politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » TV ratings: Biden’s convention speech got a bigger audience th
Options
Comments
-
What "clear market failure" in 2020 does it address?Jonathan said:
Ask a silly question, get a silly answer. Ask people if they want income tax scrapped and see what they say.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not at all.Jonathan said:
Nope. BBC is different. Tories have ideological objections and can never forgive a non privately owned, non commercial corporation being successful. Goes against their religion. They won’t be happy until it’s gone and the UK goes all Fox News.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The BBC licence fee is a poll tax and in these days is just out of date and wrongCorrectHorseBattery said:Polling in the DM, high support for getting rid of license fee criminalisation.
And so we will get to the inevitable privatisation of the BBC, as was the point in this entire story
Time to make the BBC compete on a level playing field with all the media
11,000 plus pensioners pay just for Lineker and it cannot justify that taxpayers keep it afloat on a public subsidy
Furthermore two thirds of voters want the fee scrapped so not just 'tories'
You have an ideological dislike of the BBC, despite it correcting a clear market failure.0 -
They lean slightly Republican but they did forecast correctly Trump would win Michigan and Pennsylvania in 2016 unlike every other pollsterrcs1000 said:
On the subject of Trafalgar, didn't they overstate Trump in every state? It led to them giving him the lead in (for example) Florida, but their forecast of a four point lead was a lot bigger than the actual 1.3% lead.HYUFD said:
It was accurate in 2016, though they have had Biden up in Michigan earlier in the summer.rcs1000 said:
Trafalgar adjusts for shy Trump voters. How accurate that will be is the big question.stodge said:Trafalgar have a poll showing Trump up 47-45 in Michigan.
To be more accurate, Trump leads 46.6-45.2. Before the Democrat convention, he led 46.9-44.2 and after the Democrat convention, he led 46.5-45.6 so tiny changes with both Trump and Biden votes solid within the margin of error.
As I suspected, the conventions have made little or no difference (and I suspect the debate won't either). The US electorate is highly polarised and views are entrenched.
Only 3.6% are still undecided which is extraordinary so far from the election.I have no idea how representative the Trafalgar sampling is because I don't know enough about Michigan.0 -
Of course.CorrectHorseBattery said:So here's a question, if Netflix wants to be "woke" does it as a private company have the right to offer whatever programming it wants?
0 -
Netflix is very woke, I am surprised so many here don't spend ages complaining about itPhilip_Thompson said:
Of course.CorrectHorseBattery said:So here's a question, if Netflix wants to be "woke" does it as a private company have the right to offer whatever programming it wants?
0 -
Along with 65% of the public and 77% of over 75'sJonathan said:
You are obsessed with the licence fee.Big_G_NorthWales said:
My wife subscribes to mail plus and I subscribe to Sky and Sky sports, BT sports, Amazon prime, Disney, and have just cancelled my Netflix subJonathan said:
You’ll be telling us you don’t subscribe to the Daily mail next. The right look at America with envious eyes and dream of Fox News UK. They may well have their way. God help us all.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I have nothing of the sort but the licence fee is over and it seems two thirds of the public agreeJonathan said:
Ask a silly question, get a silly answer. Ask people if they want income tax scrapped and see what they say.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not at all.Jonathan said:
Nope. BBC is different. Tories have ideological objections and can never forgive a non privately owned, non commercial corporation being successful. Goes against their religion. They won’t be happy until it’s gone and the UK goes all Fox News.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The BBC licence fee is a poll tax and in these days is just out of date and wrongCorrectHorseBattery said:Polling in the DM, high support for getting rid of license fee criminalisation.
And so we will get to the inevitable privatisation of the BBC, as was the point in this entire story
Time to make the BBC compete on a level playing field with all the media
11,000 plus pensioners pay just for Lineker and it cannot justify that taxpayers keep it afloat on a public subsidy
Furthermore two thirds of voters want the fee scrapped so not just 'tories'
You have an ideological dislike of the BBC, despite it correcting a clear market failure.
You are obsessed with Fox News which is a channel I never watch nor would I anymore than RT
It has to go0 -
Look at broadcasting in the US and Europe or alternative print news media in the UK. Generally total crap.Philip_Thompson said:
What "clear market failure" in 2020 does it address?Jonathan said:
Ask a silly question, get a silly answer. Ask people if they want income tax scrapped and see what they say.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not at all.Jonathan said:
Nope. BBC is different. Tories have ideological objections and can never forgive a non privately owned, non commercial corporation being successful. Goes against their religion. They won’t be happy until it’s gone and the UK goes all Fox News.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The BBC licence fee is a poll tax and in these days is just out of date and wrongCorrectHorseBattery said:Polling in the DM, high support for getting rid of license fee criminalisation.
And so we will get to the inevitable privatisation of the BBC, as was the point in this entire story
Time to make the BBC compete on a level playing field with all the media
11,000 plus pensioners pay just for Lineker and it cannot justify that taxpayers keep it afloat on a public subsidy
Furthermore two thirds of voters want the fee scrapped so not just 'tories'
You have an ideological dislike of the BBC, despite it correcting a clear market failure.0 -
I watched films of my choice when I subscribed to it but did not watch 'woke' ones !!!CorrectHorseBattery said:
Netflix is very woke, I am surprised so many here don't spend ages complaining about itPhilip_Thompson said:
Of course.CorrectHorseBattery said:So here's a question, if Netflix wants to be "woke" does it as a private company have the right to offer whatever programming it wants?
0 -
Yes, they had the option with digital TV of ensuring they could and deliberately sabotaged the system to ensure they couldn't. Oops.CorrectHorseBattery said:The BBC would need to implement a system where you can't watch TV/the BBC without one and I see no way of doing that - they don't have a viewing card like Sky does (did?)
POBBCWAS.0 -
No it doesn’t. People have never liked paying taxes and never will.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Along with 65% of the public and 77% of over 75'sJonathan said:
You are obsessed with the licence fee.Big_G_NorthWales said:
My wife subscribes to mail plus and I subscribe to Sky and Sky sports, BT sports, Amazon prime, Disney, and have just cancelled my Netflix subJonathan said:
You’ll be telling us you don’t subscribe to the Daily mail next. The right look at America with envious eyes and dream of Fox News UK. They may well have their way. God help us all.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I have nothing of the sort but the licence fee is over and it seems two thirds of the public agreeJonathan said:
Ask a silly question, get a silly answer. Ask people if they want income tax scrapped and see what they say.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not at all.Jonathan said:
Nope. BBC is different. Tories have ideological objections and can never forgive a non privately owned, non commercial corporation being successful. Goes against their religion. They won’t be happy until it’s gone and the UK goes all Fox News.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The BBC licence fee is a poll tax and in these days is just out of date and wrongCorrectHorseBattery said:Polling in the DM, high support for getting rid of license fee criminalisation.
And so we will get to the inevitable privatisation of the BBC, as was the point in this entire story
Time to make the BBC compete on a level playing field with all the media
11,000 plus pensioners pay just for Lineker and it cannot justify that taxpayers keep it afloat on a public subsidy
Furthermore two thirds of voters want the fee scrapped so not just 'tories'
You have an ideological dislike of the BBC, despite it correcting a clear market failure.
You are obsessed with Fox News which is a channel I never watch nor would I anymore than RT
It has to go0 -
It will not survive (the fee not the BBC)Jonathan said:
No it doesn’t. People have never liked paying taxes and never will.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Along with 65% of the public and 77% of over 75'sJonathan said:
You are obsessed with the licence fee.Big_G_NorthWales said:
My wife subscribes to mail plus and I subscribe to Sky and Sky sports, BT sports, Amazon prime, Disney, and have just cancelled my Netflix subJonathan said:
You’ll be telling us you don’t subscribe to the Daily mail next. The right look at America with envious eyes and dream of Fox News UK. They may well have their way. God help us all.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I have nothing of the sort but the licence fee is over and it seems two thirds of the public agreeJonathan said:
Ask a silly question, get a silly answer. Ask people if they want income tax scrapped and see what they say.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not at all.Jonathan said:
Nope. BBC is different. Tories have ideological objections and can never forgive a non privately owned, non commercial corporation being successful. Goes against their religion. They won’t be happy until it’s gone and the UK goes all Fox News.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The BBC licence fee is a poll tax and in these days is just out of date and wrongCorrectHorseBattery said:Polling in the DM, high support for getting rid of license fee criminalisation.
