Tv Licensing ?

Some of us are old enough to remember the 98% super income tax that the Labour government introduced. All the rich folk went to live somewhere else so instead of receiving 40% tax the Gifernment received not a penny more from most of them.

I don't think it's the tax rate that's the problem, but the hugely over complicated taxation system upon which our country relies that makes evasion legal if you can afford someone who knows the tricks,

My other gripe is big business paying their share. A large mobile phone company negotiated £5,000,000,000 off their tax bill last year. Cthey didn't avoid it or con their way around it. They sat down with Revenue and Customs and chinwagged their way out of over half their bill. No way Jose - you owe, you pay. Zero tolerance.
 
technodup":1a9ufgpf said:
Neil":1a9ufgpf said:
And what's that quote about statistics and lies...

I suspect there's a lot of people in the country who are not exactly happy with the way our country participates in the EU. Well that's one thing - but I'm not inclined to believe most of those people really have a fecking clue about what it would truly mean to do anything different. I suspect there's many complaining, but I'm far from convinced the majority would get us to pull out of Europe.
And I'm far from convinced you read it because that's not what it says. Just for clarity...

the Guardian":1a9ufgpf said:
Some 70% of voters want a vote on Britain's EU membership, and by a substantial nine-point margin respondents say they would vote for UK withdrawal.

Forty-nine per cent would vote to get Britain out of Europe, against just 40% who prefer to stay in.
Yes, I did read it - that's not the point.

The point I was trying to make, is that it's one thing to be mouthy at a certain point, completely another thing to actually follow through when voting. Which is why such polls aren't always that accurate when elections take place - idealism is one thing, but pragmatism tends to sting when the tick is near the box.
technodup":1a9ufgpf said:
Neil":1a9ufgpf said:
I think a more equitable taxation solution would help society, rather than the rich just seeing the working masses and their services as cash cows.
An equitable tax solution? Like a flat tax? Can't get much more equitable than that imo, but I suspect that's not what you meant.
I suspect many of the rich pay nothing like the percentage of tax that normal rate tax payers pay.
 
But when I look at recent major government projects, Olympics, Millennium Dome, Scottish Parliament, NHS IT system, Edinburgh trams, defence procurement etc etc they're so over budget and/or late it's a wonder anyone wants them to run anything.

All those things were built by private companies.

As for the BBC, it's 40p/day. You can't even buy a decent choccy bar for that. In my head that renders all arguments about the licence fee pretty much moot :)
 
I have no problem when the cost of the BBC is 40p a day for those that want to watch the BBC, but what I object to is those who do not want to watch the BBC being forced to pay for it's existence through some pretty dirty methods which if other sales divisions of corporations engaged in, they would be pursued and exposed for their dirty methods of money making.

I further object to be treated as a potential criminal for electing not to watch tv, as when the tv licence sales rep's come to the door you can tell them whatever you want, you don't have a tv, the tv is broke, it's being used for not watching live broadcast, anything, but you won't be believed as they then ask can they come in to check what you have just aid is true, in that question they are implying you are a liar and therefore a potential criminal.

The whole way this license fee gathering has been implemented is plain wrong and perhaps why so many grow against the BBC, for the BBC way back knew damned well they would never get the funding they needed through a voluntary system of payment, so for some reason the government of the time elected to force the licence fee on every house hold there protecting a corporation from one reason for insolvency.

As more and more people wise up to the methods used to screw this money out of people through fear, the more chance the BBC stands to lose it's followers, as oldies pass away and the new generations that questioned and formed opinions come to take their place.

But do you know, I know of one person so far who is continuing to pay their tv licence because of fear, they can't easily pay the licence and admit to having to make sacrifices to pay what is demanded, bearing in mind they are a benefit scrounger, but this person does not have a tv, but is so frazzled by past run ins with the man at the door, it is just not worth the hassle any more to not pay the tv licence. You see what is happening, and this I understand from further research is common in the UK and of the majority who are prosecuted and end up in prison, they are the lowest tiers of society who don't pay, because they can't easily pay or pay at all, I wonder how many of these people who are prosecuted since, just keep paying to avoid the hassle, seeing now as they have form.

The methods of how the BBC/TVL extract the tax should be made fecking illegal, because it is extortion, and where criminals get pursued and charged with extortion, the BBC/TVL remain immune.

If in UK law one is presumed innocent until proven guilty, the onus is on the TVL/BBC to prove someone is acting illegally and as the BBC has alll this wonderous technology to detect tv's being used, that should be their method of catching non payers, not a database which can be any number of things other than correct. But of that database, who authorised it and is it inline with the data protection act, as information being given out to subcontractors to go and use whatever means to ensure a payment from a certain household, is it in line with the data protection act ?

The methods of which the TVL/BBc collect their funding should be examined closely, as there is a lot of questionable activity going on, activity which could actually be illegal in any other sense, if it were not the hallowed BBC that was doing it.

