More envy gripes about excessive salaries.
Discussion
johnfm said:
Murph7355 said:
thinfourth2 said:
And all the channels i have mentioned would vanish as they are the channels no commercial operator could run
If there's insufficient demand for an entertainment service, why should it exist?randlemarcus said:
Makes perfect sense to me. I violently dislike EastEnders and reality guff, but feel that the Beeb provides enough decent content across all its channels to justify the licence fee in my particular case.
I would cheerfully pay the licence fee for BBCs 2, 4 and Radios 4 and 6 alone.It depresses me that I pay much more than the licence fee to VM who supply me with telly that has at 15 minutes of adverts in every hour, and that this is the reality of commercial telly; you pay for it, and then you pay for it again (with your time) with adverts. Or fast-forwarding through them at 32x.
Edited by CommanderJameson on Tuesday 20th March 17:19
TwigtheWonderkid said:
crankedup said:
Gaby Logan seems to be able to manage being a link person very well indeed.
Agreed. She was at the Beeb, but left.....because they wouldn't pay her the going rate.That's how capitalism works you see.
![silly](/inc/images/silly.gif)
TwigtheWonderkid said:
crankedup said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
crankedup said:
'all' the link has to do is take instructions from the gallery / director and ensure a flow of punditry exudes from guests.
Well if it's that easy, why aren't you doing it? Or are you earning more than £2M a year elsewhere? ![hehe](/inc/images/hehe.gif)
![cool](/inc/images/cool.gif)
Its not the difficulty of the job itself, you need to be well connected and a decent manager helps. Like most things once you have managed to prise open the door and get yourself in, your in for life. Unless you do something really stupid, like make racist comments into a live mike.
It's a bit pathetic really, but hey..you carry on fella. Like Marlon Brando in On The Waterfont...You could have been someone, you could have been a contender.
crankedup said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
crankedup said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
crankedup said:
'all' the link has to do is take instructions from the gallery / director and ensure a flow of punditry exudes from guests.
Well if it's that easy, why aren't you doing it? Or are you earning more than £2M a year elsewhere? ![hehe](/inc/images/hehe.gif)
![cool](/inc/images/cool.gif)
Its not the difficulty of the job itself, you need to be well connected and a decent manager helps. Like most things once you have managed to prise open the door and get yourself in, your in for life. Unless you do something really stupid, like make racist comments into a live mike.
It's a bit pathetic really, but hey..you carry on fella. Like Marlon Brando in On The Waterfont...You could have been someone, you could have been a contender.
I once had to narrate a dvd, in a studio, with a script, where I could go over and over it until I got it right, and it's not easy. So anyone that fronts live tv has my respect, regardless of whether or not the subject matter is of interest to me.
Making live tv look easy is incredibly hard. Unfortunately, the down side of that skill is that idiots watch and say "£2m for that....anyone could do it!"
Why does everyone automatically cry 'envy'? Lots of rich folk call for higher taxes, even Warren Buffett. I highly doubt he's 'envious' of other peoples wealth.
I happen to think inheritance taxes should be higher, but income taxes lower across the board and national insurance lower too. Thats not necessarily based on envy, just that i happen to think taxing wealth is better than taxing production.
I happen to think inheritance taxes should be higher, but income taxes lower across the board and national insurance lower too. Thats not necessarily based on envy, just that i happen to think taxing wealth is better than taxing production.
CommanderJameson said:
I would cheerfully pay the licence fee for BBCs 2, 4 and Radios 4 and 6 alone.
It depresses me that I pay much more than the licence fee to VM who supply me with telly that has at 15 minutes of adverts in every hour, and that this is the reality of commercial telly; you pay for it, and then you pay for it again (with your time) with adverts. Or fast-forwarding through them at 32x.
But you arent forced to pay for VM are you? It depresses me that I pay much more than the licence fee to VM who supply me with telly that has at 15 minutes of adverts in every hour, and that this is the reality of commercial telly; you pay for it, and then you pay for it again (with your time) with adverts. Or fast-forwarding through them at 32x.
Edited by CommanderJameson on Tuesday 20th March 17:19
That's not a tax, like the BBC Licence is.