And so we will get to the inevitable privatisation of the BBC, as was the point in this entire story
Time to make the BBC compete on a level playing field with all the media
11,000 plus pensioners pay just for Lineker and it cannot justify that taxpayers keep it afloat on a public subsidy
Furthermore two thirds of voters want the fee scrapped so not just 'tories'
You have an ideological dislike of the BBC, despite it correcting a clear market failure.
You are obsessed with Fox News which is a channel I never watch nor would I anymore than RT
It has to go1 -
Ideological, as I said. Fox News UK here we come.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It will not surviveJonathan said:
No it doesn’t. People have never liked paying taxes and never will.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Along with 65% of the public and 77% of over 75'sJonathan said:
You are obsessed with the licence fee.Big_G_NorthWales said:
My wife subscribes to mail plus and I subscribe to Sky and Sky sports, BT sports, Amazon prime, Disney, and have just cancelled my Netflix subJonathan said:
You’ll be telling us you don’t subscribe to the Daily mail next. The right look at America with envious eyes and dream of Fox News UK. They may well have their way. God help us all.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I have nothing of the sort but the licence fee is over and it seems two thirds of the public agreeJonathan said:
Ask a silly question, get a silly answer. Ask people if they want income tax scrapped and see what they say.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not at all.Jonathan said:
Nope. BBC is different. Tories have ideological objections and can never forgive a non privately owned, non commercial corporation being successful. Goes against their religion. They won’t be happy until it’s gone and the UK goes all Fox News.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The BBC licence fee is a poll tax and in these days is just out of date and wrongCorrectHorseBattery said:Polling in the DM, high support for getting rid of license fee criminalisation.
And so we will get to the inevitable privatisation of the BBC, as was the point in this entire story
Time to make the BBC compete on a level playing field with all the media
11,000 plus pensioners pay just for Lineker and it cannot justify that taxpayers keep it afloat on a public subsidy
Furthermore two thirds of voters want the fee scrapped so not just 'tories'
You have an ideological dislike of the BBC, despite it correcting a clear market failure.
You are obsessed with Fox News which is a channel I never watch nor would I anymore than RT
It has to go0 -
I will not be watching Fox news.Jonathan said:
Ideological, as I said. Fox News UK here we come.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It will not surviveJonathan said:
No it doesn’t. People have never liked paying taxes and never will.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Along with 65% of the public and 77% of over 75'sJonathan said:
You are obsessed with the licence fee.Big_G_NorthWales said:
My wife subscribes to mail plus and I subscribe to Sky and Sky sports, BT sports, Amazon prime, Disney, and have just cancelled my Netflix subJonathan said:
You’ll be telling us you don’t subscribe to the Daily mail next. The right look at America with envious eyes and dream of Fox News UK. They may well have their way. God help us all.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I have nothing of the sort but the licence fee is over and it seems two thirds of the public agreeJonathan said:
Ask a silly question, get a silly answer. Ask people if they want income tax scrapped and see what they say.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not at all.Jonathan said:
Nope. BBC is different. Tories have ideological objections and can never forgive a non privately owned, non commercial corporation being successful. Goes against their religion. They won’t be happy until it’s gone and the UK goes all Fox News.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The BBC licence fee is a poll tax and in these days is just out of date and wrongCorrectHorseBattery said:Polling in the DM, high support for getting rid of license fee criminalisation.
And so we will get to the inevitable privatisation of the BBC, as was the point in this entire story
Time to make the BBC compete on a level playing field with all the media
11,000 plus pensioners pay just for Lineker and it cannot justify that taxpayers keep it afloat on a public subsidy
Furthermore two thirds of voters want the fee scrapped so not just 'tories'
You have an ideological dislike of the BBC, despite it correcting a clear market failure.
You are obsessed with Fox News which is a channel I never watch nor would I anymore than RT
It has to go
There are and will be myriads of alternative sources of news0 -
Right now they're desperately defending themselves over a movie called Cuties, that portrays pubescent girls in an overtly sexual manner.CorrectHorseBattery said:So here's a question, if Netflix wants to be "woke" does it as a private company have the right to offer whatever programming it wants?
0 -
Yes in these days a poll tax is just out of date and wrong. Just fund it from some other less inequitable form of taxation.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The BBC licence fee is a poll tax and in these days is just out of date and wrong
That said it's not funded from a poll tax. The licence fee tax is even worse than a poll tax including THE poll tax. A single adult household pays the same as a household with several working adults. And unlike THE poll tax, which did have reductions for people on low incomes, those on low incomes pay the full amount below the age of 75.1 -
I would gladly pay an annual subscription to the BBC for BBC4 and BBC1 and Radio 2, 3 and 4 alone but yes I think the BBC license fee has had its day or if it is to continue let it be shared for cultural and current affairs programmes amongst all broadcasters.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Along with 65% of the public and 77% of over 75'sJonathan said:
You are obsessed with the licence fee.Big_G_NorthWales said:
My wife subscribes to mail plus and I subscribe to Sky and Sky sports, BT sports, Amazon prime, Disney, and have just cancelled my Netflix subJonathan said:
You’ll be telling us you don’t subscribe to the Daily mail next. The right look at America with envious eyes and dream of Fox News UK. They may well have their way. God help us all.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I have nothing of the sort but the licence fee is over and it seems two thirds of the public agreeJonathan said:
Ask a silly question, get a silly answer. Ask people if they want income tax scrapped and see what they say.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not at all.Jonathan said:
Nope. BBC is different. Tories have ideological objections and can never forgive a non privately owned, non commercial corporation being successful. Goes against their religion. They won’t be happy until it’s gone and the UK goes all Fox News.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The BBC licence fee is a poll tax and in these days is just out of date and wrongCorrectHorseBattery said:Polling in the DM, high support for getting rid of license fee criminalisation.
And so we will get to the inevitable privatisation of the BBC, as was the point in this entire story
Time to make the BBC compete on a level playing field with all the media
11,000 plus pensioners pay just for Lineker and it cannot justify that taxpayers keep it afloat on a public subsidy
Furthermore two thirds of voters want the fee scrapped so not just 'tories'
You have an ideological dislike of the BBC, despite it correcting a clear market failure.
You are obsessed with Fox News which is a channel I never watch nor would I anymore than RT
It has to go
The BBC should be allowed adverts in return0 -
rottenborough said:
I don't think I have ever had a doctor stick a needle in me, except perhaps as a young child decades ago.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/NHSMillion/status/1299449181241831424
I had a nurse do my flu jab just last year
I’ve had a few, mostly anaesthetists.
I seem to remember that that was down to lobbying by the BBC to prevent the option being built into the specification for digital TV in this country. It would have been simple enough to do to make sure you could not get BBC TV without a license, but they were worried that it would lead to people deciding to opt out.CorrectHorseBattery said:
I completely agree - but my point was that right now they don't have a way to stop it, I don't think.Andy_JS said:
The BBC need to think of a way of doing it. People should be able to watch other channels without paying the licence fee.CorrectHorseBattery said:
No you miss my point, if you don't pay your Sky subscription you can't watch Sky, Sky cut the service off.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Is it a crime NOT to pay a SKY subscription?CorrectHorseBattery said:If we decriminalise paying the license fee, sorry to state the obvious but will people then just not bother to pay it, knowing nothing will happen
The BBC have no way of doing that, from what I understand, so if you decriminalise the fee, nothing can happen if you don't pay. You can watch TV forever with no payment.
I support decriminalisation BTW, I just can see the argument that it reduces their income.
