench multi year funding to at least reduce control by the government of the day - and at the same time come up with a better means of oversight.
The license fee model if surely dead, though, if it can be used, as just happened, to impose a big cut in funding after the settlement has been agreed. It’s seriously unpopular, and has just lost any advantages it might have in terms of independence from state control.
Note the BBC current leadership is largely the creation of the last decade of Tory government, so they’re unlikely to step up as you wish.
Perhaps, but the current Tory Government has climbed into the dustbin and is putting the lid down with them inside.
The BBC should be funded by a hypothecated tax on internet and social media giants. That is my surprisingly mild mannered, social democratic opinion of the morning
For years, I have believed that we should understand that Iran is in a low-scale war, fought mostly by proxies, with the US (and the UK). And, of course, Israel.
And has been, since 1979.
The US has not been particularly good at such wars in the last century. One great handicap in such wars is our preference for quick solutions. (Early in the Vietnam War, when American voters were asked, in an open-ended question, what we should do, many said "win or get out", rather than giving a dove or hawk response.)
The arm chair generals and admirals here can probably think of strategies for that low-scale war, but it is, in my opinion, difficult to find a strategy that will keep the support of the American people for the years required, as divided as we are.
Remove dependence on oil. Then Iran becomes a small country with an interesting history. The current leadership are unable to create anything beyond a resource extraction economy. So economic collapse will end up with them being turfed out.
Have preached Death To The West for decades, that will become an unpopular pose.
Just buy an electric car and wait.
The eclipse of the petro states isn’t coming fast enough. As the nonsense at the climate summit starkly demonstrates. If anything, Saudi Arabia, with its outsize, money based influence, and sociopath leader, is more dangerous to the world than Iran.
Following the short exchanges on Dubai yesterday, an aspect that I find interesting is that the model 'cities of the future' they are trying to create in the Middle East are almost out of a 1950s USA techno-dreamland, and about a century out of date.
I don't think that's a viable post-oil future.
They can arguably create a future by exporting solar energy as one future pillar, but that will depend on Governance being resolved, intra-ME wars being surpassed, the Middle East no longer being a failed region, and an investment in distribution reminiscent of the establishment of telegraph networks in the late 19C.
Is that possible?
IMHO some of what we are seeing in the region is the growing belief, *there*, in the end of oil.
The Saudis becoming very aggressive, overtures to Israel, the desperate reaction of Hamas, the frantic attempts to become hubs of… something - I think they all stem from a sense that Change Is Coming.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
It’s our money not the governments. Sunak is hardly being Scrooge, which is a tired Xmas cliche.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
I doubt it would appeal,to Cpt Mainwaring either. He’d be proud of the institution.
And it's for us as a country to decide what we wish to tax, and invest in our public realm and our future.
Rishi attacking the BBC has nothing to do with a cost of living crisis; when a few billion is needed to lubricate the base, it appears instantly. The BBC move is political, for appearance.
Personally I think a Prime Minister unable to be trusted is more concerning.
Scrooge is precisely the right comparison - a short-termist Government salami-slicing everything including basic services, and wasting untold amounts of resource along the way by failure to think beyond the end of their noses.
What happened to fixing social care, for example? Or transport expenditure?
FFS in the midst of the greatest security crisis for a generation, this lot have *cut* defence expenditure.
For years, I have believed that we should understand that Iran is in a low-scale war, fought mostly by proxies, with the US (and the UK). And, of course, Israel.
And has been, since 1979.
The US has not been particularly good at such wars in the last century. One great handicap in such wars is our preference for quick solutions. (Early in the Vietnam War, when American voters were asked, in an open-ended question, what we should do, many said "win or get out", rather than giving a dove or hawk response.)
The arm chair generals and admirals here can probably think of strategies for that low-scale war, but it is, in my opinion, difficult to find a strategy that will keep the support of the American people for the years required, as divided as we are.
Remove dependence on oil. Then Iran becomes a small country with an interesting history. The current leadership are unable to create anything beyond a resource extraction economy. So economic collapse will end up with them being turfed out.
Have preached Death To The West for decades, that will become an unpopular pose.
Just buy an electric car and wait.
The eclipse of the petro states isn’t coming fast enough. As the nonsense at the climate summit starkly demonstrates. If anything, Saudi Arabia, with its outsize, money based influence, and sociopath leader, is more dangerous to the world than Iran.
Following the short exchanges on Dubai yesterday, an aspect that I find interesting is that the model 'cities of the future' they are trying to create in the Middle East are almost out of a 1950s USA techno-dreamland, and about a century out of date.
I don't think that's a viable post-oil future.
They can arguably create a future by exporting solar energy as one future pillar, but that will depend on Governance being resolved, intra-ME wars being surpassed, the Middle East no longer being a failed region, and an investment in distribution reminiscent of the establishment of telegraph networks in the late 19C.
Is that possible?
IMHO some of what we are seeing in the region is the growing belief, *there*, in the end of oil.
The Saudis becoming very aggressive, overtures to Israel, the desperate reaction of Hamas, the frantic attempts to become hubs of… something - I think they all stem from a sense that Change Is Coming.
How do you assess the "linear city".
It seems a bit weird in that climate laying it out for maximum solar exposure.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
It’s our money not the governments. Sunak is hardly being Scrooge, which is a tired Xmas cliche.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
I doubt it would appeal,to Cpt Mainwaring either. He’d be proud of the institution.
And it's for us as a country to decide what we wish to tax, and invest in our public realm and our future.
Rishi attacking the BBC has nothing to do with a cost of living crisis; when a few billion is needed to lubricate the base, it appears instantly. The BBC move is political, for appearance.
Personally I think a Prime Minister unable to be trusted is more concerning.
Scrooge is precisely the right comparison - a short-termist Government salami-slicing everything including basic services, and wasting untold amounts of resource along the way by failure to think beyond the end of their noses.
What happened to fixing social care, for example? Or transport expenditure?
FFS in the midst of the greatest security crisis for a generation, this lot have *cut* defence expenditure.
It's all about salting the Earth for the incoming government now.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
It’s our money not the governments. Sunak is hardly being Scrooge, which is a tired Xmas cliche.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
No it’s not. It’s a piece of arbitrary sabotage.
The BBC haters will applaud it.
Emotive claptrap.
I applaud it, not because I hate the BBC but I fundamentally disagree with how it is funded and have done for many years. The license fee is not popular and does not have public support
It is also time non payment of the license fee was decriminalised because many vulnerable people are dragged through the courts and get criminal records for minor indiscretions even when they’ve agreed payment plans.
And thanks for the header, Tim. This sentence grabs me most:
The Great British Public mind a bit less about being asked to contribute to the common good of the country, then they do about being taxed.
I wonder if that balance is coming to an end, driven for example by the increasing number of Councils unable to balance their books, and therefore services having to be slashed.
In Nottinghamshire there was a recent consultation in potential Council Tax increases. The HIGHEST number the NCC were being allowed to consider by the Government was a 5% CUT in real terms. Anything better than a 5% cut would require a referendum.
Local Government requires significantly increased funding. It's another fine mess we are in:
And many more could follow down the effective bankruptcy route, with the Local Government Information Unit suggesting as many as one in 10 councils are already at risk. ... George Osborne decided to reduce that funding pot, known as the revenue support grant (or RSG) and replace it by allowing local authorities to keep more of the council tax and business rates they collected. ... In reality, the figures have rarely settled out, with the Institute for Fiscal Studies saying the poorest fifth of councils are getting about 10% below their needs, compared with the richest fifth getting about 15% above their requirements.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
It’s our money not the governments. Sunak is hardly being Scrooge, which is a tired Xmas cliche.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
I doubt it would appeal,to Cpt Mainwaring either. He’d be proud of the institution.
And it's for us as a country to decide what we wish to tax, and invest in our public realm and our future.
Rishi attacking the BBC has nothing to do with a cost of living crisis; when a few billion is needed to lubricate the base, it appears instantly. The BBC move is political, for appearance.
Personally I think a Prime Minister unable to be trusted is more concerning.
Scrooge is precisely the right comparison - a short-termist Government salami-slicing everything including basic services, and wasting untold amounts of resource along the way by failure to think beyond the end of their noses.
What happened to fixing social care, for example? Or transport expenditure?
FFS in the midst of the greatest security crisis for a generation, this lot have *cut* defence expenditure.
Indeed, what happened to those issues. They need resolving too. Doesn’t make this move on the license fee wrong.
The funding of the BBC is anachronistic in the modern era. It is time they looked at how the BBC will be funded in future.
Fund true public service Tv and the distribution network from General taxation and let the BBC raise funds how it chooses in a commercial model outside of a license fee.
For years, I have believed that we should understand that Iran is in a low-scale war, fought mostly by proxies, with the US (and the UK). And, of course, Israel.
And has been, since 1979.
The US has not been particularly good at such wars in the last century. One great handicap in such wars is our preference for quick solutions. (Early in the Vietnam War, when American voters were asked, in an open-ended question, what we should do, many said "win or get out", rather than giving a dove or hawk response.)
The arm chair generals and admirals here can probably think of strategies for that low-scale war, but it is, in my opinion, difficult to find a strategy that will keep the support of the American people for the years required, as divided as we are.
Remove dependence on oil. Then Iran becomes a small country with an interesting history. The current leadership are unable to create anything beyond a resource extraction economy. So economic collapse will end up with them being turfed out.
Have preached Death To The West for decades, that will become an unpopular pose.
Just buy an electric car and wait.
The eclipse of the petro states isn’t coming fast enough. As the nonsense at the climate summit starkly demonstrates. If anything, Saudi Arabia, with its outsize, money based influence, and sociopath leader, is more dangerous to the world than Iran.
Following the short exchanges on Dubai yesterday, an aspect that I find interesting is that the model 'cities of the future' they are trying to create in the Middle East are almost out of a 1950s USA techno-dreamland, and about a century out of date.
