Conservative MP, John Whittingdale is the head of the BBC and wants to end the TV Liecense - Polidicks

[QUOTE]One of the Conservative MP appointed by David Cameron to oversee the future of the BBC believes the licence fee is “unsustainable” and “worse than a poll tax”. John Whittingdale, who has been appointed as Culture Secretary, said in October that the compulsory charge to fund the BBC should be eventually ended. “It's actually worse than a poll tax because under the poll tax, if you were on a very low income you would get a considerable subsidy,” he said. “The BBC licence fee, there is no means-tested element whatsoever; it doesn't matter how poor you are, you pay £145.50 and go to prison if you don't pay it.[/QUOTE] [url=http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Bookies-slash-odds-licence-fee-axed/story-26486097-detail/story.html]Source[/url]

[quote]The BBC licence fee, there is no means-tested element whatsoever; it doesn't matter how poor you are, you pay £145.50 and go to prison if you don't pay it.[/quote] You don't need to pay it. I don't pay it, I don't watch TV. Also look at him trying to make out like they're doing it "for the poor" they're doing it to cut anything which is not private.

as an american, a tv tax sounds inconceivable and i despise tv anyway

[QUOTE=bitches;47714855]as an american, a tv tax sounds inconceivable and i despise tv anyway[/QUOTE] It is optional, don't watch TV, don't have to pay. And the BBC has no adverts and british Tv in general (read most channels) has less advertisements than US tv.

[QUOTE=bitches;47714855]as an american, a tv tax sounds inconceivable and i despise tv anyway[/QUOTE] especially since 90% of it is commercials, that's the main reason i hate tv because if i have to pay an outrageous fee i don't want to watch commercials at 300-400$ a month

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;47714861]It is optional, don't watch TV, don't have to pay. And the BBC has no adverts and british Tv in general (read most channels) has less advertisements than US tv.[/QUOTE] i don't know why i should pay a tax in order to use TV you have to pay for a provider who does all the work the tax just goes to funding a particular channel what if you want tv and not that channel? for example, HBO produces commercial free content via subscribing, and everyone would be pissed if they were told they were required to subscribe to it

I'm fussing about this because its pretty obvious what is coming. Private news outlets have their own agendas and interests, they have their preferred parties and the electorate will be able to see their world through their (the news outlet) lens. At least the BBC is regulated and people can rightfully be outraged it they spread misinformation. [editline]13th May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=bitches;47714871]i don't know why i should pay a tax in order to use TV you have to pay for a provider who does all the work the tax just goes to funding a particular channel what if you want tv and not that channel? for example, HBO produces commercial free content via subscribing, and everyone would be pissed if they were told they were required to subscribe to it[/QUOTE] You don't have to pay a provider for tv here. You can choose to eg sky tv but you are not forced to. Not entirely sure how the other channels are supported but I suspect they get subsidies from the tax, don't quote me on that though.

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;47714848]You don't need to pay it. I don't pay it, I don't watch TV. Also look at him trying to make out like they're doing it "for the poor" they're doing it to cut anything which is not private.[/QUOTE] Wrong. If you have access to internet you still have to pay it because of BBC Iplayer. However I know a couple people who legally don't pay TV license because they were able to talk their way out of it. They are immigrants with poor English, and they had a massive dish set up to watch Russian TV and just said they don't watch any BBC content and it surprisingly worked. [editline]13th May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=bitches;47714855]as an american, a tv tax sounds inconceivable and i despise tv anyway[/QUOTE] As a European, no national health insurance sounds inconceivable. Edit: Apparently I'm wrong, you only need a TV license if you're watching BBC live. How can they tell though?

It should become a civil offence regardless, but a subscription based system makes more sense to me. The BBC are losing revenue through iPlayer as you can watch it without paying for a TV license.

[QUOTE=bitches;47714871]i don't know why i should pay a tax in order to use TV you have to pay for a provider who does all the work the tax just goes to funding a particular channel what if you want tv and not that channel? for example, HBO produces commercial free content via subscribing, and everyone would be pissed if they were told they were required to subscribe to it[/QUOTE] You don't understand anything about how the national broadcasting works.

In the UK you only have to pay the TV licence if you watch live television broadcasts. I didn't pay for it at all while at university because I just watches everything on catch up services which are not included in the licence fee. If you read up on it its not actually unreasonable. Yes it's £145 a year but we get an unbiased and very reliable news service as well as fantastic original programming via the BBC.

I can see it happening. BBC ran by Rupert Murdoc

The license fee is also payable quarterly and I believe monthly now. There's really no excuse as a smoking addiction costs far more than the TV License fee.