If you plug an aerial into your TV, the BBC cannot stop you from watching BBC1. I don't see how they can ever stop it unless you have to ring them up to activate it, or some other such method.2 -
The customer chooses the facts they prefer. We are doomed to the One Britain News Network.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I will not be watching Fox news.Jonathan said:
Ideological, as I said. Fox News UK here we come.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It will not surviveJonathan said:
No it doesn’t. People have never liked paying taxes and never will.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Along with 65% of the public and 77% of over 75'sJonathan said:
You are obsessed with the licence fee.Big_G_NorthWales said:
My wife subscribes to mail plus and I subscribe to Sky and Sky sports, BT sports, Amazon prime, Disney, and have just cancelled my Netflix subJonathan said:
You’ll be telling us you don’t subscribe to the Daily mail next. The right look at America with envious eyes and dream of Fox News UK. They may well have their way. God help us all.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I have nothing of the sort but the licence fee is over and it seems two thirds of the public agreeJonathan said:
Ask a silly question, get a silly answer. Ask people if they want income tax scrapped and see what they say.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not at all.Jonathan said:
Nope. BBC is different. Tories have ideological objections and can never forgive a non privately owned, non commercial corporation being successful. Goes against their religion. They won’t be happy until it’s gone and the UK goes all Fox News.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The BBC licence fee is a poll tax and in these days is just out of date and wrongCorrectHorseBattery said:Polling in the DM, high support for getting rid of license fee criminalisation.
And so we will get to the inevitable privatisation of the BBC, as was the point in this entire story
Time to make the BBC compete on a level playing field with all the media
11,000 plus pensioners pay just for Lineker and it cannot justify that taxpayers keep it afloat on a public subsidy
Furthermore two thirds of voters want the fee scrapped so not just 'tories'
You have an ideological dislike of the BBC, despite it correcting a clear market failure.
You are obsessed with Fox News which is a channel I never watch nor would I anymore than RT
It has to go
There are and will be myriads of alternative sources of news0 -
I bet these “over 75s” are going to be shocked when the BBC, ITV, and Channel 4 change beyond all recognition. I bet they simply just want to stop paying but continue to receive the exact same service.
Bit like Brexit really. Funny that.1 -
So they have the right to do that right?Sandpit said:
Right now they're desperately defending themselves over a movie called Cuties, that portrays pubescent girls in an overtly sexual manner.CorrectHorseBattery said:So here's a question, if Netflix wants to be "woke" does it as a private company have the right to offer whatever programming it wants?
0 -
I think it's repellent from what I've seen BTW0
-
The right can’t attack the BBC, so they attack the licence fee. It’s pretty transparent. It’s outdated they cry, despite pretty much everyone still owning a TV. It’s not subtle. Not subtle at all.1
-
If you don’t like it you can cancel your subscription. That’s a bit harder with the BBC...CorrectHorseBattery said:
Netflix is very woke, I am surprised so many here don't spend ages complaining about itPhilip_Thompson said:
Of course.CorrectHorseBattery said:So here's a question, if Netflix wants to be "woke" does it as a private company have the right to offer whatever programming it wants?
0 -
Can you not do that with other things, why does the BBC only get complained about for being woke?Big_G_NorthWales said:
I watched films of my choice when I subscribed to it but did not watch 'woke' ones !!!CorrectHorseBattery said:
Netflix is very woke, I am surprised so many here don't spend ages complaining about itPhilip_Thompson said:
Of course.CorrectHorseBattery said:So here's a question, if Netflix wants to be "woke" does it as a private company have the right to offer whatever programming it wants?
If private companies want to be woke, surely that is up to them, save with whatever else, no?0 -
It is not ideal, but it’s been like that for years now.Jonathan said:
The customer chooses the facts they prefer. We are doomed to the One Britain News Network.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I will not be watching Fox news.Jonathan said:
Ideological, as I said. Fox News UK here we come.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It will not surviveJonathan said:
No it doesn’t. People have never liked paying taxes and never will.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Along with 65% of the public and 77% of over 75'sJonathan said:
You are obsessed with the licence fee.Big_G_NorthWales said:
My wife subscribes to mail plus and I subscribe to Sky and Sky sports, BT sports, Amazon prime, Disney, and have just cancelled my Netflix subJonathan said:
You’ll be telling us you don’t subscribe to the Daily mail next. The right look at America with envious eyes and dream of Fox News UK. They may well have their way. God help us all.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I have nothing of the sort but the licence fee is over and it seems two thirds of the public agreeJonathan said:
Ask a silly question, get a silly answer. Ask people if they want income tax scrapped and see what they say.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not at all.Jonathan said:
Nope. BBC is different. Tories have ideological objections and can never forgive a non privately owned, non commercial corporation being successful. Goes against their religion. They won’t be happy until it’s gone and the UK goes all Fox News.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The BBC licence fee is a poll tax and in these days is just out of date and wrongCorrectHorseBattery said:Polling in the DM, high support for getting rid of license fee criminalisation.
And so we will get to the inevitable privatisation of the BBC, as was the point in this entire story
Time to make the BBC compete on a level playing field with all the media
11,000 plus pensioners pay just for Lineker and it cannot justify that taxpayers keep it afloat on a public subsidy
Furthermore two thirds of voters want the fee scrapped so not just 'tories'
You have an ideological dislike of the BBC, despite it correcting a clear market failure.
You are obsessed with Fox News which is a channel I never watch nor would I anymore than RT
It has to go
There are and will be myriads of alternative sources of news0 -
With the BBC we have one source free of commercial or private political influence. No wonder they want to get rid of it.Fysics_Teacher said:
It is not ideal, but it’s been like that for years now.Jonathan said:
The customer chooses the facts they prefer. We are doomed to the One Britain News Network.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I will not be watching Fox news.Jonathan said:
Ideological, as I said. Fox News UK here we come.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It will not surviveJonathan said:
No it doesn’t. People have never liked paying taxes and never will.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Along with 65% of the public and 77% of over 75'sJonathan said:
You are obsessed with the licence fee.Big_G_NorthWales said:
My wife subscribes to mail plus and I subscribe to Sky and Sky sports, BT sports, Amazon prime, Disney, and have just cancelled my Netflix subJonathan said:
You’ll be telling us you don’t subscribe to the Daily mail next. The right look at America with envious eyes and dream of Fox News UK. They may well have their way. God help us all.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I have nothing of the sort but the licence fee is over and it seems two thirds of the public agreeJonathan said:
Ask a silly question, get a silly answer. Ask people if they want income tax scrapped and see what they say.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not at all.Jonathan said:
Nope. BBC is different. Tories have ideological objections and can never forgive a non privately owned, non commercial corporation being successful. Goes against their religion. They won’t be happy until it’s gone and the UK goes all Fox News.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The BBC licence fee is a poll tax and in these days is just out of date and wrongCorrectHorseBattery said:Polling in the DM, high support for getting rid of license fee criminalisation.
And so we will get to the inevitable privatisation of the BBC, as was the point in this entire story
Time to make the BBC compete on a level playing field with all the media
11,000 plus pensioners pay just for Lineker and it cannot justify that taxpayers keep it afloat on a public subsidy
Furthermore two thirds of voters want the fee scrapped so not just 'tories'
You have an ideological dislike of the BBC, despite it correcting a clear market failure.
You are obsessed with Fox News which is a channel I never watch nor would I anymore than RT
It has to go
There are and will be myriads of alternative sources of news0 -
The BBC shows loads of adverts, adverts for its own programming.2
-
When the TV license was first introduced, there were attempts at analogue scramblers/decoders. But they were easy to hack, so the TV license was the solution the UK/BBC went with.Fysics_Teacher said:rottenborough said:
I don't think I have ever had a doctor stick a needle in me, except perhaps as a young child decades ago.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/NHSMillion/status/1299449181241831424
I had a nurse do my flu jab just last year
I’ve had a few, mostly anaesthetists.
I seem to remember that that was down to lobbying by the BBC to prevent the option being built into the specification for digital TV in this country. It would have been simple enough to do to make sure you could not get BBC TV without a license, but they were worried that it would lead to people deciding to opt out.CorrectHorseBattery said:
I completely agree - but my point was that right now they don't have a way to stop it, I don't think.Andy_JS said:
The BBC need to think of a way of doing it. People should be able to watch other channels without paying the licence fee.CorrectHorseBattery said:
No you miss my point, if you don't pay your Sky subscription you can't watch Sky, Sky cut the service off.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Is it a crime NOT to pay a SKY subscription?CorrectHorseBattery said:If we decriminalise paying the license fee, sorry to state the obvious but will people then just not bother to pay it, knowing nothing will happen
The BBC have no way of doing that, from what I understand, so if you decriminalise the fee, nothing can happen if you don't pay. You can watch TV forever with no payment.
