Government defeated over TV licence fee decriminalisation

[Kenai]

Talk about brainwashed.

Personaly, i would rather stand up for my universal and inalienable rights to life, than be happy to have a company infringe on them.
I will never pay it again, because I am free.
Anyone who thinks it's a good thing to be forced to pay a tax for nothing, clearly doesn't know what their life is worth.

Talk about melodramatic lol

 

[Destination]

There's a big hoohaa about council tax (LPT) in ROI, as its a new tax in most authorities, it doesn't really include any services so to speak as you still pay for those services such as refuse etc separately or through higher income tax rates.

It isn't a new tax, it is a reintroduction of a tax that one party did away with the buy themselves an election in the late 70s or early 80s.
They are also getting water charge and are up in arms regarding that. They still don't understand what their main financial issues were, and come the next election will vote once more for the nepotistic inbreds who got them into the mess in the first place.
Hard to learn when the politican's nephew is the judge and the company owner, his brother is the banker, and the wife runs the tribunal into it all.

 

[Skeeter]

Anyone who thinks it's a good thing to be forced to pay a tax for nothing, clearly doesn't know what their life is worth.

Your not forced to pay it, and if you do pay it you get something in exchange.

 

[anything I don't mind]

in some countries tv license is taken from the electric bill :|

In some countries they have no TV license but still manage to have better public broadcasting than the BBC. US has no tvl but has PBS and cspan.

 

[Burnsy2023]

In some countries they have no TV license but still manage to have better public broadcasting than the BBC. US has no tvl but has PBS and cspan.

PBS and cspan isn't anywhere close to the BBC in terms of remit or quality.

 

[Caged]

Lmao don't expect groen to make well-researched statements.

What was the last PBS show that we watched on prime time over here?

 

[UberTiger]

Some insightful replies above. I'm quite for the BBC TV and radio.

I'm happy to pay even if it's purely for the lack of bloody adverts. Of course not all the content is going to be top notch or to everyones taste, but throughout the year I'd say I get my money's worth on a few quality TV and radio shows.

I don't mind paying for media content if it's good value, as well as easy and convenient to access how and when I like, and not riddled with advertising.

I'm much more for the BBC now that the iPlayer service is so good and streams in such high quality. At £12 a month you get a fair bit for your money in terms of new British content and live streaming content. Compare it to Netflix at £7 a month.

What puzzles me though is why if you only stream from the iPlayer you don't have to purchase a TV licence. Considering the what I imagine are quite considerable bandwidth costs associated with streaming HD content this really surprises me and if I didn't already pay the TV licence due to having a TV, and only streamed through the iPlayer, I'd almost feel bad for not contributing to the content creators in some way...

 

[BunnyKillBot]

PBS and cspan isn't anywhere close to the BBC in terms of remit or quality.

Ignoring pbs, HBO? About £10.50 a month. Comparing doctor who to game of thrones is a complete joke.

 

[Caged]

You mean £10.50 a month on top of whatever you pay your cable/satellite provider already, don't you? HBO aren't maintaining live studios, distribution networks, running a 24x7 news operation, national and local radio stations, handing a percentage of that cash over to broadband development, or providing overseas content.

 

[UberTiger]

I don't think you can really compare the BBC with HBO.

HBO makes very few shows per year in comparison to the beeb and has 32.5M subscribers vs 25.5M UK TV licence sales, plus most of their original programming is targeted at certain demographics and the adult market, with most of their shows being the equivalent of rated 18.

The £10 a month price is also usually a bolt on to an existing cable package, which is a pre-requisite to getting it at all. So I wouldn't be surprised with the cable providers slightly subsidise the price in order to get the customer on board for a full phone, tv and cable package.

If/when HBO Go becomes available standalone over the net for non cable subscribers/international customers (potentially later this year) there's speculation the price will be likely be more like £15+ a month without a cable package.

 

[Skeeter]

What puzzles me though is why if you only stream from the iPlayer you don't have to purchase a TV licence. Considering the what I imagine are quite considerable bandwidth costs associated with streaming HD content this really surprises me and if I didn't already pay the TV licence due to having a TV, and only streamed through the iPlayer, I'd almost feel bad for not contributing to the content creators in some way...