I don't think that's a viable post-oil future.
They can arguably create a future by exporting solar energy as one future pillar, but that will depend on Governance being resolved, intra-ME wars being surpassed, the Middle East no longer being a failed region, and an investment in distribution reminiscent of the establishment of telegraph networks in the late 19C.
Is that possible?
IMHO some of what we are seeing in the region is the growing belief, *there*, in the end of oil.
The Saudis becoming very aggressive, overtures to Israel, the desperate reaction of Hamas, the frantic attempts to become hubs of… something - I think they all stem from a sense that Change Is Coming.
How do you assess the "linear city".
It seems a bit weird in that climate laying it out for maximum solar exposure.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
It’s our money not the governments. Sunak is hardly being Scrooge, which is a tired Xmas cliche.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
I doubt it would appeal,to Cpt Mainwaring either. He’d be proud of the institution.
And it's for us as a country to decide what we wish to tax, and invest in our public realm and our future.
Rishi attacking the BBC has nothing to do with a cost of living crisis; when a few billion is needed to lubricate the base, it appears instantly. The BBC move is political, for appearance.
Personally I think a Prime Minister unable to be trusted is more concerning.
Scrooge is precisely the right comparison - a short-termist Government salami-slicing everything including basic services, and wasting untold amounts of resource along the way by failure to think beyond the end of their noses.
What happened to fixing social care, for example? Or transport expenditure?
FFS in the midst of the greatest security crisis for a generation, this lot have *cut* defence expenditure.
Indeed, what happened to those issues. They need resolving too. Doesn’t make this move on the license fee wrong.
The funding of the BBC is anachronistic in the modern era. It is time they looked at how the BBC will be funded in future.
Fund true public service Tv and the distribution network from General taxation and let the BBC raise funds how it chooses in a commercial model outside of a license fee.
The BBC (well, a part of it) fought desperately to prevent the switch to digital TV including encryption.
The sad bit is they could have boldly made a case to move to take control of world wide rights and sell a world wide “License”. With online distribution, every market is open. My guesstimate is that the income from the USA, alone would be of the order of the current license fee.
The final step would be free BBC for anyone in the U.K.
Brand BBC would be world wide. Reinvigorated with new money. And, for the first time, utterly independent.
Sadly, we lack the politicians and broadcasters with the vision to make such a future.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
It’s our money not the governments. Sunak is hardly being Scrooge, which is a tired Xmas cliche.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
I doubt it would appeal,to Cpt Mainwaring either. He’d be proud of the institution.
And it's for us as a country to decide what we wish to tax, and invest in our public realm and our future.
Rishi attacking the BBC has nothing to do with a cost of living crisis; when a few billion is needed to lubricate the base, it appears instantly. The BBC move is political, for appearance.
Personally I think a Prime Minister unable to be trusted is more concerning.
Scrooge is precisely the right comparison - a short-termist Government salami-slicing everything including basic services, and wasting untold amounts of resource along the way by failure to think beyond the end of their noses.
What happened to fixing social care, for example? Or transport expenditure?
FFS in the midst of the greatest security crisis for a generation, this lot have *cut* defence expenditure.
It's all about salting the Earth for the incoming government now.
So, here is where we have ended up. As PM, we have a geeky, somewhat affected, narrow minded, beta public schoolboy, whose petty, right wing political antennae are broadly formed by hedge fund trader orthodoxy.
It may be subtler, but apply Meek's epigoni theory to that description and tell me who could least follow Sunak as PM from those who have been mooted as Tory leaders? Who else most fits that description?
For the purposes of wordplay, I will answer this simple question pulling in Sunak's heritage and religious devoutness (in a neutral way), his chronic inexperience for the role of PM, and his apparent opposition to environmentalism.
Rishi Sunak, my friends, is governing as if he were Jain Cub Rish Smog.
And thanks for the header, Tim. This sentence grabs me most:
The Great British Public mind a bit less about being asked to contribute to the common good of the country, then they do about being taxed.
I wonder if that balance is coming to an end, driven for example by the increasing number of Councils unable to balance their books, and therefore services having to be slashed.
In Nottinghamshire there was a recent consultation in potential Council Tax increases. The HIGHEST number the NCC were being allowed to consider by the Government was a 5% CUT in real terms. Anything better than a 5% cut would require a referendum.
Local Government requires significantly increased funding. It's another fine mess we are in:
And many more could follow down the effective bankruptcy route, with the Local Government Information Unit suggesting as many as one in 10 councils are already at risk. ... George Osborne decided to reduce that funding pot, known as the revenue support grant (or RSG) and replace it by allowing local authorities to keep more of the council tax and business rates they collected. ... In reality, the figures have rarely settled out, with the Institute for Fiscal Studies saying the poorest fifth of councils are getting about 10% below their needs, compared with the richest fifth getting about 15% above their requirements.
After the budget last week I commented it was pointless cutting NI when council funding is so parlous and councils will be raising council tax by 5%. On top of which there will be Police, Fire and social care being increased as well. All that benefit will be eaten up in rising bills.
Going back to Blair the govt has pushed more and more onto local govt and not adequately funded it. It got appreciably worse under the Tories and does not look like improving anytime soon.
The unspoken glaringly evident elephant in the lead being that the Tories' client base, elderly (and especially asset-rich) pensioners, don't pay NI but do pay IT. During the period set out by the lead, the Tories proportion of the elderly vote has increased whilst among working age people it has continued to dwindle away.
If there is an awareness to rebalance towards a more equitable, and wealth-generation friendly, balance of taxation, then this is a good thing.
Indeed, it would make a lot of sense to significantly simplify our tax code by rolling Income Tax, National Insurance, Capital Gains Tax, and even Inheritance Tax, into one type of tax all levied on the same incomes at the same rate (with a single tax free allowance and higher rate bands as appropriate).
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
It’s our money not the governments. Sunak is hardly being Scrooge, which is a tired Xmas cliche.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
I doubt it would appeal,to Cpt Mainwaring either. He’d be proud of the institution.
And it's for us as a country to decide what we wish to tax, and invest in our public realm and our future.
Rishi attacking the BBC has nothing to do with a cost of living crisis; when a few billion is needed to lubricate the base, it appears instantly. The BBC move is political, for appearance.
Personally I think a Prime Minister unable to be trusted is more concerning.
Scrooge is precisely the right comparison - a short-termist Government salami-slicing everything including basic services, and wasting untold amounts of resource along the way by failure to think beyond the end of their noses.
What happened to fixing social care, for example? Or transport expenditure?
FFS in the midst of the greatest security crisis for a generation, this lot have *cut* defence expenditure.
It's all about salting the Earth for the incoming government now.
Hence my suggestion Starmer abolishes the license fee. Defuses the issue.
The unspoken glaringly evident elephant in the lead being that the Tories' client base, elderly (and especially asset-rich) pensioners, don't pay NI but do pay IT. During the period set out by the lead, the Tories proportion of the elderly vote has increased whilst among working age people it has continued to dwindle away.
If there is an awareness to rebalance towards a more equitable, and wealth-generation friendly, balance of taxation, then this is a good thing.
Indeed, it would make a lot of sense to significantly simplify our tax code by rolling Income Tax, National Insurance, Capital Gains Tax, and even Inheritance Tax, into one type of tax all levied on the same incomes at the same rate (with a single tax free allowance and higher rate bands as appropriate).
It’s pensioners too, who pay the BBC license fee. It’s been made clear here on several occasions that there are people who never watch the BBC and consequently don’t pay a license fee. For as long as I can get away with it anyway!
And good morning one, and all; I hope those affected by the snows of of the north Are able to get about now
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
It’s our money not the governments. Sunak is hardly being Scrooge, which is a tired Xmas cliche.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
I doubt it would appeal,to Cpt Mainwaring either. He’d be proud of the institution.
And it's for us as a country to decide what we wish to tax, and invest in our public realm and our future.
Rishi attacking the BBC has nothing to do with a cost of living crisis; when a few billion is needed to lubricate the base, it appears instantly. The BBC move is political, for appearance.
Personally I think a Prime Minister unable to be trusted is more concerning.
Scrooge is precisely the right comparison - a short-termist Government salami-slicing everything including basic services, and wasting untold amounts of resource along the way by failure to think beyond the end of their noses.
What happened to fixing social care, for example? Or transport expenditure?
FFS in the midst of the greatest security crisis for a generation, this lot have *cut* defence expenditure.
It's all about salting the Earth for the incoming government now.
Hence my suggestion Starmer abolishes the license fee. Defuses the issue.
The problem is that the BBC has tied their existence to the license fee. By believing in it so strongly they have made it true.
They live in terror of a move to an encrypted system.
And thanks for the header, Tim. This sentence grabs me most:
The Great British Public mind a bit less about being asked to contribute to the common good of the country, then they do about being taxed.
I wonder if that balance is coming to an end, driven for example by the increasing number of Councils unable to balance their books, and therefore services having to be slashed.
In Nottinghamshire there was a recent consultation in potential Council Tax increases. The HIGHEST number the NCC were being allowed to consider by the Government was a 5% CUT in real terms. Anything better than a 5% cut would require a referendum.
Local Government requires significantly increased funding. It's another fine mess we are in:
And many more could follow down the effective bankruptcy route, with the Local Government Information Unit suggesting as many as one in 10 councils are already at risk. ... George Osborne decided to reduce that funding pot, known as the revenue support grant (or RSG) and replace it by allowing local authorities to keep more of the council tax and business rates they collected. ... In reality, the figures have rarely settled out, with the Institute for Fiscal Studies saying the poorest fifth of councils are getting about 10% below their needs, compared with the richest fifth getting about 15% above their requirements.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
It’s our money not the governments. Sunak is hardly being Scrooge, which is a tired Xmas cliche.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
I doubt it would appeal,to Cpt Mainwaring either. He’d be proud of the institution.
