The problem with using the idea that the majority support removing the need to pay for BBC, is that most people want something for nothing. It is also thought that 50% of the population support bringing back hanging.
How can you lie there and think of England When you don't even know who's in the team
And all that lovely Radio ... 1,2,3 and 4 ... all for free ... no licence needed ... after my MA I was skint ... very skint indeed ... and OH was at Chelsea doing his MA ... so I put out tiny portable tv in the loft and listened to the for 3 years until we were earning reasonable money and had enough to spare for the licence fee. But to be honest, I’d happily buy a licence for the BBC radio stations alone 🥰
Gardening in Central Norfolk on improved gritty moraine over chalk ... free-draining.
I'm posting this question here, not because I'm feeling curmudgeonly but because I know that corner members will see this as a genuine "I wonder why...." Â When a male person refers to their husband, I am totally used to it being a bloke - so what -big deal but I can't remember ever hearing of a member of a gay couple being referred to as a wife.. Why might this be? I have my own ideas but I would like to hear a more informed opinion.
My friend at work refers to her other half as her wife....They are married.
@philippasmith2, if you just go to the BBC website, you will see on the top toolbar a button for Iplayer. If you click on that, it will ask you to register and there you go. You can search for what programme you want to watch and which episode if it is a serial. Â
As I seem to be in the opposite side to most in these discussions, I'd like to pose a question of genuine interest (because the positive feeling towards the BBC and license fee has somewhat surprised me).
The license fee is a tax. I've checked the numbers and it generates about £4 billion of revenues for the BBC each year, increasing yearly in line with inflation. This is 75% of BBC revenue, with the remaining 25% from other sources.
So let's consider a tax allocation question. If given a choice, would you:
A) continue to give that £4bn to the BBC
B ) give the £4bn to other worthy causes, and leave the BBC to run on the remaining 25%, possibly with a subscription model
"Worthy causes" can be whatever you see fit - the purpose of the question is to see where the BBC falls within "priorities", not to debate what a good cause is.Â
If it makes it easier, the question could be "if a political party manifesto/budget included A or B, who would you be more likely to vote for".
To help set the scale as one example, £4 billion is also the amount the British Medical Association has asked for in additional NHS funding.
It would also increase the entire nhs budget for cancer diagnosis and care by 45%.
Other examples: £4bn would increase the entire UK social care budget by about 18%, or the entire school funding budget by 9%.
The BBC would also remain, but only with 25% of its budget plus whatever subscription revenue it gathered.
Not a surprise, but I'd choose B for the reasons I've already articulated. Let's hear your choice and reason?
Since when is paying a license or a subscription for a service received classed as a tax? If you don't have a TV you don't have to pay for a TV licence.  If you do have a TV, you don't have to pay extra to have SKy or any other commercial provider of TV channels but the chances are you'll watch the Beeb even if it's only for 5 minutes a year and the BBC is a public license broadcaster funded by public subscription.
Not only is it publicly funded but it has a mission - to entertain, educate and inform. Being publicly funded it also has a duty to be financially responsible and it has, for years, made extra income from selling programmes, programme formats, books and merchandise associated with programmes and so on. There are international rules about what can be broadcast by whom and where so using Britbox to sell to the USA, Canada and Oz is a good move. Doesn't work in the EU which has different rules.
There's a lot of dross on the Beeb but, on the whole, a lot that is good and more than worth the current license fee and, as has been said by others, lots of great radio too. You don't have to watch or listen.
Or C) Let Boris give another £4Bn to his friends and supporters (track and trace fiasco anyone?). HS2, overpriced nuclear power, Garden Bridge or non-existant Brexit ferries maybe? The private sector group Capita (AKA Crapita) will earn over £1Bn from running the licence fee collection scheme. As it is legally defined as a tax why are we paying the private sector to collect taxes? Could it be because the Tory mantra is that they must make a profit out of everything? They really are the Ferengi of politics.
I am delighted to give £3 a week to be informed and entertained by the BBC.Â
It is an institution that enriches our lives and raises the status of our country around the World. It is trusted more than virtually any other news organisation.Â
Tory attacks on the BBC cannot go down well with a sizeable slice of the party’s supporters and I think, indeed hope, Conservatives are misreading the mood of the nation.
Posts
It is also thought that 50% of the population support bringing back hanging.
When you don't even know who's in the team
S.Yorkshire/Derbyshire border
Gardening in Central Norfolk on improved gritty moraine over chalk ... free-draining.
You can search for what programme you want to watch and which episode if it is a serial. Â
As I seem to be in the opposite side to most in these discussions, I'd like to pose a question of genuine interest (because the positive feeling towards the BBC and license fee has somewhat surprised me).
The license fee is a tax. I've checked the numbers and it generates about £4 billion of revenues for the BBC each year, increasing yearly in line with inflation. This is 75% of BBC revenue, with the remaining 25% from other sources.
So let's consider a tax allocation question. If given a choice, would you:
A) continue to give that £4bn to the BBC
B ) give the £4bn to other worthy causes, and leave the BBC to run on the remaining 25%, possibly with a subscription model
"Worthy causes" can be whatever you see fit - the purpose of the question is to see where the BBC falls within "priorities", not to debate what a good cause is.Â
If it makes it easier, the question could be "if a political party manifesto/budget included A or B, who would you be more likely to vote for".
To help set the scale as one example, £4 billion is also the amount the British Medical Association has asked for in additional NHS funding.
It would also increase the entire nhs budget for cancer diagnosis and care by 45%.
Other examples: £4bn would increase the entire UK social care budget by about 18%, or the entire school funding budget by 9%.
The BBC would also remain, but only with 25% of its budget plus whatever subscription revenue it gathered.
Not a surprise, but I'd choose B for the reasons I've already articulated. Let's hear your choice and reason?
Since when is paying a license or a subscription for a service received classed as a tax? If you don't have a TV you don't have to pay for a TV licence.  If you do have a TV, you don't have to pay extra to have SKy or any other commercial provider of TV channels but the chances are you'll watch the Beeb even if it's only for 5 minutes a year and the BBC is a public license broadcaster funded by public subscription.
Not only is it publicly funded but it has a mission - to entertain, educate and inform. Being publicly funded it also has a duty to be financially responsible and it has, for years, made extra income from selling programmes, programme formats, books and merchandise associated with programmes and so on. There are international rules about what can be broadcast by whom and where so using Britbox to sell to the USA, Canada and Oz is a good move. Doesn't work in the EU which has different rules.
There's a lot of dross on the Beeb but, on the whole, a lot that is good and more than worth the current license fee and, as has been said by others, lots of great radio too. You don't have to watch or listen.
It is an institution that enriches our lives and raises the status of our country around the World. It is trusted more than virtually any other news organisation.Â