TV licence thread

[Car Boot 10]

47 minutes ago, kaytie said:

Well said!     Archaic system.   Should be made Pay to View, although I for one wouldn't. 

The BBC has carried out detailed studies into the viability of subscription and discovered that it would not bring in anywhere near as much money as the licence fee. The BBC understands that once people are given the choice of voluntarily paying for its content, such as under a subscription service, most people would prefer not to. 

 

The very last thing the BBC wants is subscription. It would end the extremely lucrative gravy train for the few.

[ECCOnoob 1,050]

35 minutes ago, Car Boot said:

So the BBC paying Gary Lineker £1.75 million every year ISN'T using public sector money to create £millionaires?

 

Don't forget, persecuting the poor to fund the rich is all because of the unique way the BBC is funded.

Stop lying. 

 

Who is persecuting the poor?      If you want to watch broadcast television (which includes paying on screen talent) then you pay the licence. If you dont then you dont.

 

The GOVERNMENT decides what they do with licence revenue and they CHOOSE to give it to the BBC. 

 

Since when was a free CHOICE persecution. 

[Longcol 604]

38 minutes ago, Car Boot said:

So the BBC paying Gary Lineker £1.75 million every year ISN'T using public sector money to create £millionaires?

 

 

Kind of evading the question RH asked - which was how will reducing the wage bill for presenters - 0.5% of the costs of the BBC - make any difference.

[crookesjoe 10]

On 30/06/2019 at 09:15, Cyclone said:

And you advertise that you're a criminal on a public forum...  Does it make you proud?

Yes, I'm absolutely proud of the fact that I won't pay them.

 

The license fee is a racket, I couldn't look myself in the mirror if I contributed to something I so strongly disagree with.

Edited July 6, 2019 by crookesjoe

[crookesjoe 10]

5 hours ago, Car Boot said:

Who cares if they go to the private sector? If they do they will be paid less than the BBC, as Jonathan Ross and others have quickly discovered.

 

It's the public sector and the unique way the BBC is funded that is at issue here. The public sector should not be creating £multi-millionaires at the expense of the poor and vulnerable pensioners. 

 

The BBC are an integral part of the ruling class. The ruling class have always looked down on the rest of us while picking our pockets.

Carboot has hit the nail on the head.

 

Remember the tv license adverts that were made to scare and terrorise people? The one with the circles of light scanning peoples homes in the night was just one of many adverts using fear to scare people into paying up. Terrible.

 

Whole organisation is rotten.

[Car Boot 10]

8 hours ago, ECCOnoob said:

Stop lying. 

 

Who is persecuting the poor?      If you want to watch broadcast television (which includes paying on screen talent) then you pay the licence. If you dont then you dont.

 

The GOVERNMENT decides what they do with licence revenue and they CHOOSE to give it to the BBC. 

 

Since when was a free CHOICE persecution. 

Criminalising the poorest in our society who can't afford a BBC TV licence - and poor women in particular - is persecution. Only the ruling class and it's sycophants would attempt to claim otherwise.

 

Because of the unique way the BBC is funded, prosecutions for non-payment of the BBC TV licence fee currently account for around one in 10 of all criminal cases in the magistrates’ courts. Women accounted for 72% of all prosecutions for BBC tv licence evasion in England and Wales in 2017.

 

BBC tv licence fee evasion is the most common offence for which women are prosecuted. 30% of all prosecutions for women are for not paying the BBC TV licence fee.. That the majority of those women convicted receive very low fines, and are single mothers on benefits, tells us that the unique way the BBC is funded is criminalising poverty and women in poverty in particular.

 

The ruling class, which includes the top of the BBC, claims this is not persecuting the poor, and poor women in particular. 

 

But they would say that, wouldn't they?

 

Smash the BBC. By any means necessary.

Edited July 7, 2019 by Car Boot

[crookesjoe 10]

7 minutes ago, Car Boot said:

30% of all prosecutions for women are for not paying the BBC TV licence fee.. 

As much as I hate the BBC, I'm really struggling to believe that to be true.

 

Where did you get that fact from? 

[Car Boot 10]

8 minutes ago, crookesjoe said:

As much as I hate the BBC, I'm really struggling to believe that to be true.

 

Where did you get that fact from? 

There are links at the bottom of this excellent article by a social researcher and data analyst which provide data from the Ministry of Justice.

 

http://www.moragtreanor.co.uk/?p=350

 

[melthebell 864]

Here we go, with the sexism spiel lol

[Car Boot 10]

9 minutes ago, melthebell said:

Here we go, with the sexism spiel lol

When is discrimination against women in poverty not a problem and not even worth mentioning?

 

When the BBC, due to the unique way it's funded, does it!

 

Your BBC - persecuting poor women so that it can give bumper pay rises to the rich. 

 

Smash the BBC. By any means necessary.

Edited July 7, 2019 by Car Boot

[melthebell 864]

10 minutes ago, Car Boot said:

When is discrimination against women in poverty not a problem and not even worth mentioning?

 

When the BBC, due to the unique way it's funded, does it!

 

Your BBC - persecuting poor women so that it can give bumper pay rises to the rich. 

 

Smash the BBC. By any means necessary.

When it's not discrimination, must try harder

[ECCOnoob 1,050]

2 hours ago, Car Boot said:

Criminalising the poorest in our society who can't afford a BBC TV licence - and poor women in particular - is persecution. Only the ruling class and it's sycophants would attempt to claim otherwise.

 

Because of the unique way the BBC is funded, prosecutions for non-payment of the BBC TV licence fee currently account for around one in 10 of all criminal cases in the magistrates’ courts. Women accounted for 72% of all prosecutions for BBC tv licence evasion in England and Wales in 2017.

 

BBC tv licence fee evasion is the most common offence for which women are prosecuted. 30% of all prosecutions for women are for not paying the BBC TV licence fee.. That the majority of those women convicted receive very low fines, and are single mothers on benefits, tells us that the unique way the BBC is funded is criminalising poverty and women in poverty in particular.

 

The ruling class, which includes the top of the BBC, claims this is not persecuting the poor, and poor women in particular. 

 

But they would say that, wouldn't they?

 

Smash the BBC. By any means necessary.

I could not give a fig whether the stats are against are women, men, animal or alien.

 

That's what quite rightly happens when you break a law in this country - you get prosecuted.

 

The law says that you need a licence to receive ANY broadcast television.  

 

If someone chooses to break that law that is a criminal offence and the culprit is quite rightly liable for prosecution.

 

What exactly is the problem here?   

 

Where is this persecution you speak of?