Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • MSE Archna
    • By MSE Archna 18th Mar 08, 11:39 AM
    • 1,874Posts
    • 6,140Thanks
    MSE Archna
    TV Licence article Discussion
    • #1
    • 18th Mar 08, 11:39 AM
    TV Licence article Discussion 18th Mar 08 at 11:39 AM


    This thread is specifically to discuss the the


    To discuss or ask a question about this article: click reply
    Last edited by MSE Researcher; 14-06-2010 at 4:08 PM.
    Report inappropriate posts: forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com




Page 136
    • Heedtheadvice
    • By Heedtheadvice 11th Apr 18, 11:10 AM
    • 872 Posts
    • 424 Thanks
    Heedtheadvice
    I will not get into a long discussion about the pros and cons just to point out as you rightly wrote, Cornucopia, that sure is complex!
    Where I compared the output of the BBC and others I was not expressing personal opinion regarding quality or attractiveness of the programs. C4 certainly broadcasts some good output that I watch. Rather that the output (and indeed the work of the BBC) cannot be directly compared. Where C4 makes, contracts for and buys TV programmes the BBC activities are more diverse, two full time national TV channels, regional output, other channels and digital output including CBBC and C Beebies, several radio channels,local radio, The World service (the world's largest international broadcaster, mixed funding model including from the licence fee), BBC Academy for broadcast training (available to the whole industry), BBC Engineering covering research and development (over the years has been responsible for or played a leading part in much development and progress in the broadcast world such as FM transmission, Nicam, DAB, Freeview and much more), orchestras throughout the UK.......
    ...so the outputs cannot be compared solely by what one can viewed on another much less complex and complete TV channel.

    I do note however that within the debate for the 'funding model' there is plenty on negative sentiment and wonder if some comments are just anti-BBC rather than about the licence fee itself!

    As a passing comment I note that a recent survey "Moneywise users brand TV licence unfair" actually 51% are supportive of a licence fee but perversely 6% thought it should not apply to catch-up services and another lot thought TV should be free. They should know there is 'no such thing as a free lunch'

    So ends my contribution for the moment as things with a greater impact than the licence fee call!
    Last edited by Heedtheadvice; 11-04-2018 at 11:17 AM. Reason: lots of typos!
    • Heedtheadvice
    • By Heedtheadvice 11th Apr 18, 11:28 AM
    • 872 Posts
    • 424 Thanks
    Heedtheadvice
    Sorry could not resist Cornucopia wrote "... it has produced an improvement in the efficiency and profitability of the business at no cost to consumers. "

    Sorry your logic is incorrect. Yes it is a benefit for the business but all the costs (including advertising) come from revenue i.e. sales that are a cost to the consumer.

    Nobody has yet mentioned (AFAIAA) that some advertising (and sponsorship which is just another form of the same) can play on the weaknesses of individuals and some such ones have needed to be banned).

    ....end
    • Cornucopia
    • By Cornucopia 11th Apr 18, 11:29 AM
    • 10,504 Posts
    • 10,660 Thanks
    Cornucopia
    Where I compared the output of the BBC and others I was not expressing personal opinion regarding quality or attractiveness of the programs. C4 certainly broadcasts some good output that I watch. Rather that the output (and indeed the work of the BBC) cannot be directly compared. Where C4 makes, contracts for and buys TV programmes the BBC activities are more diverse, two full time national TV channels, regional output, other channels and digital output including CBBC and C Beebies, several radio channels,local radio, The World service (the world's largest international broadcaster, mixed funding model including from the licence fee), BBC Academy for broadcast training (available to the whole industry), BBC Engineering covering research and development (over the years has been responsible for or played a leading part in much development and progress in the broadcast world such as FM transmission, Nicam, DAB, Freeview and much more), orchestras throughout the UK.......
    ...so the outputs cannot be compared solely by what one can viewed on another much less complex and complete TV channel.
    Originally posted by Heedtheadvice

    Given the non-accountability of the BBC, though, I wonder how many members of the Public (a) know about all of the above, (b) if they had the choice would decide to pay for them, and (c) whether some of them might consider some of that to be empire building for its own sake, and at LF-payers' expense.