And it's for us as a country to decide what we wish to tax, and invest in our public realm and our future.
Rishi attacking the BBC has nothing to do with a cost of living crisis; when a few billion is needed to lubricate the base, it appears instantly. The BBC move is political, for appearance.
Personally I think a Prime Minister unable to be trusted is more concerning.
Scrooge is precisely the right comparison - a short-termist Government salami-slicing everything including basic services, and wasting untold amounts of resource along the way by failure to think beyond the end of their noses.
What happened to fixing social care, for example? Or transport expenditure?
FFS in the midst of the greatest security crisis for a generation, this lot have *cut* defence expenditure.
Indeed, what happened to those issues. They need resolving too. Doesn’t make this move on the license fee wrong.
The funding of the BBC is anachronistic in the modern era. It is time they looked at how the BBC will be funded in future.
Fund true public service Tv and the distribution network from General taxation and let the BBC raise funds how it chooses in a commercial model outside of a license fee.
The BBC (well, a part of it) fought desperately to prevent the switch to digital TV including encryption.
The sad bit is they could have boldly made a case to move to take control of world wide rights and sell a world wide “License”. With online distribution, every market is open. My guesstimate is that the income from the USA, alone would be of the order of the current license fee.
The final step would be free BBC for anyone in the U.K.
Brand BBC would be world wide. Reinvigorated with new money. And, for the first time, utterly independent.
Sadly, we lack the politicians and broadcasters with the vision to make such a future.
It does seem pretty obvious that a BBC supported in the UK but free to rake it in abroad could become one of the world’s biggest media giants, with similar reach and dominance as Disney.
Indeed Disney is to American soft power what the Beeb is to British soft power.
Profitable globally, subsidised at home, the opportunities are endless. Of course that wouldn’t stop it being a political football, as Disney’s recent experience shows.
For years, I have believed that we should understand that Iran is in a low-scale war, fought mostly by proxies, with the US (and the UK). And, of course, Israel.
And has been, since 1979.
The US has not been particularly good at such wars in the last century. One great handicap in such wars is our preference for quick solutions. (Early in the Vietnam War, when American voters were asked, in an open-ended question, what we should do, many said "win or get out", rather than giving a dove or hawk response.)
The arm chair generals and admirals here can probably think of strategies for that low-scale war, but it is, in my opinion, difficult to find a strategy that will keep the support of the American people for the years required, as divided as we are.
Remove dependence on oil. Then Iran becomes a small country with an interesting history. The current leadership are unable to create anything beyond a resource extraction economy. So economic collapse will end up with them being turfed out.
Have preached Death To The West for decades, that will become an unpopular pose.
Just buy an electric car and wait.
The eclipse of the petro states isn’t coming fast enough. As the nonsense at the climate summit starkly demonstrates. If anything, Saudi Arabia, with its outsize, money based influence, and sociopath leader, is more dangerous to the world than Iran.
Following the short exchanges on Dubai yesterday, an aspect that I find interesting is that the model 'cities of the future' they are trying to create in the Middle East are almost out of a 1950s USA techno-dreamland, and about a century out of date.
I don't think that's a viable post-oil future.
They can arguably create a future by exporting solar energy as one future pillar, but that will depend on Governance being resolved, intra-ME wars being surpassed, the Middle East no longer being a failed region, and an investment in distribution reminiscent of the establishment of telegraph networks in the late 19C.
Is that possible?
IMHO some of what we are seeing in the region is the growing belief, *there*, in the end of oil.
The Saudis becoming very aggressive, overtures to Israel, the desperate reaction of Hamas, the frantic attempts to become hubs of… something - I think they all stem from a sense that Change Is Coming.
How do you assess the "linear city".
It seems a bit weird in that climate laying it out for maximum solar exposure.
I'm guessing that after buying Newcastle United the Saudis are going to base it on the Byker Wall.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/11/29/biden-inflation-soft-landing-economy-00128999 … Low unemployment, real wage growth and a fast-growing economy should be providing a boost to the public’s perception of Biden’s economic policies. It hasn’t, as countless polls demonstrate. But with inflation still climbing — albeit at a much slower rate than last year — affordability remains a top concern for voters. And that’s been enough to keep Biden’s polls on the economy deeply underwater...
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
It’s our money not the governments. Sunak is hardly being Scrooge, which is a tired Xmas cliche.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
I doubt it would appeal,to Cpt Mainwaring either. He’d be proud of the institution.
And it's for us as a country to decide what we wish to tax, and invest in our public realm and our future.
Rishi attacking the BBC has nothing to do with a cost of living crisis; when a few billion is needed to lubricate the base, it appears instantly. The BBC move is political, for appearance.
Personally I think a Prime Minister unable to be trusted is more concerning.
Scrooge is precisely the right comparison - a short-termist Government salami-slicing everything including basic services, and wasting untold amounts of resource along the way by failure to think beyond the end of their noses.
What happened to fixing social care, for example? Or transport expenditure?
FFS in the midst of the greatest security crisis for a generation, this lot have *cut* defence expenditure.
Indeed, what happened to those issues. They need resolving too. Doesn’t make this move on the license fee wrong.
The funding of the BBC is anachronistic in the modern era. It is time they looked at how the BBC will be funded in future.
Fund true public service Tv and the distribution network from General taxation and let the BBC raise funds how it chooses in a commercial model outside of a license fee.
The BBC (well, a part of it) fought desperately to prevent the switch to digital TV including encryption.
The sad bit is they could have boldly made a case to move to take control of world wide rights and sell a world wide “License”. With online distribution, every market is open. My guesstimate is that the income from the USA, alone would be of the order of the current license fee.
The final step would be free BBC for anyone in the U.K.
Brand BBC would be world wide. Reinvigorated with new money. And, for the first time, utterly independent.
Sadly, we lack the politicians and broadcasters with the vision to make such a future.
It does seem pretty obvious that a BBC supported in the UK but free to rake it in abroad could become one of the world’s biggest media giants, with similar reach and dominance as Disney.
Indeed Disney is to American soft power what the Beeb is to British soft power.
Profitable globally, subsidised at home, the opportunities are endless. Of course that wouldn’t stop it being a political football, as Disney’s recent experience shows.
Disney is not free or subsidised in the US, as you are suggesting the BBC could be. Disney+ is still operating at a substantial loss. I’m not certain the figures stack up here.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
It’s our money not the governments. Sunak is hardly being Scrooge, which is a tired Xmas cliche.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
I doubt it would appeal,to Cpt Mainwaring either. He’d be proud of the institution.
And it's for us as a country to decide what we wish to tax, and invest in our public realm and our future.
Rishi attacking the BBC has nothing to do with a cost of living crisis; when a few billion is needed to lubricate the base, it appears instantly. The BBC move is political, for appearance.
Personally I think a Prime Minister unable to be trusted is more concerning.
Scrooge is precisely the right comparison - a short-termist Government salami-slicing everything including basic services, and wasting untold amounts of resource along the way by failure to think beyond the end of their noses.
What happened to fixing social care, for example? Or transport expenditure?
FFS in the midst of the greatest security crisis for a generation, this lot have *cut* defence expenditure.
Indeed, what happened to those issues. They need resolving too. Doesn’t make this move on the license fee wrong.
The funding of the BBC is anachronistic in the modern era. It is time they looked at how the BBC will be funded in future.
Fund true public service Tv and the distribution network from General taxation and let the BBC raise funds how it chooses in a commercial model outside of a license fee.
If someone 'hates' the BBC, then they should argue that the funding model should remain exactly as it is, as if the world has not changed in the last century. Because that is a cast-iron way of killing the BBC.
If someone 'loves' the BBC, then they should argue that the funding model needs to evolve to face the challenges formed by the Internet and the orders of magnitude more media available to the public.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
It’s our money not the governments. Sunak is hardly being Scrooge, which is a tired Xmas cliche.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
I doubt it would appeal,to Cpt Mainwaring either. He’d be proud of the institution.
And it's for us as a country to decide what we wish to tax, and invest in our public realm and our future.
Rishi attacking the BBC has nothing to do with a cost of living crisis; when a few billion is needed to lubricate the base, it appears instantly. The BBC move is political, for appearance.
Personally I think a Prime Minister unable to be trusted is more concerning.
Scrooge is precisely the right comparison - a short-termist Government salami-slicing everything including basic services, and wasting untold amounts of resource along the way by failure to think beyond the end of their noses.
What happened to fixing social care, for example? Or transport expenditure?
FFS in the midst of the greatest security crisis for a generation, this lot have *cut* defence expenditure.
Indeed, what happened to those issues. They need resolving too. Doesn’t make this move on the license fee wrong.
The funding of the BBC is anachronistic in the modern era. It is time they looked at how the BBC will be funded in future.
Fund true public service Tv and the distribution network from General taxation and let the BBC raise funds how it chooses in a commercial model outside of a license fee.
If someone 'hates' the BBC, then they should argue that the funding model should remain exactly as it is, as if the world has not changed in the last century. Because that is a cast-iron way of killing the BBC.
If someone 'loves' the BBC, then they should argue that the funding model needs to evolve to face the challenges formed by the Internet and the orders of magnitude more media available to the public.
Absolutely, right; nothing of this sort lasts forever!
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
It’s our money not the governments. Sunak is hardly being Scrooge, which is a tired Xmas cliche.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
I doubt it would appeal,to Cpt Mainwaring either. He’d be proud of the institution.
And it's for us as a country to decide what we wish to tax, and invest in our public realm and our future.
Rishi attacking the BBC has nothing to do with a cost of living crisis; when a few billion is needed to lubricate the base, it appears instantly. The BBC move is political, for appearance.
Personally I think a Prime Minister unable to be trusted is more concerning.
