Why I want a compulsory TV licence to go

Interesting the bbc’s defenders mention the tv tax being used to fund the bbc’s radio stations ,but fail to mention (or ignore) the extreme damage that their unfair financial position has done to the commercial radio stations (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/jun/21/global-radio-restructure ),
but that was what they were set up for in the first place wasn’t it ? We all know Radio 1 was started to try to put Radio Caroline out of business & if it wasn’t for WWII Radio Normandy (a pre war commercial radio station) would have kept beating the bbc for listening figures .

http://www.sterlingtimes.co.uk/RADIO_NORMANDY.htm

We had a similar situation in New Zealand that people didn’t like paying the license fee. What we did was that we scrapped it and paid for it out of general taxation. The argument used was that the cost of collecting the license fee amounted to 25% of the money collected.

So no reason to scrap the work the BBC does, but I think the fee itself should be scrapped.

Personally I’d have no problem with adverts on BBC TV/Radio to drive the costs down further as well as long as the content is not compromised.

It is not clearcut. The BBC needs to be able to plan and budget high quality programmes, whether in natural history, drama or documentaries. That is what makes the BBC what it is: special, good. Yet it is spending fortunes on overpaid “sports”men and women and bombarding us with sports programmes, sometimes on both of its channel at the same time. Anyone iwth money can do that. And I don’t want my money to be spent in that way. Moreover, why should a licence fee payer not be allowed to view Springwatch when travelling abroad?

The morons who fail to appreciate the value (in every sense of the word) that the BBC provides are sufficient proof, for me, that the compulsory licence fee should remain in place as a means of funding it. Any other model, such as an optional subscription, would have to be significantly raised above the level of the current licence fee to offset the loss of revenues from those who would choose not to pay. And yet, those who chose not to pay would still be able to watch the BBC for free via services like iPlayer – unless, of course, access to that was wrapped into the paid subscription.

But, what astonishes me is that, now I live in Amsterdam, I can still receive BBC 1, 2, 3 and 4 via our cable service, which we pay for of course, but I’ve been unable to ascertain if any of what we pay actually goes to the BBC! If it doesn’t, that’s scandalous. I’d happily still pay for a TV licence to support the BBC, but without a UK address, apparently that’s just not possible. And there’s no other way I’m aware of to pay money to the BBC. Charitable donation, perhaps?

It would be a travesty of unparalleled proportions if the BBC were to lose its unique position in global broadcasting, by dumbing down the system of funding just to kowtow to the attention-span lacking couch-potato morons who so stupidly fail to recognise that commercial TV is NOT free! Where do they think the money comes from? From the companies who make the products that are advertised, of course. And where do those companies get the money? From the sale of their products to these same viewers of the commercial channels. Products whose prices are raised to cover the cost of advertising them! Durrrrr….. it’s a moronic system of funding for a moronic audience.

If we had more sense, as a society, we’d have found a way to dispose of TV advertising (and much of the rest too, while we’re at it). It’s a totally unproductive industry. The only people who really profit are the advertising agencies and the people they employ (directors, actors, models etc) to produce the ads. The rest of society is simply subsidising the often glamorous lifestyles of all the pople who work in the advertising industry. If the continued existence of the BBC were only to represent an alternative to this huge social wastage, that alone would be more than enough reason for it to continue!

Finally, I would say that it is way past time that the government did abolish the TV licence (say what? huh? please read on!) – and pay for the BBC out of general taxation, the same way it pays for everything else it funds. It’s ludicrous to incur the additional costs of running a separate service to collect the TV licence fee, which is also subject to evasion that will become even harder to avoid as services move away from the conventional broadcasting model to one that is more about on-demand viewing of online streaming content. But whatever is done, we must ensure that the BBC continues to be a paragon of broadcasting excellence – and it would be nice if, as such, it would stop chasing ratings by including ‘popular’ rubbish such as Eastenders and Strictly Come Dancing in its schedules and focus on more quality drama, documentaries and other content worthy of the standards the BBC maintains.

Why are we paying to be brainwashed by the BBC quality programmes are available on a pay as you go basis. Many poor people get criminal records due to being criminalised for not paying the tv license. Enforcement of the fee results in dubious practices.

How much do we pay for Sky subscription per year? How much quality, non repeated non-American material do you find on the encrypted Sky channels? What revenue does Sky get compared with the BBC. Why don’t we moan about the Sky monopoly? I pay nigh on £60 pounds a month to Sky. I am only supposed to watch that on one receiver on one TV at one named address, and should not take that card with me when I am not at home. Get real! you really want to sign everything over to a Sky monopoly! True there are problems with the crazy collection rules and regulations – but that is the fault of the legislators not the BBC! And even the inflexibility of the licensing authority is tame compared with the conditions dictated by Sky!

I know it’s quite a way up the board, but Tony’s post about socialism puzzles me – what is socialist about this topic? Indeed, what is political about this topic? People in favour of abolishing the license fee include a number of notable Tories and notable Labour Party members, and of course members of many other parties, including some very right-wing extremist parties. Likewise those in favour of keeping the fee include an equally broad spectrum of politicians and public.
I don’t get Tony’s point????

One or two adverts can be used to help bring down the cost of a tv licence. I seldom watch programes on the BBC as I access ITV, channel 4 and SKY. A low number of adverts will not spoil the number or range of programes on offer at the BBC. I do not think we should have to pay a licence fee of such high cost even if radio is included in the price.

I was in a lot of debt and having to save every single penny and cut down on everything. But I still had to pay for a TV licence. Even if I got rid of the TV then I would still need a licence because my computer can access TV.

The only question to ask yourself is “are you happy to pay people like Mr Paxman £1.5m a year”
(reportedly).?

I still don’t see why I should have to pay for something I don’t want. Surely for those who want it can pay for it. Those who don’t should be allowed to opt out. With digital tv now surely there is a way for those who don’t want the bbc to be disallowed from viewing their channels, same as having sky tv and not paying for the movie channels. As for the radio, I’m sure we can come up with something – a pin number for example. If someone came to my door asking me to buy a hoover and I didn’t want it that would be fair, but if they twisted my arm round my back and said but you have to buy it – would that be fair? It’s against my consumer rights. And I think it’s about time people in this country got off their fat backsides and started looking after them, because before we know it we’ll wake up one day and realise they were taken from under our noses.

This tax needs to be stopped now, I would happily not watch the bbc if it meant saving a few she knows and avoid paying for the bbc’s perverts to carry on their work. It should be noted that the tv detector vans have never led to a conviction and should the licensing agent call at your premises you do not have to allow access you also do not have to give them your name and should you not admit you have a television there is NO legal way they can take you to to court, unless you admit it.

Please replace she knows above with shekles !, again check the Internet for the facts given and see they are correct

I don’t care about the radio, i don’t care about ads on TV, i care about money in my pocket.
Having to think of every penny, consider the bills first before pleasure, having to tell your kids we cant afford it this month on a regular basis, tax after tax is not a way to live!
TV licence is totally unjustified specially when you hear about the millions given to BBC chiefs! its unbelievable.
If you notice BBC comedy shows you will find its not funny at all, nothing decent to watch before 8pm so why wast out money like this??