I support decriminalisation BTW, I just can see the argument that it reduces their income.
If you plug an aerial into your TV, the BBC cannot stop you from watching BBC1. I don't see how they can ever stop it unless you have to ring them up to activate it, or some other such method.
When digital TV came in, the BBC (as you say) specifically got the requirement for all digital TV system to support encryption removed. This meant that at least *some* TVs couldn't receive an encrypted signal. So, they thought, protecting the license fee forever.
Then came streaming.1 -
Yes it is upto private companiesCorrectHorseBattery said:
Can you not do that with other things, why does the BBC only get complained about for being woke?Big_G_NorthWales said:
I watched films of my choice when I subscribed to it but did not watch 'woke' ones !!!CorrectHorseBattery said:
Netflix is very woke, I am surprised so many here don't spend ages complaining about itPhilip_Thompson said:
Of course.CorrectHorseBattery said:So here's a question, if Netflix wants to be "woke" does it as a private company have the right to offer whatever programming it wants?
If private companies want to be woke, surely that is up to them, save with whatever else, no?
However, the BBC are required to be balanced0 -
If it were starting from scratch now, you'd set up the BBC as a publicly funded version of PBS in the US. They'd make the programmes that the market won't - the BBC4 and various high arts, religious, childrens (with no adverts), documentary and maybe some genuine investigative journalism like The Cook Report, Crimewatch of old.
But Broadcast TV is dead. Once fibre to the home is done, the airwaves of old fashioned TV will be auctioned off. That's a decade away at most.1 -
Do you think the BBC should be balanced on climate change, so they have climate change deniers on?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Yes it is upto private companiesCorrectHorseBattery said:
Can you not do that with other things, why does the BBC only get complained about for being woke?Big_G_NorthWales said:
I watched films of my choice when I subscribed to it but did not watch 'woke' ones !!!CorrectHorseBattery said:
Netflix is very woke, I am surprised so many here don't spend ages complaining about itPhilip_Thompson said:
Of course.CorrectHorseBattery said:So here's a question, if Netflix wants to be "woke" does it as a private company have the right to offer whatever programming it wants?
If private companies want to be woke, surely that is up to them, save with whatever else, no?
However, the BBC are required to be balanced0 -
There are an awful lot of people out there who don’t. They use their computers or tablets (or in some cases phones) instead.Jonathan said:The right can’t attack the BBC, so they attack the licence fee. It’s pretty transparent. It’s outdated they cry, despite pretty much everyone still owning a TV. It’s not subtle. Not subtle at all.
I only use my TV as a big monitor for a computer, console, or DVD player: if I want to watch live TV I use iPlayer or equivalent apps.
0 -
The next battle once the BBC is lost will be net neutrality.Sandpit said:If it were starting from scratch now, you'd set up the BBC as a publicly funded version of PBS in the US. They'd make the programmes that the market won't - the BBC4 and various high arts, religious, childrens (with no adverts), documentary and maybe some genuine investigative journalism like The Cook Report, Crimewatch of old.
But Broadcast TV is dead. Once fibre to the home is done, the airwaves of old fashioned TV will be auctioned off. That's a decade away at most.1 -
You would think so but I am not a climate change denierCorrectHorseBattery said:
Do you think the BBC should be balanced on climate change, so they have climate change deniers on?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Yes it is upto private companiesCorrectHorseBattery said:
Can you not do that with other things, why does the BBC only get complained about for being woke?Big_G_NorthWales said:
I watched films of my choice when I subscribed to it but did not watch 'woke' ones !!!CorrectHorseBattery said:
Netflix is very woke, I am surprised so many here don't spend ages complaining about itPhilip_Thompson said:
Of course.CorrectHorseBattery said:So here's a question, if Netflix wants to be "woke" does it as a private company have the right to offer whatever programming it wants?
If private companies want to be woke, surely that is up to them, save with whatever else, no?
However, the BBC are required to be balanced0 -
It was just an example.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You would think so but I am not a climate change denierCorrectHorseBattery said:
Do you think the BBC should be balanced on climate change, so they have climate change deniers on?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Yes it is upto private companiesCorrectHorseBattery said:
Can you not do that with other things, why does the BBC only get complained about for being woke?Big_G_NorthWales said:
I watched films of my choice when I subscribed to it but did not watch 'woke' ones !!!CorrectHorseBattery said:
Netflix is very woke, I am surprised so many here don't spend ages complaining about itPhilip_Thompson said:
Of course.CorrectHorseBattery said:So here's a question, if Netflix wants to be "woke" does it as a private company have the right to offer whatever programming it wants?
If private companies want to be woke, surely that is up to them, save with whatever else, no?
However, the BBC are required to be balanced
I think it will be a great shame to lose the BBC in its current form but I am not a big BBC user beyond BBC News0 -
I doubt it, on a dark and wet evening like tonight you are still going to watch TV with your family, even if if the BBC is competing with Netflix for your viewing you will still watch it on your TV set on the whole rather than a laptopSandpit said:If it were starting from scratch now, you'd set up the BBC as a publicly funded version of PBS in the US. They'd make the programmes that the market won't - the BBC4 and various high arts, religious, childrens (with no adverts), documentary and maybe some genuine investigative journalism like The Cook Report, Crimewatch of old.
But Broadcast TV is dead. Once fibre to the home is done, the airwaves of old fashioned TV will be auctioned off. That's a decade away at most.0 -
Yes.CorrectHorseBattery said:
So they have the right to do that right?Sandpit said:
Right now they're desperately defending themselves over a movie called Cuties, that portrays pubescent girls in an overtly sexual manner.CorrectHorseBattery said:So here's a question, if Netflix wants to be "woke" does it as a private company have the right to offer whatever programming it wants?
It's a French arthouse film, and treads a very uncomfortable line between decency and woke. BBFC would rate it 18, despite the fact that most of the actors are younger than that.
Online commentators are saying things like this would be Roman Polanski's dream movie to make, with all those young girls.0 -
Time to say good night folks0
-
It's very simple, really - the profile of those infected has massively shifted to younger people. This shows the age profile, for each week of the year, of those infected with COVID19Jonathan said:
Let’s hope this time we do not follow the continent, but the deviation between death rates and cases needs to be investigated. It’s striking.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, although you need to adjust for the fact that there's a lot more testing now, so in France (as in the UK) they are no doubt detecting a larger proportion of the true number of cases than they were in March/April. Even allowing for that, though, the current increase in France is alarming.Jonathan said:
Sacre Bleu. That said, death rates are quite different. It’s a puzzle.Richard_Nabavi said:
As you say, the death rates are also puzzling. One just has to hope that it's not simply a case of a time-lag.
0 -
I dare say many more are using TVs than in the licence fees heyday in he 60s and 70sFysics_Teacher said:
There are an awful lot of people out there who don’t. They use their computers or tablets (or in some cases phones) instead.Jonathan said:The right can’t attack the BBC, so they attack the licence fee. It’s pretty transparent. It’s outdated they cry, despite pretty much everyone still owning a TV. It’s not subtle. Not subtle at all.
I only use my TV as a big monitor for a computer, console, or DVD player: if I want to watch live TV I use iPlayer or equivalent apps.
https://www.closer.ac.uk/data/television-ownership-in-domestic-households/1 -
What about flat earthers ?Big_G_NorthWales said:
You would think so but I am not a climate change denierCorrectHorseBattery said:
Do you think the BBC should be balanced on climate change, so they have climate change deniers on?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Yes it is upto private companiesCorrectHorseBattery said:
Can you not do that with other things, why does the BBC only get complained about for being woke?Big_G_NorthWales said:
I watched films of my choice when I subscribed to it but did not watch 'woke' ones !!!CorrectHorseBattery said:
Netflix is very woke, I am surprised so many here don't spend ages complaining about itPhilip_Thompson said:
Of course.CorrectHorseBattery said:So here's a question, if Netflix wants to be "woke" does it as a private company have the right to offer whatever programming it wants?
If private companies want to be woke, surely that is up to them, save with whatever else, no?
However, the BBC are required to be balanced
Should they also be on to give balance every time someone talks about anything space related ?2 -
Why should we? If you don't like it, don't pay for it. Its simple economics.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Netflix is very woke, I am surprised so many here don't spend ages complaining about itPhilip_Thompson said:
Of course.CorrectHorseBattery said:So here's a question, if Netflix wants to be "woke" does it as a private company have the right to offer whatever programming it wants?
People have to pay for the BBC whether they want to watch it or not, that's the difference. The law says I need to pay the licence fee even if I never watch the BBC if I ever watch or stream any alternative TV live. Even if all I do is to stream Sky Football live hypothetically, I must still pay the Licence Fee.
Its nonsense and unjustifiable. I'd possibly pay the licence fee voluntarily if I had to choose, but if I did it would be my choice.1 -
Britain will be poorer without the BBC. Sadly folk are hellbent on its demise. They will probably get their way. Enjoy it whilst you still have it.2
-
I think "woke" means different things to different people.
I think a lot of older people think young people are very "woke" but I think most people aren't woke at all, what you might consider "woke" we consider normal.
I'm trying to think of a good example0 -
My family are watching different things in separate rooms on multiple devices.HYUFD said:
I doubt it, on a dark and wet evening like tonight you are still going to watch TV with your family, even if if the BBC is competing with Netflix for your viewing you will still watch it on your TV set on the whole rather than a laptopSandpit said:If it were starting from scratch now, you'd set up the BBC as a publicly funded version of PBS in the US. They'd make the programmes that the market won't - the BBC4 and various high arts, religious, childrens (with no adverts), documentary and maybe some genuine investigative journalism like The Cook Report, Crimewatch of old.
But Broadcast TV is dead. Once fibre to the home is done, the airwaves of old fashioned TV will be auctioned off. That's a decade away at most.
Me and the Mrs generally watch the same thing.
But rarely not a streaming service anymore.
Having said that the BBC is top for radio...couldn't do without it.1 -
What about Marxists? Should they be allowed to comment on anything to do with economics?ManchesterKurt said:
What about flat earthers ?Big_G_NorthWales said:
You would think so but I am not a climate change denierCorrectHorseBattery said:
Do you think the BBC should be balanced on climate change, so they have climate change deniers on?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Yes it is upto private companiesCorrectHorseBattery said:
Can you not do that with other things, why does the BBC only get complained about for being woke?Big_G_NorthWales said:
I watched films of my choice when I subscribed to it but did not watch 'woke' ones !!!CorrectHorseBattery said:
Netflix is very woke, I am surprised so many here don't spend ages complaining about itPhilip_Thompson said:
Of course.CorrectHorseBattery said:So here's a question, if Netflix wants to be "woke" does it as a private company have the right to offer whatever programming it wants?
If private companies want to be woke, surely that is up to them, save with whatever else, no?
However, the BBC are required to be balanced
Should they also be on to give balance every time someone talks about anything space related ?0 -
Here's the thing: if they forecast Michigan as 99% Trump, 1% Clinton, they would have gotten the result right. It's just they would have got the vote shares completely wrong.HYUFD said:
They lean slightly Republican but they did forecast correctly Trump would win Michigan and Pennsylvania in 2016 unlike every other pollsterrcs1000 said:
On the subject of Trafalgar, didn't they overstate Trump in every state? It led to them giving him the lead in (for example) Florida, but their forecast of a four point lead was a lot bigger than the actual 1.3% lead.HYUFD said:
It was accurate in 2016, though they have had Biden up in Michigan earlier in the summer.rcs1000 said:
Trafalgar adjusts for shy Trump voters. How accurate that will be is the big question.stodge said:Trafalgar have a poll showing Trump up 47-45 in Michigan.
To be more accurate, Trump leads 46.6-45.2. Before the Democrat convention, he led 46.9-44.2 and after the Democrat convention, he led 46.5-45.6 so tiny changes with both Trump and Biden votes solid within the margin of error.
As I suspected, the conventions have made little or no difference (and I suspect the debate won't either). The US electorate is highly polarised and views are entrenched.
Only 3.6% are still undecided which is extraordinary so far from the election.I have no idea how representative the Trafalgar sampling is because I don't know enough about Michigan.
My point is that they typically overstated Trump's margin by around three points (and I think they were similarly out in the 2018 midterms), and we should bear that in mind.
As an aside, what's your definition of 'slight'?0 -
POBBCWAS.Malmesbury said:
When the TV license was first introduced, there were attempts at analogue scramblers/decoders. But they were easy to hack, so the TV license was the solution the UK/BBC went with.Fysics_Teacher said:rottenborough said:
I don't think I have ever had a doctor stick a needle in me, except perhaps as a young child decades ago.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/NHSMillion/status/1299449181241831424
I had a nurse do my flu jab just last year
I’ve had a few, mostly anaesthetists.
I seem to remember that that was down to lobbying by the BBC to prevent the option being built into the specification for digital TV in this country. It would have been simple enough to do to make sure you could not get BBC TV without a license, but they were worried that it would lead to people deciding to opt out.CorrectHorseBattery said:
I completely agree - but my point was that right now they don't have a way to stop it, I don't think.Andy_JS said:
The BBC need to think of a way of doing it. People should be able to watch other channels without paying the licence fee.CorrectHorseBattery said:
No you miss my point, if you don't pay your Sky subscription you can't watch Sky, Sky cut the service off.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Is it a crime NOT to pay a SKY subscription?CorrectHorseBattery said:If we decriminalise paying the license fee, sorry to state the obvious but will people then just not bother to pay it, knowing nothing will happen
The BBC have no way of doing that, from what I understand, so if you decriminalise the fee, nothing can happen if you don't pay. You can watch TV forever with no payment.
I support decriminalisation BTW, I just can see the argument that it reduces their income.
If you plug an aerial into your TV, the BBC cannot stop you from watching BBC1. I don't see how they can ever stop it unless you have to ring them up to activate it, or some other such method.
When digital TV came in, the BBC (as you say) specifically got the requirement for all digital TV system to support encryption removed. This meant that at least *some* TVs couldn't receive an encrypted signal. So, they thought, protecting the license fee forever.
Then came streaming.0 -
It's a curious pejorative because if you're not woke, what are you? See also: antifa.CorrectHorseBattery said:I think "woke" means different things to different people.
0 -
good night folksBig_G_NorthWales said:Time to say good night folks
1 -
I don’t use motorways, primary schools, military bands or nuclear bombs. Can I pay less tax please? It’s nonsense and unjustifiable that I have to pay for these things I don’t use. If I want to use a motorway I’ll pay for it .Philip_Thompson said:
Why should we? If you don't like it, don't pay for it. Its simple economics.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Netflix is very woke, I am surprised so many here don't spend ages complaining about itPhilip_Thompson said:
Of course.CorrectHorseBattery said:So here's a question, if Netflix wants to be "woke" does it as a private company have the right to offer whatever programming it wants?
People have to pay for the BBC whether they want to watch it or not, that's the difference. The law says I need to pay the licence fee even if I never watch the BBC if I ever watch or stream any alternative TV live. Even if all I do is to stream Sky Football live hypothetically, I must still pay the Licence Fee.
Its nonsense and unjustifiable. I'd possibly pay the licence fee voluntarily if I had to choose, but if I did it would be my choice.2 -
I don't use the NHS, can I stop paying National Insurance0
-
I don't want the Royal Family, can I stop paying taxes to support them0
-
If we enjoyed it, there'd be no reason not to pay for it voluntarily.Jonathan said:Britain will be poorer without the BBC. Sadly folk are hellbent on its demise. They will probably get their way. Enjoy it whilst you still have it.
Its called free choice. Maybe you should familiarise yourself with the concept.0 -
Fundamentally, it is whether you consider the BBC a public good or a public benefit, as to whether you think we should all pay for it.
If you don't, then we don't, otherwise we should.
It's the same logic for healthcare, or roads, or railways0 -
If you don't use roads then I'm assuming you don't pay Vehicle Excise Duty or Fuel Duty. The government makes a profit on providing roads, it doesn't cost the government money. So yes, if you don't use roads you are paying less in tax as you're not paying those duties.Jonathan said:
I don’t use motorways, primary schools, military bands or nuclear bombs. Can I pay less tax please? It’s nonsense and unjustifiable that I have to pay for these things I don’t use. If I want to use a motorway I’ll pay for it .Philip_Thompson said:
Why should we? If you don't like it, don't pay for it. Its simple economics.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Netflix is very woke, I am surprised so many here don't spend ages complaining about itPhilip_Thompson said:
Of course.CorrectHorseBattery said:So here's a question, if Netflix wants to be "woke" does it as a private company have the right to offer whatever programming it wants?