Scrooge is precisely the right comparison - a short-termist Government salami-slicing everything including basic services, and wasting untold amounts of resource along the way by failure to think beyond the end of their noses.
What happened to fixing social care, for example? Or transport expenditure?
FFS in the midst of the greatest security crisis for a generation, this lot have *cut* defence expenditure.
Indeed, what happened to those issues. They need resolving too. Doesn’t make this move on the license fee wrong.
The funding of the BBC is anachronistic in the modern era. It is time they looked at how the BBC will be funded in future.
Fund true public service Tv and the distribution network from General taxation and let the BBC raise funds how it chooses in a commercial model outside of a license fee.
If someone 'hates' the BBC, then they should argue that the funding model should remain exactly as it is, as if the world has not changed in the last century. Because that is a cast-iron way of killing the BBC.
If someone 'loves' the BBC, then they should argue that the funding model needs to evolve to face the challenges formed by the Internet and the orders of magnitude more media available to the public.
But evolve to what? People often say the BBC should be like Netflix, but they don’t make a profit and are increasing fees.
In Nottinghamshire there was a recent consultation in potential Council Tax increases. The HIGHEST number the NCC were being allowed to consider by the Government was a 5% CUT in real terms. Anything better than a 5% cut would require a referendum.
I haven't seen any evidence of this consultation. For Nottinghamshire specifically though I'd like to ask why we are higher than any surrounding county or unitary authority (Rotherham, Doncaster, Lincolnshire, Leicestershire, Derbyshire etc) - though admittedly at least we're in a better place than Nottingham !
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/11/29/biden-inflation-soft-landing-economy-00128999 … Low unemployment, real wage growth and a fast-growing economy should be providing a boost to the public’s perception of Biden’s economic policies. It hasn’t, as countless polls demonstrate. But with inflation still climbing — albeit at a much slower rate than last year — affordability remains a top concern for voters. And that’s been enough to keep Biden’s polls on the economy deeply underwater...
Is inflation in the US going up ? I thought it had dropped to around 3%. I note the meaning of "inflation" has been consistently mangled in US media parlance 'inflation going up by 7%' instead of the correct 'to 7%' though so perhaps this is an example of that.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
It’s our money not the governments. Sunak is hardly being Scrooge, which is a tired Xmas cliche.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
I doubt it would appeal,to Cpt Mainwaring either. He’d be proud of the institution.
And it's for us as a country to decide what we wish to tax, and invest in our public realm and our future.
Rishi attacking the BBC has nothing to do with a cost of living crisis; when a few billion is needed to lubricate the base, it appears instantly. The BBC move is political, for appearance.
Personally I think a Prime Minister unable to be trusted is more concerning.
Scrooge is precisely the right comparison - a short-termist Government salami-slicing everything including basic services, and wasting untold amounts of resource along the way by failure to think beyond the end of their noses.
What happened to fixing social care, for example? Or transport expenditure?
FFS in the midst of the greatest security crisis for a generation, this lot have *cut* defence expenditure.
Indeed, what happened to those issues. They need resolving too. Doesn’t make this move on the license fee wrong.
The funding of the BBC is anachronistic in the modern era. It is time they looked at how the BBC will be funded in future.
Fund true public service Tv and the distribution network from General taxation and let the BBC raise funds how it chooses in a commercial model outside of a license fee.
The BBC (well, a part of it) fought desperately to prevent the switch to digital TV including encryption.
The sad bit is they could have boldly made a case to move to take control of world wide rights and sell a world wide “License”. With online distribution, every market is open. My guesstimate is that the income from the USA, alone would be of the order of the current license fee.
The final step would be free BBC for anyone in the U.K.
Brand BBC would be world wide. Reinvigorated with new money. And, for the first time, utterly independent.
Sadly, we lack the politicians and broadcasters with the vision to make such a future.
It does seem pretty obvious that a BBC supported in the UK but free to rake it in abroad could become one of the world’s biggest media giants, with similar reach and dominance as Disney.
Indeed Disney is to American soft power what the Beeb is to British soft power.
Profitable globally, subsidised at home, the opportunities are endless. Of course that wouldn’t stop it being a political football, as Disney’s recent experience shows.
Disney is not free or subsidised in the US, as you are suggesting the BBC could be. Disney+ is still operating at a substantial loss. I’m not certain the figures stack up here.
Even if you kept the domestic cost of the BBC the same as now, with no subsidy, it would do far better if it were allowed freedom to be an open subscription service globally, rather than in most cases being limited to licensing its content (and for example not being able to make normal BBC iPlayer available for a fee to Brits abroad). That extra income could then either go into subsidising the licence fee, or investing in more programming.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
It’s our money not the governments. Sunak is hardly being Scrooge, which is a tired Xmas cliche.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
I doubt it would appeal,to Cpt Mainwaring either. He’d be proud of the institution.
And it's for us as a country to decide what we wish to tax, and invest in our public realm and our future.
Rishi attacking the BBC has nothing to do with a cost of living crisis; when a few billion is needed to lubricate the base, it appears instantly. The BBC move is political, for appearance.
Personally I think a Prime Minister unable to be trusted is more concerning.
Scrooge is precisely the right comparison - a short-termist Government salami-slicing everything including basic services, and wasting untold amounts of resource along the way by failure to think beyond the end of their noses.
What happened to fixing social care, for example? Or transport expenditure?
FFS in the midst of the greatest security crisis for a generation, this lot have *cut* defence expenditure.
Indeed, what happened to those issues. They need resolving too. Doesn’t make this move on the license fee wrong.
The funding of the BBC is anachronistic in the modern era. It is time they looked at how the BBC will be funded in future.
Fund true public service Tv and the distribution network from General taxation and let the BBC raise funds how it chooses in a commercial model outside of a license fee.
If someone 'hates' the BBC, then they should argue that the funding model should remain exactly as it is, as if the world has not changed in the last century. Because that is a cast-iron way of killing the BBC.
If someone 'loves' the BBC, then they should argue that the funding model needs to evolve to face the challenges formed by the Internet and the orders of magnitude more media available to the public.
But evolve to what? People often say the BBC should be like Netflix, but they don’t make a profit and are increasing fees.
I don't know, and there are problems with many proposed solutions. But I believe that the licence fee model as it currently stands has not been fit for purpose for a decade or more.
In a time of stagnant and declining productivity, and of full employment there is a case for putting up Employers NI.
This would encourage capital investment in order to reduce labour costs, and discourage immigration by increasing UK unemployment.
Or we could make labour markets less flexible by increasing employment rights to much the same effect.
You say sticks, I say carrots such as allowing 150% of investment to be set off against tax. But one way or another we need to increase the attractiveness of investment to that of additional labour. It is possible that a huge AI driven productivity bonus could achieve this.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/11/29/biden-inflation-soft-landing-economy-00128999 … Low unemployment, real wage growth and a fast-growing economy should be providing a boost to the public’s perception of Biden’s economic policies. It hasn’t, as countless polls demonstrate. But with inflation still climbing — albeit at a much slower rate than last year — affordability remains a top concern for voters. And that’s been enough to keep Biden’s polls on the economy deeply underwater...
What are they talking about, US inflation isn't climbing? Do they mean prices are still climbing, ie inflation still exists?
He needs to lean back, manspread and dominate the space with his genitals. Like when Carra is on Sky Sports.
I have to admit I thought that photo was some kind of cruel photo montage when I first saw it. Politics is a cruel and brutal business but on some primitive basis it is essentially a tribe of chimp-like hominems choosing an alpha male to lead us into combat against the neighbouring tribe. Someone who sits like that is not going to be chosen.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
It’s our money not the governments. Sunak is hardly being Scrooge, which is a tired Xmas cliche.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
I doubt it would appeal,to Cpt Mainwaring either. He’d be proud of the institution.
And it's for us as a country to decide what we wish to tax, and invest in our public realm and our future.
Rishi attacking the BBC has nothing to do with a cost of living crisis; when a few billion is needed to lubricate the base, it appears instantly. The BBC move is political, for appearance.
Personally I think a Prime Minister unable to be trusted is more concerning.
Scrooge is precisely the right comparison - a short-termist Government salami-slicing everything including basic services, and wasting untold amounts of resource along the way by failure to think beyond the end of their noses.
What happened to fixing social care, for example? Or transport expenditure?
FFS in the midst of the greatest security crisis for a generation, this lot have *cut* defence expenditure.
Indeed, what happened to those issues. They need resolving too. Doesn’t make this move on the license fee wrong.
The funding of the BBC is anachronistic in the modern era. It is time they looked at how the BBC will be funded in future.
Fund true public service Tv and the distribution network from General taxation and let the BBC raise funds how it chooses in a commercial model outside of a license fee.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
It’s our money not the governments. Sunak is hardly being Scrooge, which is a tired Xmas cliche.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
I doubt it would appeal,to Cpt Mainwaring either. He’d be proud of the institution.
And it's for us as a country to decide what we wish to tax, and invest in our public realm and our future.
Rishi attacking the BBC has nothing to do with a cost of living crisis; when a few billion is needed to lubricate the base, it appears instantly. The BBC move is political, for appearance.
Personally I think a Prime Minister unable to be trusted is more concerning.
Scrooge is precisely the right comparison - a short-termist Government salami-slicing everything including basic services, and wasting untold amounts of resource along the way by failure to think beyond the end of their noses.
What happened to fixing social care, for example? Or transport expenditure?
FFS in the midst of the greatest security crisis for a generation, this lot have *cut* defence expenditure.
Indeed, what happened to those issues. They need resolving too. Doesn’t make this move on the license fee wrong.
The funding of the BBC is anachronistic in the modern era. It is time they looked at how the BBC will be funded in future.
Fund true public service Tv and the distribution network from General taxation and let the BBC raise funds how it chooses in a commercial model outside of a license fee.
