For UK members. If you own a TV you must have a licence. WRONG!

You require a licence to watch tv? AHAHAH

How stupid is your government and people?

A TV detector van?
How are they going to figure out what you are watching.. In your own home... and if they do... Invasion of privacy much?

SERIOUSLY ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!!

You have to have a license to watch TV in your country?!?!

Wow, I had no idea and never heard of such a thing.

I thought it was bad here in the USA.

Do they tax you on how many times you use the bathroom also......Thats crazy!

Honestly, I think your thread is already crystal clear for most UK TV owners..

But fair play for mentioning it..especially the fact that 1/10 of court cases are about TV licences..ridiculous, considering there are real crimes happening out on the streets on a daily basis.

Also..TV licence is primarily used to fund the BBC, rather than be used to actually allow to watch TV..

Though I'm sure you already knew the last point, OP

For some of you newcomers who clearly haven't read the thread and are jumping to conclusions, here are some points that stumason and others have covered in the thread.

The licence fee isn't a tax on owning or watching a TV. It funds the BBC and Channel 4 (which also carries commercials). The licence fee now also has to finance the World Service which the government used to do. The BBC has to finance the entire broadcasting structure (Sky excepted) of the UK - both TV and local and national radio.
The commercial broadcasters benefit by not having to pay for any of it and just reap the rewards of advertising. An example of this is the £80.3 million the BBC spent in 2010/11 on the digital switchover. None of the commercial channels paid for this.

No BBC channels carry any advertising and by and large the BBC produces quality programming and probably the best news coverage in the world.

There are subscription options available for Sky and Cable if you want extensive sport coverage or premium movie channels among other things.

Detector vans don't work and are a scare tactic. Has anyone ever seen one? I haven't.

The option? The BBC could carry commercials and produce and import the same mindless drivel we get on many of the commercial channels constantly punctuated by annoying commercials.

I know which I prefer!

Here is a lnk to a wiki page that excellently describes what the BBC does, how much it costs and how it raises the money. It also mentions the Gaelic language Scottish channel 'Alba' which no commercial enterprise would have ever created!

reply to post by wigit


Nice Thread and S+F!! And I never give one to anyone.

But the simple truth is I HAVE NEVER paid a TV license in all my life. I NEVER WILL and they can not do Sh** about it.

The British People (I say that with hesitation as so many are not really british) are so pathetic.

No one can do anything in the UK. They are all about the threat. I have had that silly little idiot turn up at my door and ask if I have a license. I have said "go **** yourself" every time.

For a start he somehow got passed my electronic gates both times and both times I made him feel completely crap about his small life. NO it is not a job, its a degenerates occupation.

TV license is the same as protection money. SO don't pay it. If everyone stopped paying it then what can they do.

My three neighbors or the people that live in the area that I do have also NEVER paid tv license. And all my neighbors earn over 80 grand a year. The reason is because its criminal to pay and the BBC forcing us to pay is criminal.

I dont even watch their crap at the best of times cos I have sky and watch the football and movies and SKY news ONLY. no BBC. SO NO feee from MEEEEE.

Originally posted by Six6Six
reply to post by wigit

 

TV license is the same as protection money. SO don't pay it. If everyone stopped paying it then what can they do.

Well for a start either there would be no TV or radio in the whole of the UK apart from Sky - that would give Murdoch a rather dangerous grip on power don't you think? Or there would be a large hike on tax!

Please read the thread or at least my post above yours and get a grasp of what the licence fee actually pays for.


The Wiki link from my post above disappeared and it's too late to edit it now, so I've added it here...

Wiki: BBC

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by Revolution9

 

Ok....

I can see you've lost the plot completely, so I won't waste my time.

I will just say that I don't watch much TV myself and leave what I do watch down to a few select programmes. Currently, they be Top Gear, Fringe, South Park and recently, the new Sherlock Holmes series, which is actually quite a good homage to Sir A.C Doyle.

Personally, it seems you're actually quite pretentious and believe yourself above others simply because you like crap from years ago, as opposed to crap from today.

How dare you? Or is that the only way to respond to me that you have available? You are very arrogant and rude. I never insulted you atall. I am angry at you for saying that. It was well below the belt.

A few select programmes??? Haha, all that stuff is junk tv. Southpark? How braindead a choice is that?

How can you compare Shakespeare as "junk" and Southpark as a "select" programe. I think it is possibly you my friend who has lost the plot if you seriously say Shakespeare and Orson Wells are junk and Southpark and Top Gear are select! Hahahaha!

I don't believe myself to be superior to others atall. Again you are making things up about me! I don't eat junk food and I don't watch junk tv like Southpark and Topgear. The reason I don't is because junk food is bad for my body and junk media would turn my brain to jelly.

Don't insult me again. Treat me with respect as I treated you. You called me "pretentious" and said I had "lost the plot". You insulted me twice! That shows me you have to resort to low punches because you are scared of my might in a fair fight!

____________________

Personally I don't want government in anyway involved with the
entertainment industry, let alone broadcasting and news;
Ethically that would be no better than having a
mindless advert industry in broadcasting.
Question,
If you do not watch any stations affiliated with bbc, but had
private satellite would you still need to pay a fee ?
. . . if so, the tax is just a money grab, and an endorsement
of a monopoly.

_________________________

Wow. The UK is the prime example of what happens when people sit back quietly and let the government strip away their rights.

Next time one of you UK citizens get arrested for something you got caught doing on CC camera, you should ask the prosecutor if he had a TV license to watch you in the first place.

reply to post by wigit


When I worked In Grosvenor Square they tried to make us pay up for TV, I laffed and slammed the door.
Communist (__*__) .

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by Revolution9

 

Ok....

I can see you've lost the plot completely, so I won't waste my time.

I will just say that I don't watch much TV myself and leave what I do watch down to a few select programmes. Currently, they be Top Gear, Fringe, South Park and recently, the new Sherlock Holmes series, which is actually quite a good homage to Sir A.C Doyle.

Personally, it seems you're actually quite pretentious and believe yourself above others simply because you like crap from years ago, as opposed to crap from today.

Infact, you have proved my very point here. You have twisted things in such a distorted fashion as to say Shakespeare is junk. Have you ever read Shakespeare? Answer my question? You better not lie to me because I will test you on it. You state that you hardly watch tv yet you reel off a lot of junk programmes that tells me you do watch quite a lot of tv.

You are precisely the kind of person I was describing to tell me Shakespeare is junk and Southpark is a "select" programme.

When you have read some poetry, done some proper thinking and critical analysis of the world you live in get back to me you who tell me Shakespeare is junk!

Originally posted by ToneDeaf
____________________

If you do not watch any stations affiliated with bbc, but had
private satellite would you still need to pay a fee ?
. . . if so, the tax is just a money grab, and an endorsement
of a monopoly.

_________________________

Yes you still need to pay a licence fee as all BBC TV channels and radio stations (except local) are on that platform.

Originally posted by mattifikation
Wow. The UK is the prime example of what happens when people sit back quietly and let the government strip away their rights.

Not really, the BBC has always been funded this way... Since the 1930's at least.

Originally posted by Mandrakerealmz
um? TV Licencing fees? Is that a joke? Every person in my country would agree that sounds like a scam.....

Yes I thought the same thing when I first learnt about TV licenses a few years ago. It's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. In Australia we have "pay TV" which is like satellite TV (Foxtel etc), which has a monthly cost. Then we have "free to air TV" which anyone can tune into for free. The adverts pay for the programs on free TV, we can have as many TV's as we like in our house and we don't have to pay any sort of license fee. We don't have any stupid TV inspectors coming into our houses and violating our privacy. And that's how it should be.

Originally posted by Revolution9

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by Revolution9

 

Ok....

I can see you've lost the plot completely, so I won't waste my time.

I will just say that I don't watch much TV myself and leave what I do watch down to a few select programmes. Currently, they be Top Gear, Fringe, South Park and recently, the new Sherlock Holmes series, which is actually quite a good homage to Sir A.C Doyle.