    I don't dispute that the BBC had a historic technical role, but in the present day and going forward, I can't really see that a PSB broadcaster is going to have much impact or influence on the development of new technologies, nor that it should.

    I also sense in some positive comments about the BBC a slightly xenophobic note - that this is something within which the UK still leads the World (or something like that). I'm not sure how appropriate that ultimately is - both the sentiment and the scale of operations that sits behind it.
    Last edited by Cornucopia; 11-04-2018 at 11:32 AM.
    I'm a Board Guide on the Phones & TV, Techie Stuff, In My Home,
    The Money Savers Arms and Food Shopping boards. I'm a volunteer to help the boards run smoothly, and I can move and merge threads there. Any views (especially those on the UK TV Licence) are mine and not the official line of moneysavingexpert.com.

    Board guides are not moderators. If you spot an inappropriate or illegal post then please report it to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com
    • Cornucopia
    • By Cornucopia 11th Apr 18, 11:38 AM
    • 10,504 Posts
    • 10,660 Thanks
    Cornucopia
    Sorry could not resist Cornucopia wrote "... it has produced an improvement in the efficiency and profitability of the business at no cost to consumers"

    Sorry your logic is incorrect. Yes it is a benefit for the business but all the costs (including advertising) come from revenue i.e. sales that are a cost to the consumer.
    Originally posted by Heedtheadvice
    The logic is not "incorrect". The notional business has grown from zero advertising spend to "some" advertising spend at no cost to consumers. That is the whole point - it's fundamentally about economies of scale.

    Nobody has yet mentioned (AFAIAA) that some advertising (and sponsorship which is just another form of the same) can play on the weaknesses of individuals and some such ones have needed to be banned).
    I'm not sure that the need for advertising to be regulated is an argument against the entirety of commercial media - assuming that's what you're saying?

    That's a bit like saying: some cats get stuck in trees, so we should ban cats... and trees.
    I'm a Board Guide on the Phones & TV, Techie Stuff, In My Home,
    The Money Savers Arms and Food Shopping boards. I'm a volunteer to help the boards run smoothly, and I can move and merge threads there. Any views (especially those on the UK TV Licence) are mine and not the official line of moneysavingexpert.com.

    Board guides are not moderators. If you spot an inappropriate or illegal post then please report it to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com
    • JimmyTheWig
    • By JimmyTheWig 11th Apr 18, 1:39 PM
    • 11,683 Posts
    • 11,272 Thanks
    JimmyTheWig
    The logic is not "incorrect". The notional business has grown from zero advertising spend to "some" advertising spend at no cost to consumers. That is the whole point - it's fundamentally about economies of scale.
    Originally posted by Cornucopia
    They've increased their sales of baked beans by 1m.
    For that to have happened, other baked bean companies have lost sales, as have other non-baked bean companies (e.g. tinned spaghetti companies). These companies are now running at reduced efficiencies (so balancing out the gains made by your company) or have had to fold (decreasing competition in the baked bean market and so driving up prices). So we're back to square one.

    Or, what would probably happen, the other companies also feel the need to advertise to claw back 1m of sales. They do that, and the previous status quo is restored. Your company is back at 50% capacity and 2m sales. But they are down by the cost of the advertising. As are their competitors. So the price of baked beans goes up across the board to fund the advertising.
    It's like a cold-war arms race. Each side needs to keep up with the other for fear of them getting too far ahead but nothing useful is coming out of it (for anyone other than the arms companies / advertising companies).
    • Cornucopia
    • By Cornucopia 11th Apr 18, 4:41 PM
    • 10,504 Posts
    • 10,660 Thanks
    Cornucopia
    They've increased their sales of baked beans by 1m.
    For that to have happened, other baked bean companies have lost sales, as have other non-baked bean companies (e.g. tinned spaghetti companies). These companies are now running at reduced efficiencies (so balancing out the gains made by your company) or have had to fold (decreasing competition in the baked bean market and so driving up prices). So we're back to square one.
    Originally posted by JimmyTheWig
    Overall, across the entire economy, perhaps. Or perhaps one of those companies has gone on to create a totally new product that has increased the overall size of the market? If we're going to have a capitalist economy and allow consumers to be fundamentally fickle, then company failures or "re-focusing" are an inevitable part of that - irrespective of the influence of advertising.

