Cyclone Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 You have totally missed the whole point! you don't have to pay for a license anyway and now they are going to force the public to pay for a TV license even if you just sit at home listening to a radio or when you are doing your gardening or just sat their starring at the walls.you will still have to pay £150ish for no reason lol. How do you think the public radio is funded? ---------- Post added 06-03-2015 at 11:13 ---------- Never paid for a license. Never will. Not obliged to either You don't watch broadcast TV then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubermaus Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 How do you think the public radio is funded? ---------- Post added 06-03-2015 at 11:13 ---------- You don't watch broadcast TV then? I think the thread answers your question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spilldig Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 What's good for the goose is good for the gander. If privatisation is good for one public service, why not another? What is it about privatisation that you fear? Being ill and not able to afford care is not good but the loss of the BBC would make no difference. You do, indirectly. Regardless, they're the only broadcaster in the UK that comes close to the range of programming the BBC makes (though quality isn't there), minus radio/internet etc.. for the bargain price of 2 to 3 times the cost (minimum). As long as you have choice. No problem. And rightly so, just as you do for many many other public services that you may not use on a daily basis. No problem with a public service that is some use. Out of interest, which shows on free to air TV are so great that you're happy to only have access to them? Not with you on this as I don't think free to air shows are particularly great. I have no objection to SKY and Virgin. So, you should only pay for the NHS when you use it? No, you should pay because it's a public service, paid for by the public to benefit the public. Agreed.On the NHS anyway. Selfish then, I guess. Selfish of you to want to watch the BBC and have someone else pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 I think the thread answers your question. I think that's a way of avoiding the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magilla Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 (edited) Being ill and not able to afford care is not good but the loss of the BBC would make no difference. No difference? Other than to get any sort of decent range of programming you have to pay *at least* 2->3 times the cost of the license fee, with adverts, and that still doesn't get access to any of the half decent sport or bought in US dramas! To quote yourself:- I don't think free to air shows are particularly great. Exactly! You seem to be saying that only those that can afford to pay several times the cost of the license fee should only watch inane crap! That sounds pretty selfish to me! Without the license fee the cost of half decent, though still not as good TV will be far far higher. No problem with a public service that is some use. It is of use, it provides more informative and educational programs than any other broadcaster in the UK! That is self evident to anyone who cares to look and doesnt' even address the web presence, the radio stations, as well as their public service obligations (online courses etc..) Maybe you could take one of the BBC online courses so you can learn to quote a post correctly Selfish of you to want to watch the BBC and have someone else pay. If I remove the "watch the BBC" and replace with "use the NHS", does your statement still hold true? Yes, it does! Edited March 6, 2015 by Magilla Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLASGOWOODS Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 (edited) Bad idea. Given that most people acquire (often unconsciously) more factual information about current affairs and the world generally from the BBC than any other single source, that would be rather like giving children the choice of whether they attend school or not. What I find annoying sometimes is the amount of presenters they send to cover a sporting contest, or concert. ---------- Post added 06-03-2015 at 20:53 ---------- What other public services do you think should also be privatised, and if they were do you think they'd be as good? ............................... Edited March 6, 2015 by GLASGOWOODS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubermaus Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 I think that's a way of avoiding the question. What was the question? Do I watch Tv? Look at the thread numbnuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 It was "Do you watch broadcast TV?" Is it too difficult for you to say yes or no, numbnuts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suggz Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 Just to reiterate only a numb nut would pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubermaus Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 It was "Do you watch broadcast TV?" Is it too difficult for you to say yes or no, numbnuts? Read the thread. Anyone with half a brain can work it out ---------- Post added 07-03-2015 at 01:18 ---------- Just to reiterate only a numb nut would pay. Say no more suggz my man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now