Page: 1 2 3 Next > Jump to:  Bottom  Last Post
 Listypoos
Male, 30-39, Europe
 1479 Posts
|
Monday, December 24, 2012 11:55:12 AM
Crakr, that didn't answer my question, which was how is only those that own a tv having to pay for a tv licence in any way 'socialism'?
Surely if you're gonna bang on about things being socialist you should actually read up on what it is before you do so..... i'm sure someone must have made a Marx book aimed at your level... perhaps a pop-up or fuzzy felt one. |
|
 Zeegrr60
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
1515 Posts
|
Monday, December 24, 2012 9:08:22 AM
No crime, no warrant. |
|
 fancythat
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
1417 Posts
|
Monday, December 24, 2012 4:30:04 AM
Brits are awesome. There were no screaming belligerent obscenities, no racist threats, no tear gas canisters and no tasers. |
|
 OldOllie
Male, 50-59, Midwest US
8764 Posts
|
Sunday, December 23, 2012 10:44:34 PM
If the BBC want's to charge for their pooty programming, they should scramble their signal and rent out descrambler boxes. |
|
 whodat6484
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
2269 Posts
|
Sunday, December 23, 2012 9:59:32 PM
@Listypoos - Ah, ok, now I get it. Thanks for the explanation! |
|
 CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
14374 Posts
|
Sunday, December 23, 2012 1:07:35 PM
randomxnp: Yeah, I've noticed that BBC News is one of the most liberal mouthpieces in Europe. They rake in over a billion dollars a year and they still need to be supported by illegal taxation?
I'm betting that if it were put to a vote, the British people would tell them to go piss off and quit squeezing and extorting people for more money. |
|
 Bakcagain21
Male, 18-29, Europe
279 Posts
|
Sunday, December 23, 2012 1:01:27 PM
This guys an idiot. An Act is a law in the UK. The License fee is classed as a tax avoiding a tax is a criminal offence. Despite what he thinks you can apply to the court for search and inspections which will be carried out under police supervision. Like how you can apply to the court for bailiffs and police to recover property for debt.
Whatever your opinion of the licensing fee, (it's actually supported by a minority of the public now) It's the current law and you should pay it until it's changed. It's not just the programming the BBC has been very influential in a lot of the advances and take up of recording and technical quality. They were the leading organisation which made HD TV mainstream.
@randomxnp Climate gate 28 was a disgrace! worse then Saville, pensioners have died from the cold and energy prices policy that will have been shaped from public opinion gotten from the Beeb. |
|
 McGovern1981
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
10257 Posts
|
Sunday, December 23, 2012 12:45:04 PM
HA! enjoy your freedom comrades! |
|
furrything
Male, 50-59, Europe
348 Posts
|
Sunday, December 23, 2012 10:29:24 AM
The sergeant seemed like a decent sort. Probably knows firsthand, what a criminal entity the BBC is. Demanding money with menaces.....it's as simple as that. These bastards (like ANY functionary) hates people who know their rights! |
|
randomxnp
Male, 30-39, Europe
779 Posts
|
Sunday, December 23, 2012 9:28:40 AM
IAFYM
The problem is that their website massively distorts the UK internet market. They have the money, they don't have to compete in a market so they destroy other websites and even potential for other websites that might be better.
Of course the whole news organisation distorts the news in the UK and even worldwide with their left-wing bias, anti-capitalist, anti-wealth, pro-EU, anti-Israeli and pro-CAGW.
In the last case they broke their charter to refuse to report very real scientific disputes and debates on the excuse that they were advised by 28 of the greatest expert. They then spent hundreds of thousands of pounds of our money to hire multiple lawyers to oppose one retired Welshman to try to hide the fact that this was a lie: only 3 were even arguably experts, most were campaigners or others with a vested interest in pushing the CAGW hypothesis. Even the three scientists had an interest, and a history of strong views. |
|
 iscariot40
Male, 30-39, Western US
27 Posts
|
Sunday, December 23, 2012 9:22:58 AM
11:43, I think Godwins Law needs to have a sister law that relates to IRL. |
|
 Draculya
Male, 30-39, Asia
6366 Posts
|
Sunday, December 23, 2012 9:10:37 AM
BTW, don't fill out a delivery address or owner's address on a warranty card. TV shops have a duty to report sales to the government (BBC). |
|
CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
14374 Posts
|
Sunday, December 23, 2012 9:05:50 AM
Listypoos: We don't pay a 'gun license'. In Illinois we have something called a FOID card (Firearm Owners ID). When you buy a gun, from a licensed shop, you pay a 'registration fee'. There is no 'license' and no yearly or periodic fees. In some states like Tennessee there is no card or fees at all. |
|
 IAFYM
Female, 18-29, Europe
66 Posts
|
Sunday, December 23, 2012 8:53:21 AM
randomxnp - Luckily what I said was an opinion not a fact!
And, in comparison to Sky News, BBC News is much better. Anyway, I was thinking more about their news website than the channel.
Also I'm sure I never said that everyone should pay it and as long as one doesn't have a tv, than one doesn't have a problem. |
|
Draculya
Male, 30-39, Asia
6366 Posts
|
Sunday, December 23, 2012 8:43:04 AM
Capita is getting desperate, hence the show of force and police presence, but I remain hopeful that licence delinquency will rise, forcing the BBC to rethink license-based revenue collection. This can only improve the country's freedom of choice.