If someone 'hates' the BBC, then they should argue that the funding model should remain exactly as it is, as if the world has not changed in the last century. Because that is a cast-iron way of killing the BBC.
If someone 'loves' the BBC, then they should argue that the funding model needs to evolve to face the challenges formed by the Internet and the orders of magnitude more media available to the public.
Absolutely, right; nothing of this sort lasts forever!
The license fee is an accident of technological history.
The plan was to replace it with a form of encryption in the early 60s. But the technology of the day wasn’t up to the job.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/11/29/biden-inflation-soft-landing-economy-00128999 … Low unemployment, real wage growth and a fast-growing economy should be providing a boost to the public’s perception of Biden’s economic policies. It hasn’t, as countless polls demonstrate. But with inflation still climbing — albeit at a much slower rate than last year — affordability remains a top concern for voters. And that’s been enough to keep Biden’s polls on the economy deeply underwater...
What are they talking about, US inflation isn't climbing? Do they mean prices are still climbing, ie inflation still exists?
As an economist I am constantly amazed at how sloppily the economy is talked about by political journalists. If you don't know the difference between the price level and inflation, don't talk about the economy.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/11/29/biden-inflation-soft-landing-economy-00128999 … Low unemployment, real wage growth and a fast-growing economy should be providing a boost to the public’s perception of Biden’s economic policies. It hasn’t, as countless polls demonstrate. But with inflation still climbing — albeit at a much slower rate than last year — affordability remains a top concern for voters. And that’s been enough to keep Biden’s polls on the economy deeply underwater...
What are they talking about, US inflation isn't climbing? Do they mean prices are still climbing, ie inflation still exists?
His economic record is actually something to be seriously proud of, way better than his predecessors. The media in the US produce a very distorted picture to the low information recipient and that piece is as good an example as any.
Yes the BBC licence fee is anachronistic. It should be a choice that does not prevent you from watching alternative content.
I would favour making the BBC free of use and funded through general taxation for national events and educational content (there is a case for news, potentially) and the rest can go on a subscription model.
On topic, I agree with Truss (and rather more importantly, Hunt). We need to tax all income the same whether it is earned or not. A brave Labour government might go further and decide income from capital assets or pensions should perhaps bear more tax than earned income but I don't see that happening any time soon.
The better course would be to adopt a Lawsonian approach to tax reform and simply incorporate NI into IT but, since that has proved too difficult, a series of steps like the Autumn statement should eventually get us there.
In Nottinghamshire there was a recent consultation in potential Council Tax increases. The HIGHEST number the NCC were being allowed to consider by the Government was a 5% CUT in real terms. Anything better than a 5% cut would require a referendum.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/11/29/biden-inflation-soft-landing-economy-00128999 … Low unemployment, real wage growth and a fast-growing economy should be providing a boost to the public’s perception of Biden’s economic policies. It hasn’t, as countless polls demonstrate. But with inflation still climbing — albeit at a much slower rate than last year — affordability remains a top concern for voters. And that’s been enough to keep Biden’s polls on the economy deeply underwater...
Is inflation in the US going up ? I thought it had dropped to around 3%. I note the meaning of "inflation" has been consistently mangled in US media parlance 'inflation going up by 7%' instead of the correct 'to 7%' though so perhaps this is an example of that.
As much as anything, I think it’s the US media, liberal and conservative alike, being consistently critical in their coverage.
Trump actually gets better coverage from liberal media - in that they basically repeat every outrageous statement verbatim as a headline. He plays that to great advantage.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
It’s our money not the governments. Sunak is hardly being Scrooge, which is a tired Xmas cliche.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
I doubt it would appeal,to Cpt Mainwaring either. He’d be proud of the institution.
And it's for us as a country to decide what we wish to tax, and invest in our public realm and our future.
Rishi attacking the BBC has nothing to do with a cost of living crisis; when a few billion is needed to lubricate the base, it appears instantly. The BBC move is political, for appearance.
Personally I think a Prime Minister unable to be trusted is more concerning.
Scrooge is precisely the right comparison - a short-termist Government salami-slicing everything including basic services, and wasting untold amounts of resource along the way by failure to think beyond the end of their noses.
What happened to fixing social care, for example? Or transport expenditure?
FFS in the midst of the greatest security crisis for a generation, this lot have *cut* defence expenditure.
Indeed, what happened to those issues. They need resolving too. Doesn’t make this move on the license fee wrong.
The funding of the BBC is anachronistic in the modern era. It is time they looked at how the BBC will be funded in future.
Fund true public service Tv and the distribution network from General taxation and let the BBC raise funds how it chooses in a commercial model outside of a license fee.
If someone 'hates' the BBC, then they should argue that the funding model should remain exactly as it is, as if the world has not changed in the last century. Because that is a cast-iron way of killing the BBC.
If someone 'loves' the BBC, then they should argue that the funding model needs to evolve to face the challenges formed by the Internet and the orders of magnitude more media available to the public.
But evolve to what? People often say the BBC should be like Netflix, but they don’t make a profit and are increasing fees.
What people are suggesting is taking the BBC truly worldwide. iPlayer for the Planet.
Netflix has a problem with content - the big media giants have slowed giving them stuff. They are all trying to stream, themselves. So Netflix is trying its hand at content - and making some very expensive rubbish.
The BBC has much of the content it needs for this - it needs the worldwide rights, mainly.
Rolling out (yet again) the TOPPING BBC FUNDING MODEL (all rights reserved).
Compartmentalise the BBC into different divisions:
News & current affairs Documentary Radio Drama "Light Entertainment" Children's Sport Etc
Charge a monthly subscription for each of them. Say £2-6/month. And of course have an "AYCE" subscription which would be in price not unadjacent to the value of the current license fee. Then people could choose what they wanted and if they wanted to pay for it. Job done.
He needs to lean back, manspread and dominate the space with his genitals. Like when Carra is on Sky Sports.
I have to admit I thought that photo was some kind of cruel photo montage when I first saw it. Politics is a cruel and brutal business but on some primitive basis it is essentially a tribe of chimp-like hominems choosing an alpha male to lead us into combat against the neighbouring tribe. Someone who sits like that is not going to be chosen.
I think the prosecution of supposed TV license fraudsters is a major risk to the BBC.
Has the whiff of the Post Office scandal about it. Vulnerable people, in dire financial straits, signed off en masse by magistrates*, isolated legal representation.
Rolling out (yet again) the TOPPING BBC FUNDING MODEL (all rights reserved).
Compartmentalise the BBC into different divisions:
News & current affairs Documentary Radio Drama "Light Entertainment" Children's Sport Etc
Charge a monthly subscription for each of them. Say £2-6/month. And of course have an "AYCE" subscription which would be in price not unadjacent to the value of the current license fee. Then people could choose what they wanted and if they wanted to pay for it. Job done.
If it's broadcast how do you restrict viewing to fee-payers?
I think the prosecution of supposed TV license fraudsters is a major risk to the BBC.
Has the whiff of the Post Office scandal about it. Vulnerable people, in dire financial straits, signed off en masse by magistrates*, isolated legal representation.
* Is it happening in Scotland too?
Prosecuting people for not having a TV licence is a major part of the JP court roll, a much larger section since prosecuting most RT offences has gone out of fashion.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
It’s our money not the governments. Sunak is hardly being Scrooge, which is a tired Xmas cliche.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
I doubt it would appeal,to Cpt Mainwaring either. He’d be proud of the institution.
And it's for us as a country to decide what we wish to tax, and invest in our public realm and our future.
Rishi attacking the BBC has nothing to do with a cost of living crisis; when a few billion is needed to lubricate the base, it appears instantly. The BBC move is political, for appearance.
Personally I think a Prime Minister unable to be trusted is more concerning.
Scrooge is precisely the right comparison - a short-termist Government salami-slicing everything including basic services, and wasting untold amounts of resource along the way by failure to think beyond the end of their noses.
What happened to fixing social care, for example? Or transport expenditure?
FFS in the midst of the greatest security crisis for a generation, this lot have *cut* defence expenditure.
Indeed, what happened to those issues. They need resolving too. Doesn’t make this move on the license fee wrong.
The funding of the BBC is anachronistic in the modern era. It is time they looked at how the BBC will be funded in future.
Fund true public service Tv and the distribution network from General taxation and let the BBC raise funds how it chooses in a commercial model outside of a license fee.
If someone 'hates' the BBC, then they should argue that the funding model should remain exactly as it is, as if the world has not changed in the last century. Because that is a cast-iron way of killing the BBC.
If someone 'loves' the BBC, then they should argue that the funding model needs to evolve to face the challenges formed by the Internet and the orders of magnitude more media available to the public.
But evolve to what? People often say the BBC should be like Netflix, but they don’t make a profit and are increasing fees.
What people are suggesting is taking the BBC truly worldwide. iPlayer for the Planet.
Netflix has a problem with content - the big media giants have slowed giving them stuff. They are all trying to stream, themselves. So Netflix is trying its hand at content - and making some very expensive rubbish.
The BBC has much of the content it needs for this - it needs the worldwide rights, mainly.
It usually doesn’t have those rights. That’s partly because prior Government interference shifted how the BBC made programmes away from in-house to buying from external production companies.
Rolling out (yet again) the TOPPING BBC FUNDING MODEL (all rights reserved).
Compartmentalise the BBC into different divisions:
News & current affairs Documentary Radio Drama "Light Entertainment" Children's Sport Etc
Charge a monthly subscription for each of them. Say £2-6/month. And of course have an "AYCE" subscription which would be in price not unadjacent to the value of the current license fee. Then people could choose what they wanted and if they wanted to pay for it. Job done.
If it's broadcast how do you restrict viewing to fee-payers?
Not sure. Login? There are plenty of subscription services around I'm sure it's doable.