    However, it has little or no bearing on the topic under consideration, I wouldn't have thought.

    Or, what would probably happen, the other companies also feel the need to advertise to claw back 1m of sales. They do that, and the previous status quo is restored. Your company is back at 50% capacity and 2m sales. But they are down by the cost of the advertising. As are their competitors. So the price of baked beans goes up across the board to fund the advertising.
    It's like a cold-war arms race. Each side needs to keep up with the other for fear of them getting too far ahead but nothing useful is coming out of it (for anyone other than the arms companies / advertising companies).
    Does it work like that, though? Maybe for some market segments, but not for Baked Beans, I don't think, where a significant proportion of sales are driven by own-brand. Therefore if all the branded options get more expensive, a proportion of customers will defect to own-brand, which is not subject to that kind of pressure (assuming it exists in that way).

    The only credible reference on this question that I've ever found suggests that the price-effect of advertising is broadly neutral - any tendency for advertising costs to increase the cost of goods is balanced both by economies of scale and the power of the market.

    If there were a demonstrable effect to the contrary, I would have thought it would be obvious in academic research, popular memes and political manifestos. We'd be clamouring for advertising to be banned as the pointless, expensive thing it allegedly is... and yet, that's not happening here and now, and AFAIAA has never happened anywhere or at any time in human history (and advertising goes back a long, long way).
    Last edited by Cornucopia; 11-04-2018 at 4:45 PM.
    I'm a Board Guide on the Phones & TV, Techie Stuff, In My Home,
    The Money Savers Arms and Food Shopping boards. I'm a volunteer to help the boards run smoothly, and I can move and merge threads there. Any views (especially those on the UK TV Licence) are mine and not the official line of moneysavingexpert.com.

    Board guides are not moderators. If you spot an inappropriate or illegal post then please report it to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com
    • mbmonty
    • By mbmonty 11th Apr 18, 7:52 PM
    • 138 Posts
    • 82 Thanks
    mbmonty
    This thread is HUGE it could be used as a consultative input for a review of the future of the BBC, I have been trying to read it for over a week so this response may be incomplete.

    I have always been very proud of the BBC and always liked the lack of ads, I also generally trust the BBC news albeit that I see leanings left and right over the years.

    Of all the input to this thread I come down on the side of those who say that the TV Licence model's day is done.

    I like the idea of a subscriber based system, perhaps phased in over 3 to 5 years with the TV licence being reduced over that time.

    Such a model would not need ads but could have sponsored programmes with a simple "brought to you by XYZ" at the beginning and end.

    I do like the idea of the "community" aspects of the BBC (Radio, News etc) being separated and funded by a percentage of the ad revenue of other stations.

    Cornucopia makes some amazing points, we are lucky to have such an informed participant, I wonder if we should create a website that defines the future operating model of the BBC, starting with the concerns of those who want to keep the TV Licence.

    I truly believe that the BBC are finished, it is just a matter of time, but not just because of the Licence fee.

    It is because Netflix has anounced that it is going to spend BILLIONS on commissioning TV, it can do this because it has worldwide revenues, while the BBC only has as many people as it can fleece in the UK.

    If the BBC wants to survive it needs to open up it's massive library and create an on demand service.

    Look at how Amazon and Google created a second business of the cloud when they built their IT Infrastructure, the BBC could do the same.
    • mbmonty
    • By mbmonty 11th Apr 18, 8:07 PM
    • 138 Posts
    • 82 Thanks
    mbmonty

    I do note however that within the debate for the 'funding model' there is plenty on negative sentiment and wonder if some comments are just anti-BBC rather than about the licence fee itself!

    As a passing comment I note that a recent survey "Moneywise users brand TV licence unfair" actually 51% are supportive of a licence fee but perversely 6% thought it should not apply to catch-up services and another lot thought TV should be free. They should know there is 'no such thing as a free lunch'

    So ends my contribution for the moment as things with a greater impact than the licence fee call!
    Originally posted by Heedtheadvice
    Well you have it wrong for me, I sort of like the BBC but it is the licence fee and all the dodgy practice that is associated with it that I find unnaceptable.

