TV licensing...

[kwackers]

No, looking at Horizon, Panorama etc... they have far less content in them (or did when I stopped watching) than they used to.

Where did tomorrow's world go?

I watched some old Tomorrows Worlds about 6 months ago - they were dire. Mind you I *was* a huge fan, so I guess I had high expectations.
Can't speak for Horizon, Panorama etc since I haven't seen any old ones since they were first broadcast but I'd expect the same fate to have befallen them.

Funnily enough, I was reading New Scientist on the train and pondering why it was so crap these days - seemed very 'popularist'.
It's hard to work out if it's true or if I've simply been around the block a few too many times...

[[XAP]Bob]

I think it was Horizon that started the rot for me.
It used to be an in-depth grown-up informative and educational programme, but became an entertainment for the masses programme. It became something that I didn't want to watch.

I don't think that it's just that I grew up and knew more...

[Mick F]

I was pondering the TVL conundrum again this morning, and wondering if I ruled the world and could change something ......

I really don't know.

My brain went onto council tax. We have no kids at school, I can transport my own household rubbish to a dump, I don't want street lighting, and I can't remember when I last saw a policeman. The parish council never seems to do much, and the county council ditto.

However, CT is a good thing. We all benefit from children being educated, street lighting is a good thing generally, and rubbish needs to be cleared. The police are needed of course whether you see them or not and the councils are part of the government of the country.

I don't object to paying council tax but only recently I was able to negotiate for a cheaper deal by being downgraded from Band C to Band B.

Now, why can't I negotiate for a cheaper TVL?
(No I don't want a B+W telly)

We don't have a house-full of people and kids. Some properties have 6 or 8 people in them with a telly in every room, but they still pay their TVL at the same price I would do with two people and only a single telly that we hardly ever watch.

Hence, I stopped it.
One thing or another.
As many tellies as I want running 24/7 .............. or nothing.
No half-way house.
Take it, or leave it.

[kwackers]

<snip>
No half-way house.
Take it, or leave it.

According to an online form I filled in whilst bored I pay around £30k more in tax than I receive in benefits. £150 is a bargain for what I get from the beeb.

[Psamathe]

£150 is a bargain for what I get from the beeb.

Which probably illustrates the problem because I have a TV, etc. but never watch the BBC (don't use their web stuff, don't use their weather app, ...) so for me it represents very poor value.

How would people feel if, in a move to court favour with certain elements of our press, our government decided that if you own a TV it is compulsory to pay for a Sky subscription? You might not want one or even watch their broadcasts but paying for it would be compulsory. Can you imagine the outcry?

Ian

[kwackers]

Which probably illustrates the problem because I have a TV, etc. but never watch the BBC (don't use their web stuff, don't use their weather app, ...) so for me it represents very poor value.

How would people feel if, in a move to court favour with certain elements of our press, our government decided that if you own a TV it is compulsory to pay for a Sky subscription? You might not want one or even watch their broadcasts but paying for it would be compulsory. Can you imagine the outcry?

Ian

I think you missed my point. I pay for *lots* of stuff I don't use, such is the nature of society and social stuff in general.
Even if you think you don't use the beeb it's the case that just by existing they produce a moderating effect on other broadcasters. (Just take a look at American TV to see the true horror that awaits in a free for all.)

Seriously, £150 is hardly worth the effort. Most folk spend far more on beer and fags and certainly spend a lot more on their Sky subscriptions.
In contrast the government has printed money and given it away almost free costing me a fortune in pension losses, savings and other stuff whilst encouraging another housing bubble. They're quietly changing laws and sneaking privatisation in with little fuss all of which reduces the value of any stake I have in this country.
IMO there are things that are well worth complaining about when it comes to wasting cash, but the TV license is a long long way down the list.

[Mick F]

I don't disagree with you kwackers, I really don't.
However, the things you listed are things I cannot do anything about.
I can choose not to have a TV.

Also, the "horror" of US TV isn't a problem to me. Let it be here like it is there. Why not?
Does it really matter?
UK TV is bad enough so it may as well be horrible.

And again.......
Why should you have to pay for live TV when EVERYTHING else that the BBC put out is free?

Imagine going into a cafe for a cuppa.
The tea is completely free, but you have to pay for the milk.

[Mark1978]

Imagine going into a cafe for a cuppa.
The tea is completely free, but you have to pay for the milk.

But it's not unusual for businesses to do that sort of thing. Have a good deal of products which are free to access, but you have to pay for the 'core' product.

[simonineaston]

I think you missed my point.

I have to point out that the vast majority of respondants on this topic have missed my point, which, seven pages ago, asked contributors to comment on the sort of person who takes on the job as 'enforcer', either for Capita or the BBC...
I am perfectly clear about my position regarding the cost and value of, a license, and if I ever start to watch live TV, whether from the BBC or not, will not hesitate for a moment to go out and buy one. I doubt I will though, at least for the foreseeable. My only issue is that as a regular consumer of BBC's radio output - live, too! - I feel slightly bad about not contributing via the cost of a license.
In the meantime I have dipped in and out of the last seven pages and found your comments entertaining - thanks.
Still like to hear about those 'enforcers' though!

[Mick F]

BBCTV isn't a core product.
It's the cream of the crop, not the core. The bulk of the BBC is totally free.

Just about all the TV you would ever want to watch is available non-live and free. Does it matter if you don't see EastEnders live? You can watch it later (if you should so wish!)

[Mark1978]

My only issue is that as a regular consumer of BBC's radio output - live, too! - I feel slightly bad about not contributing via the cost of a license.

You should feel no more guilty about that than someone who cycles but doesn't pay "road tax"

[keepontriking]

Letter No.69 just popped through the door.

It tells me - again - what to expect if I have to go to court.

<shakes head>

[TonyR]

I don't object to paying council tax but only recently I was able to negotiate for a cheaper deal by being downgraded from Band C to Band B.

Now, why can't I negotiate for a cheaper TVL?

Prob. for the same reason its not worth collecting VED from cyclists. The cost of negotiating a cheaper TVL would be disproportionate to the cost of the TVL. And then how would your compliance be monitored? Council Tax is much larger and its easy to see if you've added a big extension.

But even with Council Tax ( which pays for the roads you cycle on by the way) its only economically viable to revalue houses every few decades.

[Mick F]

The electoral role shows how many people live at this address.
If £150 can pay for a TVL for a family of ten with a telly each, we should get a bill for one fifth of that coz there's only two of us.

TVL = £15 per person per year?

[TonyR]

The electoral role shows how many people live at this address.
If £150 can pay for a TVL for a family of ten with a telly each, we should get a bill for one fifth of that coz there's only two of us.

TVL = £15 per person per year?

Ah but we rarely watch the TVs we have so we should get bill that's a fraction of yours because the person-hours of watching them are so low.