8 thoughts on “Comments on Truly Massively Aggressively”
Well said Sir,
crafty is right on the money, end that barbaric bedroom tax and leave the Beeb alone!!
Everyone? It’s now around an estimated 10% of UK households who have ditched the moron box and got a life. I don’t have a TV, don’t have a TV Licence, no problem.
Thanks Pete. The figures I’ve found suggest that as of March 2014, 96% of households have a TV set or watch live TV on other devices.
I like TV. But I can also see the appeal of a life without it, so I salute the 4%. All power to them – and you!
The problem with the comparison to bread, milk, and stamps is that there’s no chance that the government will be providing those for “free” and paying for them with progressive taxes anytime soon. The bedroom tax is a separate issue– it should be fixed regardless of what happens with licence fees. There’s currently some political will to have the revenue from the licence fee paid for more progressively, which is a good thing regardless of Conservatives’ motives.
The real question is whether this would lead to the BBC’s funding being cut. I’d suggest that as part of the proposal to transition away from the licence fee, some language should be included to guarantee that funding for some period of time, perhaps ten or twenty years.
Thanks Matt.
My focus is on the “regressive” complaint.
I mention bread, milk and stamps mostly to point out that we’re offered a price – take it or leave it. The price won’t vary if we’re rich or poor. Yet we don’t worry that these prices aren’t income-dependent.
You say “regardless of Conservatives’ motives” but motives are precisely what I’m examining. I cite the bedroom tax (which is, as you say, unconnected) in order to demonstrate that the ‘regressive’ piety is entirely disingenuous. There is no progressive instinct behind this attack, and that is what I want to expose.
It’s actually kind of wrong to say the price doesn’t change – if you are over 75, you can get a free one, if you are in residential care, you get a massively reduced one.
Benefits are paid to those in need (jobseekers, tax credits, etc), and there is no reason why those benefits can’t take into account the cost of a TV licence, and/or for more fee reductions to be introduced.
If you remove the licence fee – or more precisely, massively cut BBC funding – then you vastly remove the availability of affordable quality TV. And subscription / pay TV is far more expensive, more regressive, than the licence fee.
I wonder how many people struggling with budgets have considered that TV might not, in fact, be an essential requirement. An annual subscription to a film streaming service costs half the amount of a TV licence and iPlayer is still free for all. ITV and Channel 4 also allow free streaming of their content. Radio drama and comedy is free on the net and you can listen to it while doing something creative or constructive. How much time each day do you need to sit passively watching an undifferentiated broadcast playlist of game show filler and talent contests? Stop paying your licence fee, get your kicks on the net. The BBC is not the only purveyer of quality content and it’s not the noble institution that it was once perceived to be.
It’s all well and good saying go on the Internet to watch telly – some people’s access is not fast enough to stream programmes.
To counteract this the government rolled out a programme to provide broadband for all. Where did £300m to help pay for that come from? The licence fee.
Well said Sir,
crafty is right on the money, end that barbaric bedroom tax and leave the Beeb alone!!
Everyone? It’s now around an estimated 10% of UK households who have ditched the moron box and got a life. I don’t have a TV, don’t have a TV Licence, no problem.
Thanks Pete. The figures I’ve found suggest that as of March 2014, 96% of households have a TV set or watch live TV on other devices.
I like TV. But I can also see the appeal of a life without it, so I salute the 4%. All power to them – and you!
The problem with the comparison to bread, milk, and stamps is that there’s no chance that the government will be providing those for “free” and paying for them with progressive taxes anytime soon. The bedroom tax is a separate issue– it should be fixed regardless of what happens with licence fees. There’s currently some political will to have the revenue from the licence fee paid for more progressively, which is a good thing regardless of Conservatives’ motives.
The real question is whether this would lead to the BBC’s funding being cut. I’d suggest that as part of the proposal to transition away from the licence fee, some language should be included to guarantee that funding for some period of time, perhaps ten or twenty years.
Thanks Matt.
My focus is on the “regressive” complaint.
I mention bread, milk and stamps mostly to point out that we’re offered a price – take it or leave it. The price won’t vary if we’re rich or poor. Yet we don’t worry that these prices aren’t income-dependent.
You say “regardless of Conservatives’ motives” but motives are precisely what I’m examining. I cite the bedroom tax (which is, as you say, unconnected) in order to demonstrate that the ‘regressive’ piety is entirely disingenuous. There is no progressive instinct behind this attack, and that is what I want to expose.
It’s actually kind of wrong to say the price doesn’t change – if you are over 75, you can get a free one, if you are in residential care, you get a massively reduced one.
Benefits are paid to those in need (jobseekers, tax credits, etc), and there is no reason why those benefits can’t take into account the cost of a TV licence, and/or for more fee reductions to be introduced.
If you remove the licence fee – or more precisely, massively cut BBC funding – then you vastly remove the availability of affordable quality TV. And subscription / pay TV is far more expensive, more regressive, than the licence fee.
I wonder how many people struggling with budgets have considered that TV might not, in fact, be an essential requirement. An annual subscription to a film streaming service costs half the amount of a TV licence and iPlayer is still free for all. ITV and Channel 4 also allow free streaming of their content. Radio drama and comedy is free on the net and you can listen to it while doing something creative or constructive. How much time each day do you need to sit passively watching an undifferentiated broadcast playlist of game show filler and talent contests? Stop paying your licence fee, get your kicks on the net. The BBC is not the only purveyer of quality content and it’s not the noble institution that it was once perceived to be.
It’s all well and good saying go on the Internet to watch telly – some people’s access is not fast enough to stream programmes.
To counteract this the government rolled out a programme to provide broadband for all. Where did £300m to help pay for that come from? The licence fee.