    I do not think that it is fair that you are presumed guilty because you do not have licence.

    I do not like that Crapita teach their staff to lie and deceive the public on their front door.

    I do not like that Crapita harass people over and over again, I do not think they should be allowed to come to your door at all.

    I do not like the letters that are written to mislead people.

    I do not like the hounding aspect of the letters "will you be in on the 30th April" shown on the outside of the envelope which can cause reputational damage.

    There are aspects of the BBC as an organisation that I do not like, mostly it is that they have the disease of spending other people's money, then over the years instead of focusing on being the best they can be their primary focus is about protecting the damn empire that keeps them overpaid.

    I do not like ads and I think there are parts of the BBC that need to be protected, but I no longer watch the BBC, I made the decision not to watch because I found my lifestyle was affected by being "fed" junk tv. I used to watch F1 but they sold that off to Sky, I was not going to pay Sky one cent so that was the end of F1 for me. Other than that there was nothing I really miss.

    Thinking about it, I can't imagine any other organisation with whom I terminate my service getting away with the harassment that the BBC employ via Crapita.

    Imagine if my mobile phone provider or broadband supplier did the kind of crap that Crapita do.

    In my last letter from them they said they visit 10,101 addresses a DAY!!

    That is harassment!
    Last edited by mbmonty; 11-04-2018 at 8:11 PM.
    • Bedsit Bob
    • By Bedsit Bob 11th Apr 18, 8:28 PM
    • 10,325 Posts
    • 55,980 Thanks
    Bedsit Bob
    Look at how Amazon and Google created a second business of the cloud when they built their IT Infrastructure, the BBC could do the same.
    Originally posted by mbmonty
    The BBC don't seem to do all that well, where IT is concerned.
    1984 WAS NOT AN INSTRUCTION MANUAL.

    Amount I have so far denied the BBC - 1308

    You can't be a Christian AND a Socialist.
    • krixike
    • By krixike 11th Apr 18, 10:08 PM
    • 12 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    krixike
    Hello everyone,
    Just to double check something with you as receied some confusing info on whether to pay this rip-off fee or not...
    This has been actually my first letter I've received, although in the letter they stated that they tried to contact me without any success... not true at all.

    Secndly, I've been living in the UK for 4 ys, and have just moved to my new address. At my old place my rent basicaly covered everything, that's the reason why I've never heard of such a fee nor had to pay anything seperately via/to my landlord..
    However after this "warning" letter I was a bit scared... I moved in a month ago and only set up a broadband accound with NOW TV, have no TV at all and never watched BBC programmes live...
    Please could you tell me if I am "eligible" for this fee, do I need to worry about or just bin it? Can they really have the right to conduct any search in my premises?Thanks a lot for your advice!
    • cw18
    • By cw18 11th Apr 18, 10:16 PM
    • 7,966 Posts
    • 85,374 Thanks
    cw18
    They don't have any right to access your property unless they have a court order, and they're unlikely to get that.

    With regards to Now TV, it depends on what you watch via that (I don't have, so I'm not exactly clear on it). If anything you watch is only shown at a set time (ie. you need to turn on your set at a certain time to see it, which the childrens and sports packages seem to be), then that counts as live TV and requires a licence. But if you turn on, go through a process of selecting what you want, and can watch it at any time to suit you then that's 'on demand' and shouldn't require one (the only exception is iPlayer). The Entertainment Package reads as if that falls in the 'on demand' category.
    Cheryl
    Groceries : May 11.97 / 120 Apr 137.78 / 100 Mar 99.55 / 100.Feb 85.02 / 80.Jan 112.15 / 130. Annual 446.47 / 1200

