tax payers alliance criticise BBC

[B0ycey]

I don't really see that Boysie.

The BBC gets £5 billions from the license fee. Figures are all over the shop, but an inflation rate of 5% would not be a bad guess. So if there is not an increase in the license fee  to allow for inflation, then the Beeb is going to lose £250 millions a year. And even if Auntie does agree to stop being a silly girl and acting like the Brussels Broadcasting Company, I can't see how the government will be able to slip the BBC a quarter billion pound bung to take up the slack.

There is a huge difference from slimming down the BBC compared to getting rid of it all together. I suspect the freeze will accidentally do something what has been needed for a while now. Make the BBC sustainable and become a slimed down services. There is no point offering a tone of shit where there isn't an audience. Because one thing Thomas is right on is the audience is moving online. So I suspect more investment will be pumped into that avenue and taken away from traditional methods such as radio and television and as that happens, online content is cheaper to run than beeming out a signal in any case. So I suspect in the future the government will do what is needed. Not just this government, but all governments around the world, and that is control what we watch on the Internet. China already do that, and I guess we will soon enough. But in any case, this doesn't really address the topic which is how the BBC is funded. The licence fee is going and it will be replaced. And whatever the BBC costs is what will be charged in additional tax. And the irony is the tax being discussed right now is an additional charge from your Internet provider. See, the government is already ahead of you guys. You can't not pay that tax if you want your Internet connection to stay online.

[papasmurf]

I take any comment from the tax avoiders alliance with a large pinch of salt.

[Borchester]

But I kinda do know that Thomas. An online subscription service means the BBC loses its monopoly and the state loses the national narrative because it is the lack of selective fee that gives the BBC its advantage over say Netflix or Sky today. And we already know the BBC isn't going to be privatised as Dorries said they will debate in parliament how the BBC will be funded, not to scrap it or sell it off. So I expect the licence to be gone and replaced with a stealth tax no doubt. You can say that is a pile of waffle and I don't know that for sure, and all I will say on that is that we differ in opinion and can see no logic in a subscription service for the state when another tax works far better for the BBCs purpose to them.

I don't really see that Boysie.

The BBC gets £5 billions from the license fee. Figures are all over the shop, but an inflation rate of 5% would not be a bad guess. So if there is not an increase in the license fee  to allow for inflation, then the Beeb is going to lose £250 millions a year. And even if Auntie does agree to stop being a silly girl and acting like the Brussels Broadcasting Company, I can't see how the government will be able to slip the BBC a quarter billion pound bung to take up the slack.

[B0ycey]

another pile of waffle where you dont address what i am saying.
i dont know neither do you , how "tax" will be pumped into the bbc .

The point that is being repeated to you time and again , the simplest way to do this is like everyone else  online, an online subscription service.

You dont know , and neither do i , if the government are going to go down an online service route for free at point of use , but then implement yet another hated tax on uk taxpayers to pay for soemthing millions in other countries can watch for free.

But I kinda do know that Thomas. An online subscription service means the BBC loses its monopoly and the state loses the national narrative because it is the lack of selective fee that gives the BBC its advantage over say Netflix or Sky today. And we already know the BBC isn't going to be privatised as Dorries said they will debate in parliament how the BBC will be funded, not to scrap it or sell it off. So I expect the licence to be gone and replaced with a stealth tax no doubt. You can say that is a pile of waffle and I don't know that for sure, and all I will say on that is that we differ in opinion and can see no logic in a subscription service for the state when another tax works far better for the BBCs purpose to them.

[Thomas]

Actually Thomas, it is you who doesn't know what you are talking about. I have told you whenever there is a coup the first thing taken over is the media network and Cromwell has explained that China has its great firewall of China because control of the narrative is important to the state and then you go waffling on about watching live TV online. Nobody has said analogue TV will go online. What I have said is the BBC is already changing the way it broadcasts its narrative and most of their audience is online. If the iplayer (which isn't live) or something else is the way people want to get their content, then what happens is the BBC focus their attention on that media outlet. The BBC doesn't just die. It moves with the times. And the government will fund that. I don't really understand why you are struggling to understand that nobody is disputing that people are moving to online content and are actually telling you that whatever platform the audience move to, the government will control. Dialectical Materialism is visual motion for you if you like. So sure the licence is likely to go but tax will still be pumped into the BBC one way or another. So please respond to what I am writing and not what you think I have written because all I'm doing is repeating the same things over and over and then you go off on some other tangent of irrelevance on things nobody has said.

another pile of waffle where you dont address what i am saying.