People have to pay for the BBC whether they want to watch it or not, that's the difference. The law says I need to pay the licence fee even if I never watch the BBC if I ever watch or stream any alternative TV live. Even if all I do is to stream Sky Football live hypothetically, I must still pay the Licence Fee.
Its nonsense and unjustifiable. I'd possibly pay the licence fee voluntarily if I had to choose, but if I did it would be my choice.
Schools provide a public service, unlike the BBC.
The military provides public security, unlike the BBC.0 -
So just a question, we shouldn't pay public money for roads right?Philip_Thompson said:
If we enjoyed it, there'd be no reason not to pay for it voluntarily.Jonathan said:Britain will be poorer without the BBC. Sadly folk are hellbent on its demise. They will probably get their way. Enjoy it whilst you still have it.
Its called free choice. Maybe you should familiarise yourself with the concept.0 -
Hold on, vehicle excise duty doesn't pay for roads, you surely must know this, it goes into the same pot as everything else0
-
If the government abolishes fuel duty and vehicle excise duty then sure I'm happy for all roads to be privatised too.CorrectHorseBattery said:
So just a question, we shouldn't pay public money for roads right?Philip_Thompson said:
If we enjoyed it, there'd be no reason not to pay for it voluntarily.Jonathan said:Britain will be poorer without the BBC. Sadly folk are hellbent on its demise. They will probably get their way. Enjoy it whilst you still have it.
Its called free choice. Maybe you should familiarise yourself with the concept.
Otherwise the government is indirectly charging us for the roads already - and making quite some profit on doing so. Drivers are massively overtaxed already.0 -
But you're funding the roads without owning a car, so that's the point: can I pay less tax because I don't own a car, nor use the roadsPhilip_Thompson said:
If the government abolishes fuel duty and vehicle excise duty then sure I'm happy for all roads to be privatised too.CorrectHorseBattery said:
So just a question, we shouldn't pay public money for roads right?Philip_Thompson said:
If we enjoyed it, there'd be no reason not to pay for it voluntarily.Jonathan said:Britain will be poorer without the BBC. Sadly folk are hellbent on its demise. They will probably get their way. Enjoy it whilst you still have it.
Its called free choice. Maybe you should familiarise yourself with the concept.
Otherwise the government is indirectly charging us for the roads already - and making quite some profit on doing so. Drivers are massively overtaxed already.0 -
You're right VED and Fuel Duty pay much more than just the roads. If they were hypothecated then the roads would be getting a lot more money or those taxes would be a lot lower.CorrectHorseBattery said:Hold on, vehicle excise duty doesn't pay for roads, you surely must know this, it goes into the same pot as everything else
1 -
Military bands do not provide security so far as I can see, The BBC most definitely provides a public service.Philip_Thompson said:
If you don't use roads then I'm assuming you don't pay Vehicle Excise Duty or Fuel Duty. The government makes a profit on providing roads, it doesn't cost the government money. So yes, if you don't use roads you are paying less in tax as you're not paying those duties.Jonathan said:
I don’t use motorways, primary schools, military bands or nuclear bombs. Can I pay less tax please? It’s nonsense and unjustifiable that I have to pay for these things I don’t use. If I want to use a motorway I’ll pay for it .Philip_Thompson said:
Why should we? If you don't like it, don't pay for it. Its simple economics.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Netflix is very woke, I am surprised so many here don't spend ages complaining about itPhilip_Thompson said:
Of course.CorrectHorseBattery said:So here's a question, if Netflix wants to be "woke" does it as a private company have the right to offer whatever programming it wants?
People have to pay for the BBC whether they want to watch it or not, that's the difference. The law says I need to pay the licence fee even if I never watch the BBC if I ever watch or stream any alternative TV live. Even if all I do is to stream Sky Football live hypothetically, I must still pay the Licence Fee.
Its nonsense and unjustifiable. I'd possibly pay the licence fee voluntarily if I had to choose, but if I did it would be my choice.
Schools provide a public service, unlike the BBC.
The military provides public security, unlike the BBC.
0 -
Yes. If you're not owning a car and not using the roads then you're not paying VED and not paying Fuel Duty. Less tax.CorrectHorseBattery said:
But you're funding the roads without owning a car, so that's the point: can I pay less tax because I don't own a car, nor use the roadsPhilip_Thompson said:
If the government abolishes fuel duty and vehicle excise duty then sure I'm happy for all roads to be privatised too.CorrectHorseBattery said:
So just a question, we shouldn't pay public money for roads right?Philip_Thompson said:
If we enjoyed it, there'd be no reason not to pay for it voluntarily.Jonathan said:Britain will be poorer without the BBC. Sadly folk are hellbent on its demise. They will probably get their way. Enjoy it whilst you still have it.
Its called free choice. Maybe you should familiarise yourself with the concept.
Otherwise the government is indirectly charging us for the roads already - and making quite some profit on doing so. Drivers are massively overtaxed already.
I don't smoke so I don't pay those taxes.0 -
The "Public Good" bit can be funded from general taxation, without needing everyone to contribute to the rest of it via a bureaucratic and criminal system.CorrectHorseBattery said:Fundamentally, it is whether you consider the BBC a public good or a public benefit, as to whether you think we should all pay for it.
If you don't, then we don't, otherwise we should.
It's the same logic for healthcare, or roads, or railways2 -
Woke is just today's politically correct. I frankly hate the term myself.Dura_Ace said:
It's a curious pejorative because if you're not woke, what are you? See also: antifa.CorrectHorseBattery said:I think "woke" means different things to different people.
I think it's entirely subjective and depends entirely on the person.
I can't think of anything I'd call "woke" but I'm sure there are things I do that others would say were woke.
It's this idea there's a single set of "woke" things like the Telegraph believes, that is very bemusing to me.0 -
What public service does Homes Under The Hammer serve?Jonathan said:
Military bands do not provide security so far as I can see, The BBC most definitely provides a public service.Philip_Thompson said:
If you don't use roads then I'm assuming you don't pay Vehicle Excise Duty or Fuel Duty. The government makes a profit on providing roads, it doesn't cost the government money. So yes, if you don't use roads you are paying less in tax as you're not paying those duties.Jonathan said:
I don’t use motorways, primary schools, military bands or nuclear bombs. Can I pay less tax please? It’s nonsense and unjustifiable that I have to pay for these things I don’t use. If I want to use a motorway I’ll pay for it .Philip_Thompson said:
Why should we? If you don't like it, don't pay for it. Its simple economics.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Netflix is very woke, I am surprised so many here don't spend ages complaining about itPhilip_Thompson said:
Of course.CorrectHorseBattery said:So here's a question, if Netflix wants to be "woke" does it as a private company have the right to offer whatever programming it wants?
People have to pay for the BBC whether they want to watch it or not, that's the difference. The law says I need to pay the licence fee even if I never watch the BBC if I ever watch or stream any alternative TV live. Even if all I do is to stream Sky Football live hypothetically, I must still pay the Licence Fee.
Its nonsense and unjustifiable. I'd possibly pay the licence fee voluntarily if I had to choose, but if I did it would be my choice.
Schools provide a public service, unlike the BBC.
The military provides public security, unlike the BBC.0 -
It's a simple yes or no, if I don't use the roads nor own a car, please can I have a lower tax rate as I don't want any of my taxes going to something I don't use?Philip_Thompson said:
You're right VED and Fuel Duty pay much more than just the roads. If they were hypothecated then the roads would be getting a lot more money or those taxes would be a lot lower.CorrectHorseBattery said:Hold on, vehicle excise duty doesn't pay for roads, you surely must know this, it goes into the same pot as everything else
0 -
The BBC at its best is superb, and I would almost certainly continue to pay if the license fee became voluntary.Jonathan said:Britain will be poorer without the BBC. Sadly folk are hellbent on its demise. They will probably get their way. Enjoy it whilst you still have it.
