TV Licence - Page 6

Neil · 22-02-2008, 23:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lilly

Blimey, that's a lot of money!

It is and many people are paying that much for Sky and the license fee

garinda · 23-02-2008, 00:09

No licence fee equals no funding for the B.B.C.

Simple.

I notice that no defenders of the current system have commented on the fact that we pay for foreign language broadcasts to the rest of the world on the B.B.C,and which they get to listen to for free.

cashman · 23-02-2008, 00:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

No licence fee equals no funding for the B.B.C.

Simple.

I notice that no defenders of the current system have commented on the fact that we pay for foreign language broadcasts to the rest of the world on the B.B.C,and which they get to listen to for free.

bet those defenders had no idea? i certainly didn't,thanks for the ammo.

garinda · 23-02-2008, 00:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

bet those defenders had no idea? i certainly didn't,thanks for the ammo.

I thought I hadn't seen their replies because I hit the off button when they're on.

steeljack · 23-02-2008, 00:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

I notice that no defenders of the current system have commented on the fact that we pay for foreign language broadcasts to the rest of the world on the B.B.C,and which they get to listen to for free.

I think the BBC gets funding or did at one time , from the foriegn office budget for its overseas broadcasts as part of the Govt. propaganda program, much like Voice of America, DW (German radio) , Radio France and Radio Moscow

garinda · 23-02-2008, 00:42

The cost of producing newspapers/magazines certainly isn't covered by the retail price.

It's all from advertising.

If you don't want to see them just flick over, like you can do with commercial television.

garinda · 23-02-2008, 00:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by steeljack

I think the BBC gets funding or did at one time , from the foriegn office budget for its overseas broadcasts as part of the Govt. propaganda program, much like Voice of America, DW (German radio) , Radio France and Radio Moscow

The same F.O. which is funded by the British tax payer, so all these Johnny foreigners can listen to programmes we've paid for?

garinda · 23-02-2008, 00:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by steeljack

I think the BBC gets funding or did at one time , from the foriegn office budget for its overseas broadcasts as part of the Govt. propaganda program, much like Voice of America, DW (German radio) , Radio France and Radio Moscow

'BBC World Service's broadcasting costs are met by a separate Parliamentary grant-in-aid, totalling £252m in 2007/08.'

BBC - Press Office - World Service information pack Constitution and Funding

...and all for free, for everyone else around the world to listen to.

garinda · 23-02-2008, 00:53

From the same link.

'The announcement formally confirmed £15m per annum funding for a BBC news and information television channel in the Farsi (Persian) language for Iran which will be launched next year.'

Good new all round then, if you're Iranian.

Neil · 23-02-2008, 01:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

The cost of producing newspapers/magazines certainly isn't covered by the retail price.

It's all from advertising.

Yes and no. I have read it cost's a couple of pence to print a newspaper. They make several times the selling price on each one sold due to advertising.

garinda · 23-02-2008, 01:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil

Yes and no. I have read it cost's a couple of pence to print a newspaper. They make several times the selling price on each one sold due to advertising.

...and who pays the journalists, illustrators, photographers etc., their lovely big salaries, nevermind the shareholders?

Don't argue with me, I'm always right.

Neil · 23-02-2008, 01:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

BBC - Press Office - World Service information pack Constitution and Funding

reading that is very annoying. Why would I want my tax/license fee to be used to provide free TV to the people we are at war with in the middle east?

andrewb · 23-02-2008, 01:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by jambutty

Cyfr you are spouting a load of crap as usual and you could do well to determine the meaning of pedantic and misguided before using them.

I'm sure I knew exactly what I was saying with those words.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jambutty

However it is comforting to know that you are privy to government thinking in that if the BBC was made private the license fee WOULD BE REDUCED. The arrogance? Sheeesh!

That is the problem with people - they have made the connection between the license fee and the BBC and just refuse to accept that it is tenuous at best. THE LICENSE MONEY GOES TO THE GOVERNMENT. IT COSTS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF MONEY TO RUN THE BBC AND THE GOVERNMENT MAKES A GRANT TO THE BBC TO ENABLE IT TO RUN. THERE IS NO DIRECT CORRELATION BETWEEN THE LICENSE FEES AND BBC FUNDING.

Writing it in red capital letters doesn't make it more correct you know. How can you not see. The government takes a licence fee, then the BBC gets a grant from the government, can you guess where the money for the grant comes from? This is clearly us funding the BBC and I'm sure every other person will read the post and see it for themselves whether they agree with the fee or not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jambutty

Calculations theoretical eh? Now let me see dividing the license fee of £135.50 by the number of days in a normal year (365) is a fraction over 37p per day. To be really pedantic about it, it is 37.1232877p per day. No theory there, just plain FACT. But then you do seem to have difficulty from distinguishing between fact and theory. Your comments are quite simply theatrical.

Try one film per week. It would still be cheaper (£2.60) than one ticket in a cinema.

Yes it IS theory. Your assuming people will use the 37p a day watching a film on the BBC. In practice people don't do that.

Also comparing BBC on your tv to the cinema is.. well do I even need to explain why that's a bad comparison?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jambutty

The real point is, that you cannot seem to grasp, the law of the land decrees that in order to have apparatus that can receive TV programmes installed in your house you must have a TV license. Whether you watch it or not or which channels, is completely irrelevant. If you have a working apparatus you must have a license. If you don’t want to pay the license fee then don’t have such an apparatus. It’s not rocket science.

Now toddle off to mummy and get your nappy changed.

I understand the law of the land, if you read my earlier posts I'm quite aware of what is and isn't allowed, hence I only use BBC iPlayer.

The real point is that we have MP's and a parliament to amend and create laws. I'm not advocating breaking the law, I'm saying lets discuss the possibility of changing it.