Rolling out (yet again) the TOPPING BBC FUNDING MODEL (all rights reserved).
Compartmentalise the BBC into different divisions:
News & current affairs Documentary Radio Drama "Light Entertainment" Children's Sport Etc
Charge a monthly subscription for each of them. Say £2-6/month. And of course have an "AYCE" subscription which would be in price not unadjacent to the value of the current license fee. Then people could choose what they wanted and if they wanted to pay for it. Job done.
The BBC’s income would collapse under this model. It wouldn’t be able to make what it currently makes.
I can’t believe Rishi Sunak’s superb reshuffle has resulted in “Lord Cameron” instantly becoming one of the most unpopular members of the Cabinet
A lesson for political birdwatchers, I think, and a warning to Labour. Lots of political people rate Cameron as a decent centrist figure and reasonably competent (many also do not - my own view is that he had a particular leadership style and made managing the Tory party look relatively easy, until it all blew up in his face, with the blowing up being somewhat self-inflicted). The general public just see a has-been who they probably blame for the current mess.
It might be that Lord Cameron can successfully advocate for sensible positions, and contribute to a modicum of good governance in the remaining time before the Sunak Ministry is defenestrated by the electorate, but even if he does he probably won't get much credit from electorate. The public might like the potential benefits of a dose of Cameronism in this Government, but they won't appreciate Cameron himself.
In a similar vein, I think Starmer recognises that the public might enjoy a touch of Blairism but no one wants him to bring Blair back into Government.
Rolling out (yet again) the TOPPING BBC FUNDING MODEL (all rights reserved).
Compartmentalise the BBC into different divisions:
News & current affairs Documentary Radio Drama "Light Entertainment" Children's Sport Etc
Charge a monthly subscription for each of them. Say £2-6/month. And of course have an "AYCE" subscription which would be in price not unadjacent to the value of the current license fee. Then people could choose what they wanted and if they wanted to pay for it. Job done.
If it's broadcast how do you restrict viewing to fee-payers?
Not sure. Login? There are plenty of subscription services around I'm sure it's doable.
And none of them are making money yet. They’re all surviving on shareholder investment so far.
I think the prosecution of supposed TV license fraudsters is a major risk to the BBC.
Has the whiff of the Post Office scandal about it. Vulnerable people, in dire financial straits, signed off en masse by magistrates*, isolated legal representation.
* Is it happening in Scotland too?
They should make it a civil matter, not a criminal one. No TV license?, that will be 100 points off your credit rating. Simples.
Rolling out (yet again) the TOPPING BBC FUNDING MODEL (all rights reserved).
Compartmentalise the BBC into different divisions:
News & current affairs Documentary Radio Drama "Light Entertainment" Children's Sport Etc
Charge a monthly subscription for each of them. Say £2-6/month. And of course have an "AYCE" subscription which would be in price not unadjacent to the value of the current license fee. Then people could choose what they wanted and if they wanted to pay for it. Job done.
The BBC’s income would collapse under this model. It wouldn’t be able to make what it currently makes.
Fine. Why should people be taxed for something they don't use. I mean yes hospitals if they are well or roads if they don't drive. But a broadcast media company? Nope. That is crazy to force people on pain of prosecution to consume it.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
It’s our money not the governments. Sunak is hardly being Scrooge, which is a tired Xmas cliche.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
I doubt it would appeal,to Cpt Mainwaring either. He’d be proud of the institution.
And it's for us as a country to decide what we wish to tax, and invest in our public realm and our future.
Rishi attacking the BBC has nothing to do with a cost of living crisis; when a few billion is needed to lubricate the base, it appears instantly. The BBC move is political, for appearance.
Personally I think a Prime Minister unable to be trusted is more concerning.
Scrooge is precisely the right comparison - a short-termist Government salami-slicing everything including basic services, and wasting untold amounts of resource along the way by failure to think beyond the end of their noses.
What happened to fixing social care, for example? Or transport expenditure?
FFS in the midst of the greatest security crisis for a generation, this lot have *cut* defence expenditure.
It's all about salting the Earth for the incoming government now.
Hence my suggestion Starmer abolishes the license fee. Defuses the issue.
Rolling out (yet again) the TOPPING BBC FUNDING MODEL (all rights reserved).
Compartmentalise the BBC into different divisions:
News & current affairs Documentary Radio Drama "Light Entertainment" Children's Sport Etc
Charge a monthly subscription for each of them. Say £2-6/month. And of course have an "AYCE" subscription which would be in price not unadjacent to the value of the current license fee. Then people could choose what they wanted and if they wanted to pay for it. Job done.
If it's broadcast how do you restrict viewing to fee-payers?
Not sure. Login? There are plenty of subscription services around I'm sure it's doable.
And none of them are making money yet. They’re all surviving on shareholder investment so far.
Rolling out (yet again) the TOPPING BBC FUNDING MODEL (all rights reserved).
Compartmentalise the BBC into different divisions:
News & current affairs Documentary Radio Drama "Light Entertainment" Children's Sport Etc
Charge a monthly subscription for each of them. Say £2-6/month. And of course have an "AYCE" subscription which would be in price not unadjacent to the value of the current license fee. Then people could choose what they wanted and if they wanted to pay for it. Job done.
The BBC’s income would collapse under this model. It wouldn’t be able to make what it currently makes.
Fine. Why should people be taxed for something they don't use. I mean yes hospitals if they are well or roads if they don't drive. But a broadcast media company? Nope. That is crazy to force people on pain of prosecution to consume it.
Fair enough, if you take that view. But be very clear that your plan would mean the end of the BBC as we know it.
I think the BBC is a hugely successful UK export. I agree with other people there. I think when you have something that’s very successful, it’s a bad idea to destroy it.
I think the prosecution of supposed TV license fraudsters is a major risk to the BBC.
Has the whiff of the Post Office scandal about it. Vulnerable people, in dire financial straits, signed off en masse by magistrates*, isolated legal representation.
* Is it happening in Scotland too?
Similar to what Cyclefree was saying re the PO the other day: the BBC and Capita don't have it theor own way in Scotland. Unlike in England, the PF does the deciding and prosecuting. So it goes for other options than prosecution, presumably cos there are more important things to use limited court time and resources on.
Rolling out (yet again) the TOPPING BBC FUNDING MODEL (all rights reserved).
Compartmentalise the BBC into different divisions:
News & current affairs Documentary Radio Drama "Light Entertainment" Children's Sport Etc
Charge a monthly subscription for each of them. Say £2-6/month. And of course have an "AYCE" subscription which would be in price not unadjacent to the value of the current license fee. Then people could choose what they wanted and if they wanted to pay for it. Job done.
The BBC’s income would collapse under this model. It wouldn’t be able to make what it currently makes.
Fine. Why should people be taxed for something they don't use. I mean yes hospitals if they are well or roads if they don't drive. But a broadcast media company? Nope. That is crazy to force people on pain of prosecution to consume it.
If we have to have a license fee not having it should be decriminalised.
Do we really want to clog the courts up with needless prosecuting of the most vulnerable ?
I can’t believe Rishi Sunak’s superb reshuffle has resulted in “Lord Cameron” instantly becoming one of the most unpopular members of the Cabinet
A lesson for political birdwatchers, I think, and a warning to Labour. Lots of political people rate Cameron as a decent centrist figure and reasonably competent (many also do not - my own view is that he had a particular leadership style and made managing the Tory party look relatively easy, until it all blew up in his face, with the blowing up being somewhat self-inflicted). The general public just see a has-been who they probably blame for the current mess.
It might be that Lord Cameron can successfully advocate for sensible positions, and contribute to a modicum of good governance in the remaining time before the Sunak Ministry is defenestrated by the electorate, but even if he does he probably won't get much credit from electorate. The public might like the potential benefits of a dose of Cameronism in this Government, but they won't appreciate Cameron himself.
In a similar vein, I think Starmer recognises that the public might enjoy a touch of Blairism but no one wants him to bring Blair back into Government.
I think the prosecution of supposed TV license fraudsters is a major risk to the BBC.
Has the whiff of the Post Office scandal about it. Vulnerable people, in dire financial straits, signed off en masse by magistrates*, isolated legal representation.
* Is it happening in Scotland too?
Similar to what Cyclefree was saying re the PO the other day: the BBC and Capita don't have it theor own way in Scotland. Unlike in England, the PF does the deciding and prosecuting. So it goes for other options than prosecution, presumably cos there are more important things to use limited court time and resources on.
Edit: but see DAvidL's post which I have now seen. Confused ...
That does not accord with the experience of a good friend of mine who sits as a JP in Edinburgh. The alternative to prosecution is normally a fixed penalty. If you don't pay the fixed penalty you are prosecuted. I think these numbers are somewhat misleading.
Edit my guess is that they show the number of people offered a fixed penalty first.
Rolling out (yet again) the TOPPING BBC FUNDING MODEL (all rights reserved).
Compartmentalise the BBC into different divisions:
News & current affairs Documentary Radio Drama "Light Entertainment" Children's Sport Etc
Charge a monthly subscription for each of them. Say £2-6/month. And of course have an "AYCE" subscription which would be in price not unadjacent to the value of the current license fee. Then people could choose what they wanted and if they wanted to pay for it. Job done.
The BBC’s income would collapse under this model. It wouldn’t be able to make what it currently makes.
Fine. Why should people be taxed for something they don't use. I mean yes hospitals if they are well or roads if they don't drive. But a broadcast media company? Nope. That is crazy to force people on pain of prosecution to consume it.
Fair enough, if you take that view. But be very clear that your plan would mean the end of the BBC as we know it.
I think the BBC is a hugely successful UK export. I agree with other people there. I think when you have something that’s very successful, it’s a bad idea to destroy it.
It is OK. It projects "our values" abroad (how colonially quaint, as though people in sub-Saharan Africa need "our values"). But it can't be hugely successful otherwise or we wouldn't be having this discussion wrt funding models.