However I think they have made some significant mistakes in trying to hold onto a model that has a limited shelf life for too long. While there are many people who sit down in the evening and see what’s on the telly, most now are streaming what they want when they want it (with the major exceptions of live sport and news).
They have a huge back catalogue of outstanding programmes that they could use to raise revenue in a much more targeted way than the rather pathetic BritBox (which I do subscribe to, but mostly for Midsommer Murders (and yes, I know that is from ITV)) and they could then compete with the likes of Netflix and Amazon Prime. Trying to stick to the old way of doing things and they will end up like BlockBuster.
1 -
On what basis are drivers overtaxed? Especially when we consider the externalities of motoring.
I say this as someone who loves driving.0 -
My kids just left school. That's off my bill too.CorrectHorseBattery said:I don't use the NHS, can I stop paying National Insurance
1 -
Its not a public good or a public benefit. Its an entertainment package no more special than any other - and more expensive than comparable ones like Netflix.CorrectHorseBattery said:Fundamentally, it is whether you consider the BBC a public good or a public benefit, as to whether you think we should all pay for it.
If you don't, then we don't, otherwise we should.
It's the same logic for healthcare, or roads, or railways0 -
Okay but you're happy with the BBC continuing to make a loss under that system right, or you think it needs to balance its costs, in which case it presumably needs to start offering advertising, etc?Sandpit said:
The "Public Good" bit can be funded from general taxation, without needing everyone to contribute to the rest of it via a bureaucratic and criminal system.CorrectHorseBattery said:Fundamentally, it is whether you consider the BBC a public good or a public benefit, as to whether you think we should all pay for it.
If you don't, then we don't, otherwise we should.
It's the same logic for healthcare, or roads, or railways
I think there's a difference between supporting abolishing the license fee and keeping the BBC as a public corp which we fund through tax, vs privatising it and making it commercial.
Do you see what I'm getting at? My fear is that with the Tories in charge abolishing the license fee leads to privatisation.0 -
VED is a tax on emissions...0
-
I don't go to school, please can I stop my taxes being spent on that0
-
Yes.CorrectHorseBattery said:
It's a simple yes or no, if I don't use the roads nor own a car, please can I have a lower tax rate as I don't want any of my taxes going to something I don't use?Philip_Thompson said:
You're right VED and Fuel Duty pay much more than just the roads. If they were hypothecated then the roads would be getting a lot more money or those taxes would be a lot lower.CorrectHorseBattery said:Hold on, vehicle excise duty doesn't pay for roads, you surely must know this, it goes into the same pot as everything else
If you don't use the roads, nor own a car, then you have lower taxes as you're not paying fuel duty and you're not paying vehicle excise duty.
Now if I don't want to watch the BBC, but do want to watch other live channels, then can I not pay the Licence Fee?0 -
I am perfectly happy with abolishing the license fee if that means the BBC is funded through general taxation and it is kept publicly owned. No issues with that at all.0
-
BBC should be funded via a tax on utility bills so no one can avoid it.
Probably also should provide some level of local media as local democracy has almost no media to hold it to account any more.0 -
So why do we have to pay for university? That's not a public good then? Why can't that come out of general taxation1
-
If this is the end case, I am perfectly happy with thatManchesterKurt said:BBC should be funded via a tax on utility bills so no one can avoid it.
Probably also should provide some level of local media as local democracy has almost no media to hold it to account any more.0 -
Entertainment.Philip_Thompson said:
What public service does Homes Under The Hammer serve?Jonathan said:
Military bands do not provide security so far as I can see, The BBC most definitely provides a public service.Philip_Thompson said:
If you don't use roads then I'm assuming you don't pay Vehicle Excise Duty or Fuel Duty. The government makes a profit on providing roads, it doesn't cost the government money. So yes, if you don't use roads you are paying less in tax as you're not paying those duties.Jonathan said:
I don’t use motorways, primary schools, military bands or nuclear bombs. Can I pay less tax please? It’s nonsense and unjustifiable that I have to pay for these things I don’t use. If I want to use a motorway I’ll pay for it .Philip_Thompson said:
Why should we? If you don't like it, don't pay for it. Its simple economics.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Netflix is very woke, I am surprised so many here don't spend ages complaining about itPhilip_Thompson said:
Of course.CorrectHorseBattery said:So here's a question, if Netflix wants to be "woke" does it as a private company have the right to offer whatever programming it wants?
People have to pay for the BBC whether they want to watch it or not, that's the difference. The law says I need to pay the licence fee even if I never watch the BBC if I ever watch or stream any alternative TV live. Even if all I do is to stream Sky Football live hypothetically, I must still pay the Licence Fee.
Its nonsense and unjustifiable. I'd possibly pay the licence fee voluntarily if I had to choose, but if I did it would be my choice.
Schools provide a public service, unlike the BBC.
The military provides public security, unlike the BBC.0 -
Preventing folk from taking a look at how disappointing, miserable and devoid of meaning their life is?Philip_Thompson said:
What public service does Homes Under The Hammer serve?Jonathan said:
Military bands do not provide security so far as I can see, The BBC most definitely provides a public service.Philip_Thompson said:
If you don't use roads then I'm assuming you don't pay Vehicle Excise Duty or Fuel Duty. The government makes a profit on providing roads, it doesn't cost the government money. So yes, if you don't use roads you are paying less in tax as you're not paying those duties.Jonathan said:
I don’t use motorways, primary schools, military bands or nuclear bombs. Can I pay less tax please? It’s nonsense and unjustifiable that I have to pay for these things I don’t use. If I want to use a motorway I’ll pay for it .Philip_Thompson said:
Why should we? If you don't like it, don't pay for it. Its simple economics.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Netflix is very woke, I am surprised so many here don't spend ages complaining about itPhilip_Thompson said:
Of course.CorrectHorseBattery said:So here's a question, if Netflix wants to be "woke" does it as a private company have the right to offer whatever programming it wants?
People have to pay for the BBC whether they want to watch it or not, that's the difference. The law says I need to pay the licence fee even if I never watch the BBC if I ever watch or stream any alternative TV live. Even if all I do is to stream Sky Football live hypothetically, I must still pay the Licence Fee.
Its nonsense and unjustifiable. I'd possibly pay the licence fee voluntarily if I had to choose, but if I did it would be my choice.
Schools provide a public service, unlike the BBC.
The military provides public security, unlike the BBC.2 -
You do whatever mental gymnastics you need to do to justify your position mate.Philip_Thompson said:
Its not a public good or a public benefit. Its an entertainment package no more special than any other - and more expensive than comparable ones like Netflix.CorrectHorseBattery said:Fundamentally, it is whether you consider the BBC a public good or a public benefit, as to whether you think we should all pay for it.
If you don't, then we don't, otherwise we should.
It's the same logic for healthcare, or roads, or railways1 -
Like I said above, privatising it is different to just abolishing the license fee.
I think Philip supports remove license fee + privatise it. I most certainly don't support privatising it0 -
Why is my tax money still being spent on the roads then?Philip_Thompson said:
Yes.CorrectHorseBattery said:
It's a simple yes or no, if I don't use the roads nor own a car, please can I have a lower tax rate as I don't want any of my taxes going to something I don't use?Philip_Thompson said:
You're right VED and Fuel Duty pay much more than just the roads. If they were hypothecated then the roads would be getting a lot more money or those taxes would be a lot lower.CorrectHorseBattery said:Hold on, vehicle excise duty doesn't pay for roads, you surely must know this, it goes into the same pot as everything else
If you don't use the roads, nor own a car, then you have lower taxes as you're not paying fuel duty and you're not paying vehicle excise duty.
Now if I don't want to watch the BBC, but do want to watch other live channels, then can I not pay the Licence Fee?0 -
They can’t attack the BBC, so they attack the licence fee instead.CorrectHorseBattery said:Like I said above, privatising it is different to just abolishing the license fee.
I think Philip supports remove license fee + privatise it. I most certainly don't support privatising it
1 -
What do you suggest instead of BritBox, isn't that trying to be more modern or have I missed your point?Fysics_Teacher said:
The BBC at its best is superb, and I would almost certainly continue to pay if the license fee became voluntary.Jonathan said:Britain will be poorer without the BBC. Sadly folk are hellbent on its demise. They will probably get their way. Enjoy it whilst you still have it.