    • krixike
    • By krixike 11th Apr 18, 10:22 PM
    • 12 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    krixike
    Hiya, many thanks fr quick response! Well, when I set it up, TBH, I don't really know what I've actually installed, but not for TV for sure as I have no TV device at all! So, honesltly only use it for normal internet. No kids programmes, no live channels in UK (just sometimes live channels abroad, but definetely not UK ones if that makes a difference at all!). And of course, downloading movies & music, but once again, nothing live or BBC at all...
    What do you think? What if I just contact NOW TV to double check as I have only got broadband package with them nothing else, so don't really know what to set/reset differently on my box - if needed at all. However I presume the watchdogs could defo find out if I connected any TV devise to the box at all...or?
    • krixike
    • By krixike 11th Apr 18, 10:25 PM
    • 12 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    krixike
    also, since I've recently moved to this new flat, what about if this letter was consigned to the previous tenant in the same flat? since there's no name on the envelope at all....
    • Cornucopia
    • By Cornucopia 11th Apr 18, 10:29 PM
    • 10,504 Posts
    • 10,660 Thanks
    Cornucopia
    However after this "warning" letter I was a bit scared...
    Originally posted by krixike
    They send letters to every unlicensed address, millions of them.

    I moved in a month ago and only set up a broadband accound with NOW TV, have no TV at all and never watched BBC programmes live...
    You don't need a Licence just for broadband (it may confuse things that it is from Now TV, who supply Broadband, Pay TV and physical Hardware all called by the same brand name). I have all three and no need for a TV Licence.

    You don't say what you do watch, if anything. If you watch or record any TV broadcasts from the UK, or their Internet streaming equivalent, or use BBC iPlayer you need a TV Licence, which is a Licence for receiving TV not for owning equipment.

    no live channels in UK (just sometimes live channels abroad, but definetely not UK ones if that makes a difference at all!)
    Be aware that TVL say that you need a Licence for that (although their advice is confused, and I don't think it is legally accurate).

    Can they really have the right to conduct any search in my premises?
    They don't have a general right of access. They can apply to a Court for a Warrant to gain access, but they do that extremely rarely.
    Last edited by Cornucopia; 11-04-2018 at 10:32 PM.
    I'm a Board Guide on the Phones & TV, Techie Stuff, In My Home,
    The Money Savers Arms and Food Shopping boards. I'm a volunteer to help the boards run smoothly, and I can move and merge threads there. Any views (especially those on the UK TV Licence) are mine and not the official line of moneysavingexpert.com.

    Board guides are not moderators. If you spot an inappropriate or illegal post then please report it to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com
    • krixike
    • By krixike 11th Apr 18, 10:40 PM
    • 12 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    krixike
    Hello - OK thanks noted, but still a bit confusing, if watching a foreign live news channel (in EU, not UK or BBC) why counts for this...
    Anyway, how can I simply hide or deny that I have ever watched such? I can simply delete my browser history or they don't even understand on the other foregn language what I've watched was live at that time or not? There's no way they can prove it, is it?
    Secondly, if moving abroad in a year or so and just ignoring these mails, what could happen?
    • cw18
    • By cw18 11th Apr 18, 10:43 PM
    • 7,966 Posts
    • 85,374 Thanks
    cw18
    also, since I've recently moved to this new flat, what about if this letter was consigned to the previous tenant in the same flat? since there's no name on the envelope at all....
    Originally posted by krixike
    As someone who has to deliver these evil letters (I work for Royal Mail), I can assure you that if there's no name it's meant for the current occupier (you in this case) or property owner (if the place is unoccupied). Should you get any mail addressed to someone who doesn't live there you should put a line through the address and write 'gone away' or 'not known at the address' on the envelope before putting it back into a postbox. If it's simply been put through your letterbox by accident you should either push it through where it was meant for or put it back in a mailbox without writing on it. Withholding mail (which you are if you don't do this) is actually an offence you can be charged with, although that's unlikely to happen.
    Cheryl
    Groceries : May 11.97 / 120 Apr 137.78 / 100 Mar 99.55 / 100.Feb 85.02 / 80.Jan 112.15 / 130. Annual 446.47 / 1200

    • Cornucopia
    • By Cornucopia 11th Apr 18, 10:49 PM
    • 10,504 Posts
    • 10,660 Thanks
    Cornucopia
    Hello - OK thanks noted, but still a bit confusing, if watching a foreign live news channel (in EU, not UK or BBC) why counts for this...
    Originally posted by krixike
    As I said, I don't think it does, but TVL seem to say otherwise. All I can suggest is that you phone them and ask them, and go by what they say.

