TV licence annoyance

General chit-chat

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Phil8659
Posts: 2175
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2022 11:50 am
Contact:

Re: TV licence annoyance

Post by Phil8659 »

I have not watched tv for decades. There is nothing worth watching on tv.
If one wants movies or whole tv programs, something like this does it a whole lot better:
https://archive.org/download/movies_202211
User avatar
Maia
Posts: 1815
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2022 8:11 am
Location: UK

Re: TV licence annoyance

Post by Maia »

Phil8659 wrote: Wed Jul 30, 2025 3:24 pm I have not watched tv for decades. There is nothing worth watching on tv.
If one wants movies or whole tv programs, something like this does it a whole lot better:
https://archive.org/download/movies_202211
My parents had the telly on at all times (and still do), so I could hardly avoid it when I was living there.

It's not that there are absolutely no films or programmes that I don't enjoy. My favourite film, for example, is The Wicker Man, which is, of course, a musical. But they are so few and far between that it's just not worth the bother of getting my own TV.
User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 8815
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: TV licence annoyance

Post by FlashDangerpants »

Maia wrote: Wed Jul 30, 2025 9:35 am
FlashDangerpants wrote: Wed Jul 30, 2025 8:46 am
Maia wrote: Tue Jul 29, 2025 8:52 am Even at a reduced rate of 50%, which I'm entitled to, TV is so full of mindless rubbish and blatant propaganda, that I try and avoid it like the plague
You prefer to get your rabid propaganda from Svetlana's bot farm. It has that extra xenophobic crunch you don't get from Auntie Beeb.
Why should everyone who has a TV be expected to fund the BBC?
On the one hand I guess that would be a result of us living in a democracy which has placed a certain value on various public services which must be paid for. So the BBC is the public service broadcaster, the NHS is the free at point of use healthcare provider, just as busses and trains are subsidised transport facilities and so on. You don't really get to choose which particular public services you contribute to as a rule.

Usually you wouldn't find many technocratic types such as myself endorsing what is known as hypothecated taxation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothecated_tax in which the tax paid by users of a public service is the source of direct funding for that service, it's not really very efficient and there are usually perverse outcomes.

The usual example of hypothecated taxes gone wrong is American highway maintenance, which is paid for out petrol taxes. The problem is that politicians won't allow those petrol taxes to rise in line with costs, meanwhile cars do the same amount of damage to the pavement per mile travelled as they ever did, but fuel efficiency gains have meant that they pay ever less tax per mile driven, and as a result American highways are some of the worst in the world.

You cold perhaps make a case that the BBC is another example of hypothecated taxation gone wrong by complaining for instance that it created a ravenous beast that consumes too many resources and outputs too much light entertainment product that could easily be supplied by commercial rivals. But that would be a complicated case to make well.

In the end the UK populace seems to value the BBC even those of us who rarely use it. It is a useful source of independent news content, good educational product and many other things we approve of. It would be a smaller thing by far if funded from general taxation instead of hypothecated taxes, so on the whole I think you are onto a loser with this one.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 13319
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: TV licence annoyance

Post by attofishpi »

FlashDangerpants wrote: Fri Aug 08, 2025 12:04 am
Maia wrote: Wed Jul 30, 2025 9:35 am
FlashDangerpants wrote: Wed Jul 30, 2025 8:46 am
You prefer to get your rabid propaganda from Svetlana's bot farm. It has that extra xenophobic crunch you don't get from Auntie Beeb.
Why should everyone who has a TV be expected to fund the BBC?
On the one hand I guess that would be a result of us living in a democracy which has placed a certain value on various public services which must be paid for. So the BBC is the public service broadcaster, the NHS is the free at point of use healthcare provider, just as busses and trains are subsidised transport facilities and so on. You don't really get to choose which particular public services you contribute to as a rule.
So do what the Australians do and scam the public by making them fund the broadcasting of socialist propaganda via TAX. Ya know, far more efficient than sending dorks to peoples houses and having to pay them to check up on people in their own homes.

Everyone against MASS immigration should boycott the TV licence, it's the most intelligent thing to do, bring the BBC to it's betraying needs..(Britains Betraying Corporation).
Post Reply