On topic, I agree with Truss (and rather more importantly, Hunt). We need to tax all income the same whether it is earned or not. A brave Labour government might go further and decide income from capital assets or pensions should perhaps bear more tax than earned income but I don't see that happening any time soon.
The better course would be to adopt a Lawsonian approach to tax reform and simply incorporate NI into IT but, since that has proved too difficult, a series of steps like the Autumn statement should eventually get us there.
No NI should be ringfenced for the state pension, JSA and some health spending as it was set up to do
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
It’s our money not the governments. Sunak is hardly being Scrooge, which is a tired Xmas cliche.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
I doubt it would appeal,to Cpt Mainwaring either. He’d be proud of the institution.
And it's for us as a country to decide what we wish to tax, and invest in our public realm and our future.
Rishi attacking the BBC has nothing to do with a cost of living crisis; when a few billion is needed to lubricate the base, it appears instantly. The BBC move is political, for appearance.
Personally I think a Prime Minister unable to be trusted is more concerning.
Scrooge is precisely the right comparison - a short-termist Government salami-slicing everything including basic services, and wasting untold amounts of resource along the way by failure to think beyond the end of their noses.
What happened to fixing social care, for example? Or transport expenditure?
FFS in the midst of the greatest security crisis for a generation, this lot have *cut* defence expenditure.
Indeed, what happened to those issues. They need resolving too. Doesn’t make this move on the license fee wrong.
The funding of the BBC is anachronistic in the modern era. It is time they looked at how the BBC will be funded in future.
Fund true public service Tv and the distribution network from General taxation and let the BBC raise funds how it chooses in a commercial model outside of a license fee.
The BBC (well, a part of it) fought desperately to prevent the switch to digital TV including encryption.
The sad bit is they could have boldly made a case to move to take control of world wide rights and sell a world wide “License”. With online distribution, every market is open. My guesstimate is that the income from the USA, alone would be of the order of the current license fee.
The final step would be free BBC for anyone in the U.K.
Brand BBC would be world wide. Reinvigorated with new money. And, for the first time, utterly independent.
Sadly, we lack the politicians and broadcasters with the vision to make such a future.
It does seem pretty obvious that a BBC supported in the UK but free to rake it in abroad could become one of the world’s biggest media giants, with similar reach and dominance as Disney.
Indeed Disney is to American soft power what the Beeb is to British soft power.
Profitable globally, subsidised at home, the opportunities are endless. Of course that wouldn’t stop it being a political football, as Disney’s recent experience shows.
Disney is not free or subsidised in the US, as you are suggesting the BBC could be. Disney+ is still operating at a substantial loss. I’m not certain the figures stack up here.
Even if you kept the domestic cost of the BBC the same as now, with no subsidy, it would do far better if it were allowed freedom to be an open subscription service globally, rather than in most cases being limited to licensing its content (and for example not being able to make normal BBC iPlayer available for a fee to Brits abroad). That extra income could then either go into subsidising the licence fee, or investing in more programming.
The BBC rarely owns any of the overseas rights to the programming it shows in the UK. Those are usually sold separately by the production company, usually to Netflix or Amazon for far, far more than the BBC could afford. The BBC also very rarely produces anything of note in house now, most of it's hit shows are produced externally, which is a consequence of longstanding policy by the BBC to underinvest in it's own production capability and overpay on screen talent for live shows.
Rolling out (yet again) the TOPPING BBC FUNDING MODEL (all rights reserved).
Compartmentalise the BBC into different divisions:
News & current affairs Documentary Radio Drama "Light Entertainment" Children's Sport Etc
Charge a monthly subscription for each of them. Say £2-6/month. And of course have an "AYCE" subscription which would be in price not unadjacent to the value of the current license fee. Then people could choose what they wanted and if they wanted to pay for it. Job done.
The BBC’s income would collapse under this model. It wouldn’t be able to make what it currently makes.
The BBC could also help fund drama and light entertainment via advertising
Rolling out (yet again) the TOPPING BBC FUNDING MODEL (all rights reserved).
Compartmentalise the BBC into different divisions:
News & current affairs Documentary Radio Drama "Light Entertainment" Children's Sport Etc
Charge a monthly subscription for each of them. Say £2-6/month. And of course have an "AYCE" subscription which would be in price not unadjacent to the value of the current license fee. Then people could choose what they wanted and if they wanted to pay for it. Job done.
If it's broadcast how do you restrict viewing to fee-payers?
Not sure. Login? There are plenty of subscription services around I'm sure it's doable.
And none of them are making money yet. They’re all surviving on shareholder investment so far.
Rolling out (yet again) the TOPPING BBC FUNDING MODEL (all rights reserved).
Compartmentalise the BBC into different divisions:
News & current affairs Documentary Radio Drama "Light Entertainment" Children's Sport Etc
Charge a monthly subscription for each of them. Say £2-6/month. And of course have an "AYCE" subscription which would be in price not unadjacent to the value of the current license fee. Then people could choose what they wanted and if they wanted to pay for it. Job done.
If it's broadcast how do you restrict viewing to fee-payers?
Not sure. Login? There are plenty of subscription services around I'm sure it's doable.
This was the manifesto of the Party to Protect the People from NHK that won a seat in the Japanese Senate in 2019. They said you could scramble the signal unless you bought a subscription, presumably it would have required a decoder box.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
It’s our money not the governments. Sunak is hardly being Scrooge, which is a tired Xmas cliche.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
I doubt it would appeal,to Cpt Mainwaring either. He’d be proud of the institution.
And it's for us as a country to decide what we wish to tax, and invest in our public realm and our future.
Rishi attacking the BBC has nothing to do with a cost of living crisis; when a few billion is needed to lubricate the base, it appears instantly. The BBC move is political, for appearance.
Personally I think a Prime Minister unable to be trusted is more concerning.
Scrooge is precisely the right comparison - a short-termist Government salami-slicing everything including basic services, and wasting untold amounts of resource along the way by failure to think beyond the end of their noses.
What happened to fixing social care, for example? Or transport expenditure?
FFS in the midst of the greatest security crisis for a generation, this lot have *cut* defence expenditure.
Indeed, what happened to those issues. They need resolving too. Doesn’t make this move on the license fee wrong.
The funding of the BBC is anachronistic in the modern era. It is time they looked at how the BBC will be funded in future.
Fund true public service Tv and the distribution network from General taxation and let the BBC raise funds how it chooses in a commercial model outside of a license fee.
If someone 'hates' the BBC, then they should argue that the funding model should remain exactly as it is, as if the world has not changed in the last century. Because that is a cast-iron way of killing the BBC.
If someone 'loves' the BBC, then they should argue that the funding model needs to evolve to face the challenges formed by the Internet and the orders of magnitude more media available to the public.
But evolve to what? People often say the BBC should be like Netflix, but they don’t make a profit and are increasing fees.
And ?
Netflix, and other streaming services, are in the start up phase. Many are still in their infancy. They won’t make money. Obviously they will expect to at a future date. If they don’t they don’t, if they do, great.
I think there are probably too many and there will be some consolidation.
The latest Hail Mary Pass to appeal to Captain Mainwaring.
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
He needs to lean back, manspread and dominate the space with his genitals. Like when Carra is on Sky Sports.
I have to admit I thought that photo was some kind of cruel photo montage when I first saw it. Politics is a cruel and brutal business but on some primitive basis it is essentially a tribe of chimp-like hominems choosing an alpha male to lead us into combat against the neighbouring tribe. Someone who sits like that is not going to be chosen.
Quite a dash of homophobia in there
Er, I wasn't aware Rishi is gay. If you think a gay man can't be an alpha male maybe you are the homophobe here! I'm not saying it should be like this, in many ways this method of choosing leaders is quite backwards and stupid, it leads to people choosing leaders like Trump, but the reality is that politicians who can't assert strength struggle to impress the public. Pictures like this are quite harmful to the Tories' chances IMHO.
Comments
If anything, Saudi Arabia, with its outsize, money based influence, and sociopath leader, is more dangerous to the world than Iran.
But the Thatcher consensus won’t be at an end until something is done to address the evisceration of local government, and the long running sores of housing, and privatised monopolies.
Even Liz of 49 Days couldn’t manage that.
I think you could probably rock Liz’s look (with slightly better tailoring).
Amusingly in 2015 he beat Nigel Farage, then the current leader of UKIP in South Thanet.
I don't think that's a viable post-oil future.
They can arguably create a future by exporting solar energy as one future pillar, but that will depend on Governance being resolved, intra-ME wars being surpassed, the Middle East no longer being a failed region, and an investment in distribution reminiscent of the establishment of telegraph networks in the late 19C.
Is that possible?
The Government having reached an agreement for the BBC to increase its licence fee by the rate of inflation for several years in return for savings delivered previously, Short-Term-Rishi is going back on the promise for pure attempted politics - which are likely to fail.
The BBC fulfilled it's side of the bargain - a 2 year freeze, and Rishi is welching on the deal. What a miserable, untrustworthy, Scrooge-like Government we have.
At least their reputation is consistent, if that's what they want to reinforce.
Is anyone surprised?
I wonder, is this potentially subject to legal action?
Full article:
https://archive.ph/k4747
To answer your question, far as Saudi is concerned, the availability of almost free energy through solar ought to ensure they remain a fairly prosperous society, irrespective of other questions. Their influence ought though to be much reduced within a decade or two.
A license fee type setup and taxatiion funding are the main models in Europe, with license fees dominant in Western Europe. France is just replacing there's with a VAT levy - part of that may well just be normal Macron political-stuntery.
https://www.statista.com/chart/28040/how-public-broadcaster-services-are-financed-across-europe/
I think what I would like to see is the BBC grabbing hold of this debate, rather than it being defined by kneejerks from washed up attention-seeking politicians, such as the Prime Minister.