You do for live programs on iPlayer, because the TV License is a license to receive a live broadcast TV signal.

Contrary to what most people believe, its not a tax imposed by the BBC, its a tax for a license which is then used primarily to fund the BBC. Its a rather key point people miss. You need a TV license to receive any live TV broadcast, regardless of which channel.

 

[UberTiger]

Ahh, interesting.

I'm kind of surprised this hasn't been updated to reflect the on demand nature of iPlayer TV and radio the last few years. Especially now that most BBC shows are available within minutes of them airing live on TV.

Plus it's more difficult to tell if people are watching streaming TV or pre-recorded TV if using a net connection. I'm guessing it's probably impossible for them to figure out unless they've got GCHQ slipping them the names of the naughty households who are streaming live but haven't paid.

 

[Werewolf]

Ignoring pbs, HBO? About £10.50 a month. Comparing doctor who to game of thrones is a complete joke.

HBO IIRC shows about 8-10 hours of new content a week.
The BBC shows more than that in a day between it's two main TV channels alone, ignoring all the radio stations etc )

Also HBO from memory not only charge a sub (which I believe is similar to the UK sub channels in that you pay per receiver), but also get advertising revenue.

 

[Werewolf]

Contrary to what most people believe, its not a tax imposed by the BBC, its a tax for a license which is then used primarily to fund the BBC. Its a rather key point people miss. You need a TV license to receive any live TV broadcast, regardless of which channel.

Aye at the moment we're reasonably fortunate in that the TVL actually goes towards something other than just general government funds.

IIRC the BBC is now being expected to cover the cost of things that used to be paid for as part of the Foreign Office policies, and broadband expansion.

I doubt very much that if the government decided to shut the BBC down we'd see the TVL go away.
It's too much money that could be spent on other things the government might want to do.

 

[Skeeter]

Yep if the BBC went commercial I expect the TVL would stay, although I'd hope it would be reduced.

All the cut backs the BBC have had to make recently have been because the Government froze TVL fee.

 

[vila]

You do for live programs on iPlayer, because the TV License is a license to receive a live broadcast TV signal.

Contrary to what most people believe, its not a tax imposed by the BBC, its a tax for a license which is then used primarily to fund the BBC. Its a rather key point people miss. You need a TV license to receive any live TV broadcast, regardless of which channel.

But surely that is the very point people are objecting to?

Most people have a finite disposable income, and for some it's tight.

If you enjoy the BBC then great but why should you be forced to pay the licence fee that primarily funds the BBC if you would rather have 'just' say a HBO subscription and enjoy its limited but high quality output?

 

[Caged]

If an HBO version of Netflix existed then you wouldn't need a TV License, just like you don't need one for Netflix.

 

[Skeeter]

For the same reason someone who drives 1,000 miles a year pays the same VED as someone who drives 50,000. Its a flat fee that's the same for everyone. Moaning that you shouldn't have to pay it because you don't like part of what it pays for is odd.

I dont have kids, but part of my taxes fund schools. I'm not going to refuse to pay income tax because I don't use some of the services it pays for, am I?

And if money is so tight that you can't afford £5 a week, then dont watch TV, rather than moaning that you shouldn't have to pay it, while still wanting to use its service.

Watching live TV in the UK will cost you £145 per household per year. Its as simple as that. Take it or leave it.

 

[anything I don't mind]

Having to pay for other children's education is an injustice greater than the TV license. People should suffer the consequence of having their own children not pass it on to people they don't even know through the government. Even if tvl was £20 a year i would still be against the BBC and tvl. Not that it will ever be £20 per year as the price has never gone down.

 

[Skeeter]

Having to pay for other children's education is an injustice greater than the TV license. People should suffer the consequence of having their own children not pass it on to people they don't even know through the government. Even if tvl was £20 a year i would still be against the BBC and tvl. Not that it will ever be £20 per year as the price has never gone down.

You were a child once. I assume you were also educated...