Freedom from TV license oppression

[Martin4x4]

grumbledoak said:

As for 'wreaked', I think the lefties wrecked the BBC long ago.

Keep drinking that Murdoch kool aid it will rot your brain completely.

[98elise]

Funk said:

There is no way a 'detector' can could work. .

Yes the is and its not even that complex for anyone with electronics experience. I was shown how it works, and more crucially how to mask a tv during my electronics training. TV's leak rf, and its pretty easy to detect.

Edited by 98elise on Saturday 28th February 22:53

[AdeTuono]

98elise said:

Funk said:

There is no way a 'detector' can could work. .

Yes the is and its not even that complex for anyone with electronics experience. I was shown how it works, and more crucially how to mask a tv during my electronics training. TV's leak rf, and its pretty easy to detect.

Edited by 98elise on Saturday 28th February 22:53

How do they detect anything when there's nothing inside them?

[grumbledoak]

Martin4x4 said:

Keep drinking that Murdoch kool aid it will rot your brain completely.

Care to tell us where you work, or shall we guess?

[Martin4x4]

grumbledoak said:

Martin4x4 said:

Keep drinking that Murdoch kool aid it will rot your brain completely.

Care to tell us where you work, or shall we guess?

Keep making those ill-informed guesses, they just prove my point.

[supersingle]

Martin4x4 said:

Yet another example of the Tories wreaking everything that is good in Britain.

They took our milk!

[McWigglebum4th]

Funk said:

McWigglebum4th said:

BUMP

the TV license will be dead in 15 years time

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-31623...


To be replaced by a mandatory tax on everyone whether you watch the idiot box or not



Be careful what you wish far

I won't pay it. Simple as that.

Happy to go to jail?

As you can bet your arse it will be the ultimate response if you don't pay the new media tax

[Ilovejapcrap]

For why it costs, yet the amount I use it and other stuff attached to it.

I think it's a bit mean not to pay it.

[Colonial]

I probably made this point earlier but why not just fund it from general revenue and build the amount in to existing taxes?

[mph1977]

98elise said:

Yes the is and its not even that complex for anyone with electronics experience. I was shown how it works, and more crucially how to mask a tv during my electronics training. TV's leak rf, and its pretty easy to detect.

Edited by 98elise on Saturday 28th February 22:53

and for a demonstation ofthe leakyness of TVs etc to RF put a mobile phone next to one and then ring it ...

[NicD]

Why not let the BBC raise it from subscribers and sales?

If it's popular, will have no problem.

If it's unpopular, pay from taxes. Why?

[dxg]

Colonial said:

I probably made this point earlier but why not just fund it from general revenue and build the amount in to existing taxes?

But what is the political, wealth redistribution argument that justifies using taxation to support one broadcaster's business model? I can't see it. And let's ignore the fact that the BBC is not supposed to be a commercial organisation. For all intents and purposes - and certainly from the point of no longer being able to differentiate its offerings on the market - it is.

Despite not watching any TV, I could live with a general taxation if I knew that a subsidy was going to be paid to *every* broadcaster. Better still, if a smaller levy was going to support the BBC's radio offerings which, apart from the jingoistic World Service and bias in Radio 4's comedy, generally excellent. This would leave the BBC's TV and web content to fight for its own right to exist.

Hell, I'd love for the BBC's Radio output to wind up something like NPR (without the censorship).

[davepoth]

98elise said:

Funk said:

There is no way a 'detector' can could work. .

Yes the is and its not even that complex for anyone with electronics experience. I was shown how it works, and more crucially how to mask a tv during my electronics training. TV's leak rf, and its pretty easy to detect.

Edited by 98elise on Saturday 28th February 22:53

How do you tell the difference between a TV and a computer monitor? Especially when my TV is a computer monitor. I'd be intrigued to know.

[davepoth]

BlackLabel said:

It's only a recommendation - and it sounds like they've picked the '15 year' figure from thin air. Shirley a non story?

15 years is the typical length of a BBC Charter renewal, of which one is due next year.

[Funk]

Colonial said:

I probably made this point earlier but why not just fund it from general revenue and build the amount in to existing taxes?

Because there are many of us who don't watch live TV or any of the BBC's output. Why should we have to pay for it? Perhaps you should pay for people who want Sky or Virgin TV too, even if you don't want it?

Make it subscription, lock the channels down and require a valid TV licence to watch iPlayer. It's all digital now so there are no excuses. Simple, effective and fair and those who want it can pay for it, those who don't, won't.

[Murph7355]

NicD said:

Why not let the BBC raise it from subscribers and sales?

If it's popular, will have no problem.

If it's unpopular, pay from taxes. Why?

Agree totally. TV is not an essential service, nor does programming have to be provided centrally. There is zero evidence to suggest BBC programming improves quality/freedom from bias across the board. You could argue strongly for the opposite!

If the fee was used exclusively to govern/control the broadcast spectrum then I could see some point (though again, the funding needed for that should come from the fees to use the spectrum).

[Tannedbaldhead]

markcoznottz said:

Ozzie Osmond said:

"communism?"

"state intimidation?"

It's less than 40p a day!!!!

Infiltration by lefties a broadly civil service thing not just BBC. It is really cheap, and also gives access to freeview, which if you only buy the box is ridiculous value.

I'd pay 40p a day for the privilege of listening to Radio 4 in my car on the way too and from work every day.

As for the accusation of a Left Wing bias? I think this is the opinion of thick UKIPpy types mixing up proper left wing views with a liberal, urbane cosmopolitan, intellectual mindset that they find equally offensive. Proper lefty class warrior types, believe it or not, are of the opinion that the BBC is a middle class bastion of the status quo, a pillar of the establishment and views the BBC bias as to the Right of the political spectrum. I recon that if the BBC is managing to upset everyone they are getting the balance more or less right.

[NicD]

Tannedbaldhead said:

I'd pay 40p a day for the privilege of listening to Radio 4 in my car on the way too and from work every day.

As for the accusation of a Left Wing bias? I think this is the opinion of thick UKIPpy types mixing up proper left wing views with a liberal, urbane cosmopolitan, intellectual mindset that they find equally offensive. Proper lefty class warrior types, believe it or not, are of the opinion that the BBC is a middle class bastion of the status quo, a pillar of the establishment and views the BBC bias as to the Right of the political spectrum. I recon that if the BBC is managing to upset everyone they are getting the balance more or less right.

see there you go, 40p a day to cover the billions the BBC burns. Would not take long to cover it.
As for your opinion, you are welcome to it.

[chris watton]

If the BBC is as great as some on here are saying, then it will be as successful, if not more, than SKY, if it were to become a subscription based model?

[McWigglebum4th]

chris watton said:

If the BBC is as great as some on here are saying, then it will be as successful, if not more, than SKY, if it were to become a subscription based model?

Only about 10% of what the BBC turns out is decent

And that 10% is only decent if you have an IQ higher then a fish

I am sure the BBC in its current form would go belly up within a year as the majority of the UK loves the fish level IQ fodder that sky and its ilk churn out