Personally, it seems you're actually quite pretentious and believe yourself above others simply because you like crap from years ago, as opposed to crap from today.

Infact, you have proved my very point here. You have twisted things in such a distorted fashion as to say Shakespeare is junk. Have you ever read Shakespeare? Answer my question? You better not lie to me because I will test you on it. You state that you hardly watch tv yet you reel off a lot of junk programmes that tells me you do watch quite a lot of tv.

You are precisely the kind of person I was describing to tell me Shakespeare is junk and Southpark is a "select" programme.

When you have read some poetry, done some proper thinking and critical analysis of the world you live in get back to me you who tell me Shakespeare is junk!

edit on 23-3-2012 by Revolution9 because: spelling

One last point here! I assume you said I "had lost the plot" because I used the term "zombies"? I used that as a metaphor. Do you know what a metaphor is? You will find no metaphors in those tv programmes you watch. You do find them in clever stuff like films made by Orson Wells. Go read some poetry and find out what a metaphor is. When writing here I use lots of metaphors and similes. It is a way to better express oneself, have impact and create images in the reader's mind. You should try it!

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder

Originally posted by Mandrakerealmz
um? TV Licencing fees? Is that a joke? Every person in my country would agree that sounds like a scam.....

Yes I thought the same thing when I first learnt about TV licenses a few years ago. It's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. In Australia we have "pay TV" which is like satellite TV (Foxtel etc), which has a monthly cost. Then we have "free to air TV" which anyone can tune into for free. The adverts pay for the programs on free TV, we can have as many TV's as we like in our house and we don't have to pay any sort of license fee. We don't have any stupid TV inspectors coming into our houses and violating our privacy. And that's how it should be.

That is so much more assertive than our British way. People are so willingly enslaved here in all kinds of ways. Like a lot of lost sheep they are. They drive me bonkers they do. Help!!!

That is why I like coming here to ATS. It is so refreshing to experience people who have a bit more freedom of spirit. Britain is a bit of a robot nation I am afraid to say!

reply to post by Insomniac

Well for a start either there would be no TV or radio in the whole of the UK apart from Sky - that would give Murdoch a rather dangerous grip on power don't you think? Or there would be a large hike on tax!

Please read the thread or at least my post above yours and get a grasp of what the licence fee actually pays for.

How dumb are you? Why is it that the majority of countries don't pay TV license fees hmmm? Have you ever wondered about that? Oh right we must have super high tax rates. I bet UK taxes are even higher than Australian taxes.

EDIT: In fact lets take a look at the data shall we:

Chart 3.2: The tax burden
OECD-30, total taxation revenue as a proportion of GDP, 2003

For the period 1965 to 2003, Australia’s tax burden has mostly been in the bottom third of OECD countries (Table 3.1). Australia’s tax burden has typically been lower than that in most of the European countries, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Canada, but has generally ranked above Japan and the United States.

Chart 3.3: The tax burden per capita
OECD-30, total taxation revenue per capita, 2003

On this basis, Australia has a low tax burden when measured as taxation revenue per capita (A$13,834) — slightly below the OECD-10 average of A$15,011. New Zealand ranks lower (A$12,122), and the United States (A$14,738), the United Kingdom (A$15,124) and Canada (A$16,436) are among those countries that rank higher (Chart 3.3).

source: International Comparison of Australian Taxes

With a fee to watch tv you should get really good shows to watch,its bad enough when you pay for cable and half of the programming is fn commercials.

reply to post by Insomniac

The option? The BBC could carry commercials and produce and import the same mindless drivel we get on many of the commercial channels constantly punctuated by annoying commercials.

Then why isn't the BBC channel offered as an extra thing which requires some sort of subscription? Why must they make it necessary to pay a license to watch TV at all? If you want advert free TV it should be payed for as an extra thing, not forced upon people. There should be a completely free and license free channels which are supported by adverts. If you want something more than that it should come as an extra which needs to be payed for if you can afford it. That is sensible and logical.