I listen to Nick Ferrari on LBC when I drive to work. If he was replaced I'd likely listen to his replacement. I like a bit of talk radio in the car rather than music.
I suspect this is true for many who may have watched Jonathan Ross's show on BBC1. They didn't watch it for him, but because of who the guests were and the time the programme was on. People bang on about top talent in the media being " worth it". A point which is largely a nonsense.
I suspect this is true for many who may have watched Jonathan Ross's show on BBC1. They didn't watch it for him, but because of who the guests were and the time the programme was on. People bang on about top talent in the media being " worth it". A point which is largely a nonsense.
The BBC are in a no win situation. There's a constant flow of their best talent away to commercial broadcasters as they can pay more money.
When the beeb draw a line in the sand and decide to pay someone the market rate to keep them, everybody jumps on them for paying £2m of licence fee money to one person. When they decide not to pay and they lose the talent, people moan that the standard isn't good enough.
When the beeb draw a line in the sand and decide to pay someone the market rate to keep them, everybody jumps on them for paying £2m of licence fee money to one person. When they decide not to pay and they lose the talent, people moan that the standard isn't good enough.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
crankedup said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
crankedup said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
crankedup said:
'all' the link has to do is take instructions from the gallery / director and ensure a flow of punditry exudes from guests.
Well if it's that easy, why aren't you doing it? Or are you earning more than £2M a year elsewhere? ![hehe](/inc/images/hehe.gif)
![cool](/inc/images/cool.gif)
Its not the difficulty of the job itself, you need to be well connected and a decent manager helps. Like most things once you have managed to prise open the door and get yourself in, your in for life. Unless you do something really stupid, like make racist comments into a live mike.
It's a bit pathetic really, but hey..you carry on fella. Like Marlon Brando in On The Waterfont...You could have been someone, you could have been a contender.
I once had to narrate a dvd, in a studio, with a script, where I could go over and over it until I got it right, and it's not easy. So anyone that fronts live tv has my respect, regardless of whether or not the subject matter is of interest to me.
Making live tv look easy is incredibly hard. Unfortunately, the down side of that skill is that idiots watch and say "£2m for that....anyone could do it!"
So it was 'only the once' that you over dubbed a dvd?
TwigtheWonderkid said:
The BBC are in a no win situation. There's a constant flow of their best talent away to commercial broadcasters as they can pay more money.
When the beeb draw a line in the sand and decide to pay someone the market rate to keep them, everybody jumps on them for paying £2m of licence fee money to one person. When they decide not to pay and they lose the talent, people moan that the standard isn't good enough.
Utterly and completely wrong, you do professional artists and presenters a grave injustice with your words. True some will jump to the highest bidder (Mr Brundle?) but make no mistake many will want to be associated with high class work that will further their career and reputation. Give some examples of this constant flow you talk of.When the beeb draw a line in the sand and decide to pay someone the market rate to keep them, everybody jumps on them for paying £2m of licence fee money to one person. When they decide not to pay and they lose the talent, people moan that the standard isn't good enough.
crankedup said:
Utterly and completely wrong, you do professional artists and presenters a grave injustice with your words. True some will jump to the highest bidder (Mr Brundle?) but make no mistake many will want to be associated with high class work that will further their career and reputation. Give some examples of this constant flow you talk of.
Adrian Childs, Christine Bleakly, Gabby Logan, Alishia Dixon. Those are just the recent ones that spring to mind. How many can you name that have made their name on commercial telly but have defected to the beeb?
DSM2 said:
Why? Where do you think the wealth comes from, in the main?
Whats your point? Consumption/VAT is also funded by income at base, as is duty and everything else.The point is if i tax one thing and not another that skews investors decision making. I happen to think speculation isnt taxed enough, and wealth invested in actual productive uses is taxed too much. Seems odd that if i choose to spend £1million of my hard earned on a house, any profit i make isnt taxed. If I happen to spend £100k of my hard earned on a house, and the other £900k invested in various job creating businesses, any profit i make on the £900k is taxed. Should be the other way round. Once built, a house, worth £100k or £1million takes the same amount of upkeep, creates no more jobs as its value is bid up.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff