Should the TV licence fee be scrapped?

[Deleted User]

JayWalker wrote: »

That would increase the burden on people who buy multiple TVs and reduce it for people who have only one.

And what of people who buy TVs, but don't use them for TV viewing?

ALIBOBSY

Idiophreak wrote: »

Quite shocked by the results so far.

Seriously, people...have you *seen* Fox news!?

The best news channel by a million miles is Al Jazeera. Watch it and open your eyes to the narrow minded biased mainstream reporting perpetrated by the Beeb.

Ali x

ALIBOBSY

Idiophreak wrote: »

Meh, I think that's the problem...Everyone seems to be focusing on the BBC's core business (TV) and forgetting that it's actually only a fraction of what the BBC actually does...I'm impressed by the amount of stuff the BBC get involved in - and I guarantee I don't know a tenth of it...

The point for me is all these "extra" areas smack of a communist "state" broadcaster.

The answer I think is to slash the licence fee, could be done over a few years to allow the beeb time to adjust. They need to pull back to doing high quality (often niche) programming. If they want to continue with extra channels/internet access/other "stuff", let them become self funding.

What we need is a leaner, more efficient BBC and a slashed LF-say as low as £60 a year.

Ali x

ALIBOBSY

Mosquito46 wrote: »

We take the BBC for granted and fail to see what an asset it is, warts, errors and all. And also what value for money it is too.

I did some research on this in 2007, so the figures relate to then, but doubtless the ratios and principles remain the same. Searching around on the Ofcom website, I found that that total commercial TV advertising revenue is running at about £4 billion a year. Total retail spending in the UK runs at about £264 billion a year. (Retail Consortium, thisismoney.co.uk).

So of that £264 billion, £4 billion goes to pay for commercial television. That's about 1.5%. So 1.5% of every shopping basket on average is what you pay for commercial television. To match the current licence fee for the BBC at that level, you would have to spend £8,766.66 a year. Or another way, if you spend less than £8,766.66 then the BBC is costing you more than commercial television, if you spend more than £8766.66 a year, and most people do, commercial television is costing you more than the BBC, especially if on top of retail spending, you are paying again through subscription fees.

I would very strongly argue with the idea that "most people" spend over 8766.66 on shopping. That's around £168 A WEEK. I know no-one who would be spending at that level.
Plus the point is for all these costs-i.e. higher product costs, sub fees you get a choice if you want to pay or not. The biggest issue I think most people have with the LF is the having to pay element.

Ali x

[Deleted User]

It's only happening quite slowly, but people are beginning to realise, it is quite possible to legally watch TV, without paying the LF.

As this becomes more widely known, I suspect there will be a snowball effect, and the number of licences on issue, will stop increasing, and then begin to fall.

stevemcol

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

It's only happening quite slowly, but people are beginning to realise, it is quite possible to legally watch TV, without paying the LF.

As this becomes more widely known, I suspect there will be a snowball effect, and the number of licences on issue, will stop increasing, and then begin to fall.

.....and hopefully the government will see sense, scrap the licence fee and fund the BBC from general taxation to stop the squabbling.

Cornucopia

stevemcol wrote: »

...squabbling.

What do you mean by "squabbling"?

Steve059

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

It's only happening quite slowly, but people are beginning to realise, it is quite possible to legally watch TV, without paying the LF.

As this becomes more widely known, I suspect there will be a snowball effect, and the number of licences on issue, will stop increasing, and then begin to fall.

And the government will classify the internet as a broadcast medium and network interfaces as broadcast receiving devices.

[Deleted User]

Just as owning a TV is not evidence of watching live TV, neither is owning a "network interface".

stevemcol

Cornucopia wrote: »

What do you mean by "squabbling"?

Well I probably don't use 50% of the public services that are available to me but I have paid for them through taxation. I'm quite happy with that because society is probably better off for having these services. But if I paid for each service with a specific fee or licence, I might start to think "hang on, I've no kids so actually I might not want to pay the schools fee"or "I've never been out of work so I might not want to pay the unemployment benefit portion."
Because the TV licence is specific and identifiable as a payment, it makes people who don't use that particular public service resentful of the outgoing. If it was just another element of taxation it would probably go unnoticed.
I think with the range of services offered, society in general is enriched by having the BBC