But I wonder, how much of the lack of care shown by some is because they in fact don't care, because their name is Jack and they are alright and so completely forgetting about others who are not so lucky to be alright.

All that is required for evil to triumph is good men do nothing ~ Edmund Burke ( father of the current Tory party)

Apathy and evil. The two work hand in hand. They are the same, really.... Evil wills it. Apathy allows it. Evil hates the innocent and the defenceless most of all. Apathy doesn't care as long as it's not personally inconvenienced. ~ JAKE THOENE, Shaiton's Fire



But for the technically minded regarding the detection technology, some interesting reading, you decide;

http://www.tvlicensing.biz/detection/index.php

http://www.tvlicensing.biz/wpblog/blog_ ... rticle.gif

But some tips to avoid being harassed ;

http://www.bbctvlicence.com/Tips%20for% ... ssment.htm

Always useful to remember ; praemonitus praemunitus

Loosely translating as; Forewarned is Forearmed !

And finally, did you know the vast majority of people prosecuted for non licence paying are women, and that because women are usually the one's at home when the BBC spetsnatz call, that being if you have forgotten to pay your licence for whatever means, it is your spouse at home that will be abused by these people.
 
Oh aye, there's some sharp practices right enough. That doesn't render the entire concept of a licence fee a bad one, though :)
 
I disagree with the concept of a license, because a license is the granting of permission by virtue of having paid up, that being the only qualification necessary is the fact that one has money to spend.

But in the case of the tv license fee, the licence has in fact been re-labled as a tax, so avoidance of the tax can be deemed a criminal offence and there pursued by law.



But, did you know, there is no belief in the fact that people simply do not want to watch tv, for it is assumed everyone just must watch tv and those that don't are liars, thieves and other criminals who will be prosecuted somehow to reinforce the message that everyone must pay.

http://www.turnoffyourtv.com/international/bbc.html


But guess what's coming ?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/03/03/pc_tax/

Either way what controls us will always get their pound of flesh.

http://www.centreforcitizenship.org/tv.html


Now people might be getting fed up with my continuous attack on our human rights by the BBC and what governs us, but know this, that is me, where I see wrong, I will investigate and if I cannot put right in the cases such as these, I will disseminate information everywhere I go and that because if I can make just one person sit up and question what they have always thought to be right, I will have achieved something at least. And who do I do this for you may ask, well, I will tell you, people who can't fight back, people who do not possess the where with all to fight back, or are so trampled on by the system this country operates they just pay up for a quiet life.

We live in a Democracy so we are told and if it is a democracy, then force of numbers changes rules and so by people being educated and coming together, wrongs can stand a chance of being made right, and if they are not in the face of a majority, then we do not live in a democracy and won't that be a surprise to many who have lived with that illusion.

But one final link, even if you are quite happy with what is being enacted on you without your consent and you are all for the BBC and it's operations, just be aware of others and what they experience for having their freedom of choice denied them in the United Kingdom of today, as by being aware, you are at least better educated and no one can deny education is a good thing ;


http://www.lime-marmalade.net/
 
silverclaws":3vewqoh9 said:
I disagree with the concept of a license, because a license is the granting of permission by virtue of having paid up, that being the only qualification necessary is the fact that one has money to spend.

What's your stand on the driving licence?

Or a firearms licence? Do you disagree with these too? Should we all be allowed to go and buy guns and ammunition along with our weekly groceries?
 
IDB1":3rbslohy said:
silverclaws":3rbslohy said:
I disagree with the concept of a license, because a license is the granting of permission by virtue of having paid up, that being the only qualification necessary is the fact that one has money to spend.

What's your stand on the driving licence?

Or a firearms licence? Do you disagree with these too? Should we all be allowed to go and buy guns and ammunition along with our weekly groceries?

and a fishing licence

or a shooting/hunting licence

or waste carriers licence

or water abstraction licence

or broadcast licence

or marraige licence


They all cost, and you are not allowed to do that particular activity without one.... and more importantly, to varying degrees I will admit, said activity SHOULD be controlled and regulated in some way.

OK, so watching TV does not exactly fall into the same category as some of the above, but the point remains that the BBC needs to be paid for somehow. Its NEVER going to become a subscription service. It is the PUBLIC service broadcaster, and therefor is paid for by the public. If you choose not to watch TV, then dont pay the licence. There are plenty of examples given by people here who do not pay the licence, and receive none of the hassle that you suggest you are suffering from

I have lost somewhere in reams of posts and words above if you choose to get round the system by way of online content; but if you do, then that is your perogative, but personally, I think this is morally wrong, as anyone doing this is experiencing the content without having contributed to its funding

Not debating, just stating my 2p... and everyone is entitled to theirs 8)

G
 
Back
Top