I used to pay for a license, but I would not if I still lived in the UK. I now live in Hong Kong and no longer watch local TV (which does not require a license) as it's gone predominantly over to Chinese language and the remaining Ebglish broadcasts aren't worth watching. I get all my entertainment from the internet or a paid cable service that has channels that I choose. This is how it should be in the UK.
Let the BBC produce viewing worth one's choosing to pay for. |
|
randomxnp
Male, 30-39, Europe
779 Posts
|
Sunday, December 23, 2012 8:38:23 AM
IAFYM
"They produce some amazing programming and content (their news content is bar none)"
Then you pay for it! I don't want to.
Their news is actually pretty dire. It is utterly biased, they lie, they hide things and they openly support certain political parties and oppose others. They use their news to attack commercial rivals, but only the ones they disagree with.
tedgp
Good on you. I didn't have one for a while, but can't persuade my wife not to pay ours at the moment although I am working on it. |
|
Draculya
Male, 30-39, Asia
6366 Posts
|
Sunday, December 23, 2012 8:33:42 AM
The BBC has never relied upon detector van evidence in court and has rejected Freedom of Information requests to reveal the equipment used or its effectiveness as it would prejudice the public's likelihood of paying the licence fee (ie and admission of ineffectiveness).
Therefore, the only ways to be caught are to admit the fact, for the BBC's agent (Capita rep) observing a TV in use or to voluntarily permit access of the Capita Rep to the home whereupon he may infer that the household has been watching the BBC.
If one does not have a TV in view of the outside of the house, does not volunteer access, nor engages the inspector in conversation, then there can be no prosecution.
These two were stupid to have a conversation, but did not admit fault and had the presence of mind to record the conversation, so will get away with it. |
|
Draculya
Male, 30-39, Asia
6366 Posts
|
Sunday, December 23, 2012 8:23:33 AM
TV detector vans were long presumed by many not to contain any actual detection electronics, but just a big printout (today a database) of households not possessing a license. The vans were just a form of psychological deterrance. In the old days, it may have been feasable, but today it is not, for several reasons: modern TVs contain neither a CRT, not a local oscillator, having been converted to digital reception. In any case, there is too much electronic background noise. Apartment dwellers are also safe because a van could not differentiate between two households in adjacent apartments. |
|
IAFYM
Female, 18-29, Europe
66 Posts
|
Sunday, December 23, 2012 8:12:10 AM
I have no problem paying my license fee to the BBC, what I do have a problem with is the companies that take compensation along the way (like Capita, the people who run the license fee's revenue and collection service). I think the BBC should take all of the fee.
They produce some amazing programming and content (their news content is bar none) and as long as they keep the quality of the content up, then I have no problem paying any small increase. |
|
tedgp
Male, 30-39, Europe
2933 Posts
|
Sunday, December 23, 2012 7:59:56 AM
Since hiding a TV is a simple thing, the enforcement officers have broad powers to enter your home if they believe you have an unlicensed TV.
------
They dont have ANY powers to enter your home at all. All you need to do is call them or send them an instruction of removal of implied right of access.
If they breach that instruction, they can be liable for criminal tresspass. |
|
tedgp
Male, 30-39, Europe
2933 Posts
|
Sunday, December 23, 2012 7:58:34 AM
All these comments and nobody realises that its technically not illegal for you NOT to have a licence. Plus there are numerous loopholes you can use to get out of paying it. I havent had one for 15 years and never intend to. |
|
 rburridge
Female, 18-29, Europe
58 Posts
|
Sunday, December 23, 2012 7:41:10 AM
grrr I hate everyone and everything!! drat da police!!! drat da government!! Anarchy in the UK!!! |
|
 RobSwindol
Male, 30-39, Southern US
2035 Posts
|
Sunday, December 23, 2012 4:42:26 AM
Stupid |
|
 Nickel2
Male, 50-59, Europe
1558 Posts
|
Sunday, December 23, 2012 4:19:36 AM
Sistarose: The licensing of tv applies to all methods of receiving live television, whether by cable, digital, or broadcast transmission. It is perfectly OK though to watch tv programmes an hour after they have been transmitted by way of I-player, watch again or similar apps.
I would imagine that the next increase in license fee will be calculated to produce sufficient funds to compensate all those poor children assaulted by one jimmy savile and his ilk.
Look at the stupidity of it!
You pay firstly to subsidise paedo's, then you pay extra to compensate the victims.
Not for me thank-you; I'll stay with DVDs from the supermarket shelves. |
|
 drawman61
Male, 50-59, Europe
1404 Posts
|
Sunday, December 23, 2012 4:07:31 AM
Don't get me started on this!
It's another tax on the public. It dates back to the 1940's when the BBC was the only channel over here.
These days everything is digital and channels can be switched on and off at source. Every other channel has to fund itself with advertising. The most popular is Sky TV with all its sports and movies but people cannot afford this because they MUST pay for this license whether they want to watch BBC or not! The government gets a hefty share, hence why no one objects.
I still cannot believe Sky TV don't fight this. |
|
Page: 1 2 3 Next >
|
Back to Listing
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}