Whether the politics will fail or not is irrelevant. It is the right thing to do in a cost of living crisis.
I doubt it would appeal,to Cpt Mainwaring either. He’d be proud of the institution.
A hostile environment for migrants is evolving into a hostile environment for everybody.
There's -> theirs.
("Effing AI keyboards", he lied through his teeth.)
"Venezuelans have voted overwhelmingly in favour of claiming a disputed oil-rich territory long controlled by neighbouring Guyana.
More than 95% approved establishing a new state in Essequibo, officials say."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-67610200
I expect there to be trouble in the region very soon.
It is an interesting problem, as you’d still need to entrench multi year funding to at least reduce control by the government of the day - and at the same time come up with a better means of oversight.
The license fee model if surely dead, though, if it can be used, as just happened, to impose a big cut in funding after the settlement has been agreed.
It’s seriously unpopular, and has just lost any advantages it might have in terms of independence from state control.
Note the BBC current leadership is largely the creation of the last decade of Tory government, so they’re unlikely to step up as you wish.
The BBC haters will applaud it.
This would encourage capital investment in order to reduce labour costs, and discourage immigration by increasing UK unemployment.
Or we could make labour markets less flexible by increasing employment rights to much the same effect.
So what is a way ahead?
The Saudis becoming very aggressive, overtures to Israel, the desperate reaction of Hamas, the frantic attempts to become hubs of… something - I think they all stem from a sense that Change Is Coming.
Rishi attacking the BBC has nothing to do with a cost of living crisis; when a few billion is needed to lubricate the base, it appears instantly. The BBC move is political, for appearance.
Personally I think a Prime Minister unable to be trusted is more concerning.
Scrooge is precisely the right comparison - a short-termist Government salami-slicing everything including basic services, and wasting untold amounts of resource along the way by failure to think beyond the end of their noses.
What happened to fixing social care, for example? Or transport expenditure?
FFS in the midst of the greatest security crisis for a generation, this lot have *cut* defence expenditure.
It seems a bit weird in that climate laying it out for maximum solar exposure.
They need to submit to the God of Facts on The Ground.
And admit their culpability for their own potential casualties in a hypothetical war?
I applaud it, not because I hate the BBC but I fundamentally disagree with how it is funded and have done for many years. The license fee is not popular and does not have public support
It is also time non payment of the license fee was decriminalised because many vulnerable people are dragged through the courts and get criminal records for minor indiscretions even when they’ve agreed payment plans.
https://x.com/kirkkorner/status/1721889902995050980?s=61&t=s0ae0IFncdLS1Dc7J0P_TQ
And thanks for the header, Tim. This sentence grabs me most:
The Great British Public mind a bit less about being asked to contribute to the common good of the country, then they do about being taxed.
I wonder if that balance is coming to an end, driven for example by the increasing number of Councils unable to balance their books, and therefore services having to be slashed.
In Nottinghamshire there was a recent consultation in potential Council Tax increases. The HIGHEST number the NCC were being allowed to consider by the Government was a 5% CUT in real terms. Anything better than a 5% cut would require a referendum.
Local Government requires significantly increased funding. It's another fine mess we are in:
And many more could follow down the effective bankruptcy route, with the Local Government Information Unit suggesting as many as one in 10 councils are already at risk.
...
George Osborne decided to reduce that funding pot, known as the revenue support grant (or RSG) and replace it by allowing local authorities to keep more of the council tax and business rates they collected.
...
In reality, the figures have rarely settled out, with the Institute for Fiscal Studies saying the poorest fifth of councils are getting about 10% below their needs, compared with the richest fifth getting about 15% above their requirements.
And this is born out in a National Audit Office (NAO) report, that showed councils' spending power fell in real terms by more than 50% on a like-for-like basis between 2010-11 and 2020-21.
https://news.sky.com/story/why-are-councils-going-bankrupt-13018122
The funding of the BBC is anachronistic in the modern era. It is time they looked at how the BBC will be funded in future.
Fund true public service Tv and the distribution network from General taxation and let the BBC raise funds how it chooses in a commercial model outside of a license fee.
The sad bit is they could have boldly made a case to move to take control of world wide rights and sell a world wide “License”. With online distribution, every market is open. My guesstimate is that the income from the USA, alone would be of the order of the current license fee.
The final step would be free BBC for anyone in the U.K.
Brand BBC would be world wide. Reinvigorated with new money. And, for the first time, utterly independent.
Sadly, we lack the politicians and broadcasters with the vision to make such a future.
It may be subtler, but apply Meek's epigoni theory to that description and tell me who could least follow Sunak as PM from those who have been mooted as Tory leaders? Who else most fits that description?
For the purposes of wordplay, I will answer this simple question pulling in Sunak's heritage and religious devoutness (in a neutral way), his chronic inexperience for the role of PM, and his apparent opposition to environmentalism.
Rishi Sunak, my friends, is governing as if he were Jain Cub Rish Smog.
Going back to Blair the govt has pushed more and more onto local govt and not adequately funded it. It got appreciably worse under the Tories and does not look like improving anytime soon.
It’s a real mess.
If there is an awareness to rebalance towards a more equitable, and wealth-generation friendly, balance of taxation, then this is a good thing.
Indeed, it would make a lot of sense to significantly simplify our tax code by rolling Income Tax, National Insurance, Capital Gains Tax, and even Inheritance Tax, into one type of tax all levied on the same incomes at the same rate (with a single tax free allowance and higher rate bands as appropriate).
Defuses the issue.
And good morning one, and all; I hope those affected by the snows of of the north Are able to get about now
Never ask a woman her age, a man his salary, and Stephen Flynn how the SNP voted in the 1979 motion of no confidence.
https://twitter.com/willglloyd/status/1731316958614769986
They live in terror of a move to an encrypted system.
He needs to lean back, manspread and dominate the space with his genitals. Like when Carra is on Sky Sports.
Indeed Disney is to American soft power what the Beeb is to British soft power.
Profitable globally, subsidised at home, the opportunities are endless. Of course that wouldn’t stop it being a political football, as Disney’s recent experience shows.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/11/29/biden-inflation-soft-landing-economy-00128999
… Low unemployment, real wage growth and a fast-growing economy should be providing a boost to the public’s perception of Biden’s economic policies. It hasn’t, as countless polls demonstrate. But with inflation still climbing — albeit at a much slower rate than last year — affordability remains a top concern for voters. And that’s been enough to keep Biden’s polls on the economy deeply underwater...
If someone 'loves' the BBC, then they should argue that the funding model needs to evolve to face the challenges formed by the Internet and the orders of magnitude more media available to the public.
The plan was to replace it with a form of encryption in the early 60s. But the technology of the day wasn’t up to the job.
See https://www.amazon.co.uk/Codebreakers-Comprehensive-History-Communication-Internet/dp/0684831309
I would favour making the BBC free of use and funded through general taxation for national events and educational content (there is a case for news, potentially) and the rest can go on a subscription model.
The better course would be to adopt a Lawsonian approach to tax reform and simply incorporate NI into IT but, since that has proved too difficult, a series of steps like the Autumn statement should eventually get us there.
Trump actually gets better coverage from liberal media - in that they basically repeat every outrageous statement verbatim as a headline. He plays that to great advantage.
Netflix has a problem with content - the big media giants have slowed giving them stuff. They are all trying to stream, themselves. So Netflix is trying its hand at content - and making some very expensive rubbish.
The BBC has much of the content it needs for this - it needs the worldwide rights, mainly.
Rolling out (yet again) the TOPPING BBC FUNDING MODEL (all rights reserved).
Compartmentalise the BBC into different divisions:
News & current affairs
Documentary
Radio
Drama
"Light Entertainment"
Children's
Sport
Etc
Charge a monthly subscription for each of them. Say £2-6/month. And of course have an "AYCE" subscription which would be in price not unadjacent to the value of the current license fee. Then people could choose what they wanted and if they wanted to pay for it. Job done.
Has the whiff of the Post Office scandal about it. Vulnerable people, in dire financial straits, signed off en masse by magistrates*, isolated legal representation.
* Is it happening in Scotland too?
It might be that Lord Cameron can successfully advocate for sensible positions, and contribute to a modicum of good governance in the remaining time before the Sunak Ministry is defenestrated by the electorate, but even if he does he probably won't get much credit from electorate. The public might like the potential benefits of a dose of Cameronism in this Government, but they won't appreciate Cameron himself.
In a similar vein, I think Starmer recognises that the public might enjoy a touch of Blairism but no one wants him to bring Blair back into Government.
No TV license?, that will be 100 points off your credit rating. Simples.
Oxford names ‘rizz’ word of the year
https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/4340335-oxford-names-rizz-word-of-the-year/
I thought it meant risible.
I think the BBC is a hugely successful UK export. I agree with other people there. I think when you have something that’s very successful, it’s a bad idea to destroy it.
https://www.gov.scot/publications/foi-202100213156/
Edit: but see DAvidL's post which I have now seen. Confused ...
Do we really want to clog the courts up with needless prosecuting of the most vulnerable ?
https://x.com/kirkkorner/status/1729591348213207508?s=61&t=s0ae0IFncdLS1Dc7J0P_TQ
Edit my guess is that they show the number of people offered a fixed penalty first.
Sir Keir looks Reagan-esque here
Netflix, and other streaming services, are in the start up phase. Many are still in their infancy. They won’t make money. Obviously they will expect to at a future date. If they don’t they don’t, if they do, great.
I think there are probably too many and there will be some consolidation.
I'm not saying it should be like this, in many ways this method of choosing leaders is quite backwards and stupid, it leads to people choosing leaders like Trump, but the reality is that politicians who can't assert strength struggle to impress the public. Pictures like this are quite harmful to the Tories' chances IMHO.