I don't see why it can't be funded from general revenue and any sales by the BBC (such as sales of seasons of Doctor Who). It's how our national broadcasters - ABC and SBS - are funded (SBS does broadcast ads, though). The UK government could perhaps consolidate the tax system by getting rid of the licence fee and some other taxes, and then slightly bump up another tax such as a marginal income tax rate or capital gains. The implication of having the licence fee tells me that the UK government is trying to incentivise people to not use BBC services so they can try to kill it off.

[QUOTE=UberMensch;47715064]The license fee is also payable quarterly and I believe monthly now. There's really no excuse as a smoking addiction costs far more than the TV License fee.[/QUOTE] It's not really a question of whether you should "be able" to pay it as much as it is a question of "why" should you pay for this?

So how will the BBC be funded then?

[QUOTE=Chrisordie;47715108]So how will the BBC be funded then?[/QUOTE]I suspect the idea is that it won't be.

I really don't watch TV anymore, and the main thing i watched on the Beeb was Top Gear. BUT the BBC has given us things like Blue Planet, Life, Life on Mars, and on and on and on. It's a british institution. Edit : I'd change it so you have to pay for iplayer. Make it cheaper and improve the time content is on iPlayer.

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;47714848]You don't need to pay it. I don't pay it, I don't watch TV. Also look at him trying to make out like they're doing it "for the poor" they're doing it to cut anything which is not private.[/QUOTE] God forbid that they might actually try to help people...

We had a similar system. Yle was funded with television licenses. Then they realized that no one is actually paying it and got rid of it and now EVERYONE PAYS

I love the fact they still have discount for if you own a black and white TV. [QUOTE=Buck.;47714938]Wrong. If you have access to internet you still have to pay it because of BBC Iplayer.[/QUOTE] The only time I've bought a PC and got a letter through my door telling me to buy a TV licence was when it had an analogue/DVB-T/DVB-S TV tuner card inside it. If you watch catch up TV you don't need one, it's only if you're watching TV while it's being broadcast.

It seems they want to decriminalise it first so it'll be interesting to see how it affects people paying for the licence fee.

I'm really torn on this I really like the BBC but dislike the whole payment system for it. I really don't think it will be the same tho if they scrap the fee.

Here in Denmark, we have kind of the same system. The reasoning is exactly that it [I]isn't[/I] a tax, and as such the government can't choose what it should be used for - that's completely up to DR (the national broadcasting company). The license is there to make sure DR has no political or commercial interest in being biased or selective in its programming and reporting. The solution might not be elegant, but I think it's preferable.

[QUOTE=Buck.;47714938]Wrong. If you have access to internet you still have to pay it because of BBC Iplayer. However I know a couple people who legally don't pay TV license because they were able to talk their way out of it. They are immigrants with poor English, and they had a massive dish set up to watch Russian TV and just said they don't watch any BBC content and it surprisingly worked. [/QUOTE] Erm no that is complete bollocks. You need to have a TV licence to (legally) use iPlayers live stuff but you do not need one just for simply having the internet..

Thinking about it, If the BBC were to introduce a worldwide subscription service they might do really well.

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;47714861]It is optional, don't watch TV, don't have to pay. And the BBC has no adverts and british Tv in general (read most channels) has less advertisements than US tv.[/QUOTE] We have a similar thing here in Norway called NRK and yes it's optional in the sense that if you don't buy a TV you don't have to pay but it's still unfair in many situations. If you buy a TV under your name and it has the ability to receive TV signals even if you don't subscribe to any channels you have to pay the license. [url=http://www.nrk.no/lisens/the-broadcasting-licence-fee-1.8037439]"The broadcasting licence fee is a legal requirement which anyone who has a television receiver is required to pay."[/url] It's very unfair for those who do watch TV but don't watch NRK. I bought a TV that I have a computer hooked up to and I've avoided paying because I got my dad to buy it who already pays the license. I've had some guy from NRK at my door asking me to provide proof that I don't have a TV receiving NRK signals. I didn't so I showed him it wasn't and it was fine. But legally speaking it's not fine until I remove the receiver in my TV.

The licence fee also pays for all the BBC Radio services as well the internet and TV services the BBC provides. So this would also put scores of local BBC stations as well the main stations at risk.

Everyone's ignoring the most important part of what he's said [quote]“In the long term it is unsustainable,” he said. “When I say unsustainable in the long term, [B]I’m talking about over 20, 50 years[/B]. I think in the longer term we are potentially looking at reducing at least a proportion of the licence fee that is compulsory and introducing an element of choice.”[/quote] [url]http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/may/11/john-whittingdale-culture-secretary-bbc-charter-renewal[/url]

The CBC doesn't charge everyone a tax to run, granted it does run advertisements. Having to pay an annual license for a TV just sounds ridiculous to me.