So sure the licence is likely to go but tax will still be pumped into the BBC one way or another.

i dont know neither do you , how "tax" will be pumped into the bbc .

The point that is being repeated to you time and again , the simplest way to do this is like everyone else  online, an online subscription service.

You dont know , and neither do i , if the government are going to go down an online service route for free at point of use , but then implement yet another hated tax on uk taxpayers to pay for soemthing millions in other countries can watch for free.

You arent quite getting the ins and outs are you?

You are so desperate to keep the bbc , and a state broadcaster , as i keep saying , in all your ideological lefty extremisim you arent addressing the issues being raised ,and simply keep screaming over and over that the uk taxpayer will be punished by taxation to pay for the bbc if we keep moaning about the current licence fee.

Good luck with any government that brings that in. They wont be getting my vote.

Only 14 % of people polled think the bbc offer good content , and two thirds want rid of the licence fee. You are in a minority.

As ever , we dont expect ideological zealots to see common sense and think progressively

[B0ycey]

most of your replies are waffling nonsense where clearly you dont have a clue what you are talking about.right  so you are sugesting the bbc wil simply broadcast "live" online? At the moment , the vast majority of bbc content online is "catch up tv" , not live. ..but sure , if they broadcast live online , how do they get paid wihtout subscription?See this is what im talking aout , you dont have a fackin clue.

This is exactly where many are discussing the bbc are losing funding. Which you have just so perfectly highlighted for me.

The old licence fee structure isnt working  for funding online content , the bbc is losing millions if not more , and there is no way the government can enforce a licence fee on people who are streaming content online using phones or ipads , much of which will be catch up tv.

We had people within the uk and without , using vpns and other methods to watch bbc content for free......

BBC iPlayer 'watched by more than 60 million people outside the UK for free' 

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jul/21/bbc-iplayer-uk-vpn-proxy-server


Here is another online company offering bbc online content for a small monthly subscirption which the bbc doesnt see a penny of...

https://www.purevpn.com/bbc-iplayer-vpn

..and here is another article from money savers telling students and others how to watch bbc online for free using aunties very own bizarre rules.....

Trick for students to watch live telly and use BBC iPlayer without a licence

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/broadband-and-tv/tv-licence/#needtoknow-2

Just a few of the ways the bbc are losing shitloads of money with online content you tell me is the way forward . As it stands , the currnet licence fee is next to useless and the rules that go with it , and the only way anyone can see how the bbc survives and progresses is by using subscription serivices like everyone else online.......which you and others tell me you are against?

Actually Thomas, it is you who doesn't know what you are talking about. I have told you whenever there is a coup the first thing taken over is the media network and Cromwell has explained that China has its great firewall of China because control of the narrative is important to the state and then you go waffling on about watching live TV online. Nobody has said analogue TV will go online. What I have said is the BBC is already changing the way it broadcasts its narrative and most of their audience is online. If the iplayer (which isn't live) or something else is the way people want to get their content, then what happens is the BBC focus their attention on that media outlet. The BBC doesn't just die. It moves with the times. And the government will fund that. I don't really understand why you are struggling to understand that nobody is disputing that people are moving to online content and are actually telling you that whatever platform the audience move to, the government will control. Dialectical Materialism is visual motion for you if you like. So sure the licence is likely to go but tax will still be pumped into the BBC one way or another. So please respond to what I am writing and not what you think I have written because all I'm doing is repeating the same things over and over and then you go off on some other tangent of irrelevance on things nobody has said.

[Thomas]

I am, but you aren't listening to my relies Thomas.

most of your replies are waffling nonsense where clearly you dont have a clue what you are talking about.

If the TV station becomes redundant than the network just moves to the new platform.

right  so you are sugesting the bbc wil simply broadcast "live" online? At the moment , the vast majority of bbc content online is "catch up tv" , not live. ..but sure , if they broadcast live online , how do they get paid wihtout subscription?

It still needs funding and as it happens the BBC is already ahead of you. Most of their half a billion monthly audience get their content online.

See this is what im talking aout , you dont have a fackin clue.