However I think they have made some significant mistakes in trying to hold onto a model that has a limited shelf life for too long. While there are many people who sit down in the evening and see what’s on the telly, most now are streaming what they want when they want it (with the major exceptions of live sport and news).
They have a huge back catalogue of outstanding programmes that they could use to raise revenue in a much more targeted way than the rather pathetic BritBox (which I do subscribe to, but mostly for Midsommer Murders (and yes, I know that is from ITV)) and they could then compete with the likes of Netflix and Amazon Prime. Trying to stick to the old way of doing things and they will end up like BlockBuster.
The strength is surely in programmes like Top Gear and Doctor Who, that's where all the money is. Can they make more out of them than they already do?0 -
“Public good” is just whatever @Philip_Thompson thinks the Government should be subsidizing for him. Otherwise everyone else can get stuffed.1
-
That survey should have asked opinions on privatising the BBC0
-
VED is a tax on a very carefully defined version of emissions.Gallowgate said:VED is a tax on emissions...
My favorite example of which is the £1m Porsche 918 Spyder, which pays no car tax and is exempt from the congestion charge, but does 217mph and 0-60 in under three seconds when it switches on the big V8.1 -
You probably use it indirectly. Deliveries to your house, to the supermarket where you buy food, etc.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Why is my tax money still being spent on the roads then?Philip_Thompson said:
Yes.CorrectHorseBattery said:
It's a simple yes or no, if I don't use the roads nor own a car, please can I have a lower tax rate as I don't want any of my taxes going to something I don't use?Philip_Thompson said:
You're right VED and Fuel Duty pay much more than just the roads. If they were hypothecated then the roads would be getting a lot more money or those taxes would be a lot lower.CorrectHorseBattery said:Hold on, vehicle excise duty doesn't pay for roads, you surely must know this, it goes into the same pot as everything else
If you don't use the roads, nor own a car, then you have lower taxes as you're not paying fuel duty and you're not paying vehicle excise duty.
Now if I don't want to watch the BBC, but do want to watch other live channels, then can I not pay the Licence Fee?0 -
What about newspapers: should you pay for them as well?CorrectHorseBattery said:Fundamentally, it is whether you consider the BBC a public good or a public benefit, as to whether you think we should all pay for it.
If you don't, then we don't, otherwise we should.
It's the same logic for healthcare, or roads, or railways
That is actually a serious question. For local government to be properly democratic it needs to be supervised, and local papers are the traditional way of doing that. As many are loss making this becoming harder, so should we use taxes to subsidise them? Perhaps we could have a Reading License and charge anybody who owns a book £50 a year?0 -
Don't use schools, can I have a reduction for those pleaseRobD said:
You probably use it indirectly. Deliveries to your house, to the supermarket where you buy food, etc.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Why is my tax money still being spent on the roads then?Philip_Thompson said:
Yes.CorrectHorseBattery said:
It's a simple yes or no, if I don't use the roads nor own a car, please can I have a lower tax rate as I don't want any of my taxes going to something I don't use?Philip_Thompson said:
You're right VED and Fuel Duty pay much more than just the roads. If they were hypothecated then the roads would be getting a lot more money or those taxes would be a lot lower.CorrectHorseBattery said:Hold on, vehicle excise duty doesn't pay for roads, you surely must know this, it goes into the same pot as everything else
If you don't use the roads, nor own a car, then you have lower taxes as you're not paying fuel duty and you're not paying vehicle excise duty.
Now if I don't want to watch the BBC, but do want to watch other live channels, then can I not pay the Licence Fee?0 -
I assume you used one in the past?CorrectHorseBattery said:
Don't use schools, can I have a reduction for those pleaseRobD said:
You probably use it indirectly. Deliveries to your house, to the supermarket where you buy food, etc.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Why is my tax money still being spent on the roads then?Philip_Thompson said:
Yes.CorrectHorseBattery said:
It's a simple yes or no, if I don't use the roads nor own a car, please can I have a lower tax rate as I don't want any of my taxes going to something I don't use?Philip_Thompson said:
You're right VED and Fuel Duty pay much more than just the roads. If they were hypothecated then the roads would be getting a lot more money or those taxes would be a lot lower.CorrectHorseBattery said:Hold on, vehicle excise duty doesn't pay for roads, you surely must know this, it goes into the same pot as everything else
If you don't use the roads, nor own a car, then you have lower taxes as you're not paying fuel duty and you're not paying vehicle excise duty.
Now if I don't want to watch the BBC, but do want to watch other live channels, then can I not pay the Licence Fee?0 -
I'm not sure, for me the papers don't even try to be impartial, the BBC does its best.Fysics_Teacher said:
What about newspapers: should you pay for them as well?CorrectHorseBattery said:Fundamentally, it is whether you consider the BBC a public good or a public benefit, as to whether you think we should all pay for it.
If you don't, then we don't, otherwise we should.
It's the same logic for healthcare, or roads, or railways
That is actually a serious question. For local government to be properly democratic it needs to be supervised, and local papers are the traditional way of doing that. As many are loss making this becoming harder, so should we use taxes to subsidise them? Perhaps we could have a Reading License and charge anybody who owns a book £50 a year?
I don't see the papers as providing a vital public service, unlike BBC News say.
If the BBC was Fox News and we were publicly paying for it, I would get the hatred but to me it is fairly balanced and that is shown in getting complaints from both sides0 -
How is that relevant? I'm still paying for schools now.RobD said:
I assume you used one in the past?CorrectHorseBattery said:
Don't use schools, can I have a reduction for those pleaseRobD said:
You probably use it indirectly. Deliveries to your house, to the supermarket where you buy food, etc.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Why is my tax money still being spent on the roads then?Philip_Thompson said:
Yes.CorrectHorseBattery said:
It's a simple yes or no, if I don't use the roads nor own a car, please can I have a lower tax rate as I don't want any of my taxes going to something I don't use?Philip_Thompson said:
You're right VED and Fuel Duty pay much more than just the roads. If they were hypothecated then the roads would be getting a lot more money or those taxes would be a lot lower.CorrectHorseBattery said:Hold on, vehicle excise duty doesn't pay for roads, you surely must know this, it goes into the same pot as everything else
If you don't use the roads, nor own a car, then you have lower taxes as you're not paying fuel duty and you're not paying vehicle excise duty.
Now if I don't want to watch the BBC, but do want to watch other live channels, then can I not pay the Licence Fee?
Did you use the BBC in the past? You must keep paying your license fee forever0 -
I never said that.CorrectHorseBattery said:Like I said above, privatising it is different to just abolishing the license fee.
I think Philip supports remove license fee + privatise it. I most certainly don't support privatising it
If it was up to me I'd make the BBC Trust a wholly independent Charity like the National Trust. It could then choose to raise revenues however it pleases, whether it be through fundraising drives like PBS, or subscription fees, or charitable donations, or however else it chooses to do it. It would be the BBC's choice not mine.
The Trust might choose to become a business instead of a charity in which case so be it, but it'd be more tax advantageous to be a charity.0 -
Really, really good point about local media. Most are now run by either large media companies with no local presence, or groups pushing a political agenda.ManchesterKurt said:BBC should be funded via a tax on utility bills so no one can avoid it.
Probably also should provide some level of local media as local democracy has almost no media to hold it to account any more.1 -
See, I said state schools were bad...CorrectHorseBattery said:I don't go to school, please can I stop my taxes being spent on that
0 -
But that is privatising it?Philip_Thompson said:
I never said that.CorrectHorseBattery said:Like I said above, privatising it is different to just abolishing the license fee.
I think Philip supports remove license fee + privatise it. I most certainly don't support privatising it
If it was up to me I'd make the BBC Trust a wholly independent Charity like the National Trust. It could then choose to raise revenues however it pleases, whether it be through fundraising drives like PBS, or subscription fees, or charitable donations, or however else it chooses to do it. It would be the BBC's choice not mine.
The Trust might choose to become a business instead of a charity in which case so be it, but it'd be more tax advantageous to be a charity.
The BBC should remain owned by the Government in my view, even if we abolish the license fee.0 -
Local media, I think more should be done to support those indeed.1
This discussion has been closed.