    Anyway, how can I simply hide or deny that I have ever watched such? I can simply delete my browser history or they don't even understand on the other foregn language what I've watched was live at that time or not? There's no way they can prove it, is it?
    No, you're right, and since you probably have the law on your side, you could do just that. If a TVL person calls at your address, you can simply ignore them, or tell them to leave. An ideal form of words is this: "Sorry, it's not convenient right now, but feel free to call back some other time".

    Secondly, if moving abroad in a year or so and just ignoring these mails, what could happen?
    The letters are meaningless, hollow threats. They are a national disgrace IMHO, and it embarrasses me when people from outside the UK see our national institutions out of control and behaving irrationally like this.

    Ignoring the letters is not a problem. Also ignore the TVL people if they should call at your home. If you do that, then it's extremely unlikely that they would be able to take any action against you.
    I'm a Board Guide on the Phones & TV, Techie Stuff, In My Home,
    The Money Savers Arms and Food Shopping boards. I'm a volunteer to help the boards run smoothly, and I can move and merge threads there. Any views (especially those on the UK TV Licence) are mine and not the official line of moneysavingexpert.com.

    Board guides are not moderators. If you spot an inappropriate or illegal post then please report it to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com
    • krixike
    • By krixike 11th Apr 18, 11:08 PM
    • 12 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    krixike
    appreciate your honest opinion & advice, indeed!
    it is really shocking though, that even if paying for a service provider to use broadband, some other "crafty" "authorities" feel the right to rip you off for any nonsense reason they call it..
    Anyway, hopefully will sort it out now by this and ignoring these mails, however am a bit uncertain in case my agent (advertising the property via the landlord) notices this that at the end of my tenancy with them and in case moving elsewhere, they try to withhold the deposit for the flat before I pay in the license fee...
    Can they do that? Are they normally also notified by TVL on my broadband subspription or outstanding payment obligation towards TVL?
    It might be a bit too unealistic, but you never know...or do you?
    • krixike
    • By krixike 11th Apr 18, 11:10 PM
    • 12 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    krixike
    also, just to be on the safe side, should I just stop watching online news from abroad?:-)
    • Cornucopia
    • By Cornucopia 11th Apr 18, 11:14 PM
    • 10,504 Posts
    • 10,660 Thanks
    Cornucopia
    it is really shocking though, that even if paying for a service provider to use broadband, some other "crafty" "authorities" feel the right to rip you off for any nonsense reason they call it..
    Originally posted by krixike
    It genuinely is on the margin of the TV Licence to consider Broadband access. Mostly what they are looking for is actual TVs showing actual UK TV programs.

    Anyway, hopefully will sort it out now by this and ignoring these mails, however am a bit uncertain in case my agent (advertising the property via the landlord) notices this that at the end of my tenancy with them and in case moving elsewhere, they try to withhold the deposit for the flat before I pay in the license fee...
    Can they do that? Are they normally also notified by TVL on my broadband subspription or outstanding payment obligation towards TVL?
    No to all of that.

    - BB suppliers do not notify TVL about BB contracts.

    - Although many tenancy agreements state that a TV Licence is required, this effectively means "if needed".

    - The Licence is not a continuing liability for a new tenant, so there is no need for the Letting Agent of Landlord to concern themselves with it (and most likely they will not).
    I'm a Board Guide on the Phones & TV, Techie Stuff, In My Home,
    The Money Savers Arms and Food Shopping boards. I'm a volunteer to help the boards run smoothly, and I can move and merge threads there. Any views (especially those on the UK TV Licence) are mine and not the official line of moneysavingexpert.com.

    Board guides are not moderators. If you spot an inappropriate or illegal post then please report it to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

260Posts Today

2,168Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Ta ta... for now. This August, as I try and do every few yrs, I'm lucky enough to be taking a sabbatical. No work,? https://t.co/Xx4R3eLhFG

  • RT @lethalbrignull: @MartinSLewis I've been sitting here for a good while trying to decide my answer to this, feeling grateful for living i?

  • Early days but currently it's exactly 50 50 in liberality v democracy, with younger people more liberal, older more? https://t.co/YwJr4izuIj

  • Follow Martin