This is exactly where many are discussing the bbc are losing funding. Which you have just so perfectly highlighted for me.

The old licence fee structure isnt working  for funding online content , the bbc is losing millions if not more , and there is no way the government can enforce a licence fee on people who are streaming content online using phones or ipads , much of which will be catch up tv.

We had people within the uk and without , using vpns and other methods to watch bbc content for free......

BBC iPlayer 'watched by more than 60 million people outside the UK for free' 

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jul/21/bbc-iplayer-uk-vpn-proxy-server


Here is another online company offering bbc online content for a small monthly subscirption which the bbc doesnt see a penny of...

https://www.purevpn.com/bbc-iplayer-vpn

..and here is another article from money savers telling students and others how to watch bbc online for free using aunties very own bizarre rules.....

Trick for students to watch live telly and use BBC iPlayer without a licence

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/broadband-and-tv/tv-licence/#needtoknow-2

Just a few of the ways the bbc are losing shitloads of money with online content you tell me is the way forward . As it stands , the currnet licence fee is next to useless and the rules that go with it , and the only way anyone can see how the bbc survives and progresses is by using subscription serivices like everyone else online.......which you and others tell me you are against?

[B0ycey]

false dichotomy.

You havent established the public want or need a state run tv network. Havent you been reading what i am posting ?

I am, but you aren't listening to my relies Thomas. If the TV station becomes redundant than the network just moves to the new platform. Dialectical Materialism in motion. The Base moves the Superstructure. It still needs funding and as it happens the BBC is already ahead of you. Most of their half a billion monthly audience get their content online.

[Good old]

Big difference is I can choose not to pay for Murdoch's dubious services. It is the fact that I have to fund the BBC just for owning a television that I object to.

That's fair enough Steve,  if you don't want to listen to it , or watch it. Don't . But the point has been made, and I agree with it ,that you will pay, you might not think you are ,and we know ignorance can be bliss, but you will pay whether you ever pay it attention or not.  
The real question in all of this is why appear to sanction the BBC in this way unless it's to gain more control over its output? 

[Thomas]

Sure, but no state run television network can exist without state run funds. If exists  you pay for it either directly or indirectly. Very much like all the other state run program you don't use.

false dichotomy.

You havent established the public want or need a state run tv network. Havent you been reading what i am posting ?

[B0ycey]

Big difference is I can choose not to pay for Murdoch's dubious services. It is the fact that I have to fund the BBC just for owning a television that I object to.

Sure, but no state run television network can exist without state run funds. If exists  you pay for it either directly or indirectly. Very much like all the other state run program you don't use. 

[Thomas]

Big difference is I can choose not to pay for Murdoch's dubious services. It is the fact that I have to fund the BBC just for owning a television that I object to.

well said steve. Why is it some folk are against freedom of choice and seem hell bent on punishing folk by demanding another punitive tax is introduced if we stop paying for their beloved aunties licence fee?

[Thomas]

And should wee Krankie pluck up courage for another indy ref and wins she'll take over bbc Scotland and you'll end up paying for that IMO.

we wont , because f you are listening to what im saying , countries wont need a state broadcaster in the future as it stands. We can sell pacific quay off as flats , or open a museum on british propaganda for the weans to learn about.

I know you love auntie cromwell , but i cant help it the tide is turning against you and your beloved corporation.

[srb7677]

I don't necessarily disagree with this, but it should be said what does that have to do with the government? Keeping it state run is to their advantage not yours. But even so do you think privatising the BBC would halt the propaganda? If anything it would enhance it to the opinion of the owner very much like the Murdoch Empire. Your only hope is to remove any source material full stop.

Big difference is I can choose not to pay for Murdoch's dubious services. It is the fact that I have to fund the BBC just for owning a television that I object to. 

[B0ycey]

This is the very problem with the BBC right there. More and more of us are recognising it as the mouthpiece of the status quo and the establishment. Which makes it the enemy of those of us who can recognise a broken political and economic model when we see it and want real change. We do not need or want to be told what to think by a state broadcaster, propagandising on behalf of the current set up.

I don't necessarily disagree with this, but it should be said what does that have to do with the government? Keeping it state run is to their advantage not yours. But even so do you think privatising the BBC would halt the propaganda? If anything it would enhance it to the opinion of the owner very much like the Murdoch Empire. Your only hope is to remove any source material full stop.