Jump to content

Free tv Licence for over 75


forestboy

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, CrazyDave said:

Do all these old people who expect the rest of us to pay for their old school TV, also want us to buy their Radio Times and marker pens for them as well?

Pray tell, could you please define “ old school TV?”  


As for expecting  “the rest of us to buy old people’s Radio Times and marker pens for them”. No I don’t think they do. What makes you think they might?

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Pray tell, could you please define “ old school TV?”  


As for expecting  “the rest of us to buy old people’s Radio Times and marker pens for them”. No I don’t think they do. What makes you think they might?

 

Live tv is old school.

it might be normal on here with its elderly demographic, but definitely not in the real world.  Our kids rarely even use a TV, they watch everything on demand via games consoles, PCs tablets and phones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, CrazyDave said:

Live tv is old school.

it might be normal on here with its elderly demographic, but definitely not in the real world.  Our kids rarely even use a TV, they watch everything on demand via games consoles, PCs tablets and phones.

That’s a shame. They are missing out on so much.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, woolley said:

Some of the output is undeniably first rate, but so is some commercially produced material too, for example the current excellent ITV drama about the sub-postmasters scandal.

Yep, I was surprised at the quality: acting, writing, accuracy where necessary, directing etc.  There's a thread elsewhere on it.

I have followed this for a few years (via Private Eye) and it took this series to bring it fully into the general public consciousness. Would BBC have produced such a drama? Although on the subject there is a Panorama Report but it didn't have much impact. Incidentally Adam Crozier left as CEO of Post Office in 2010 (and was present at a crucial time of the now exposed scandal) to become Chief Exec at . . . .  ITV.

A man who says he does not like the spotlight. I think he's going to have an interesting 2024.

Edited by Barlow
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/4/2024 at 7:33 AM, Banker said:

That’s because you’re anti establishment etc etc and think tv is all state propaganda!

I don't think I have ever once stated whether I am anti establishment or not. Weird hill for you to die on but there we go.

The real reason is...

On 1/4/2024 at 9:32 AM, Andy Onchan said:

I think you'll find that most of it is shit! That's why a lot of people don't watch 'live' TV.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I pay my licence fee because I'm generally a compliant soul regarding these things, but I think it's had its time.  When it came in it paid for BBC1, BBC2, and assorted radio stations.  You never needed a license to listen to the radio, it was only if you had a TV capable of receiving BBC TV.  This was distinct from Independent TV funded by advertising.

The distinction is now blurred completely by streaming, recording, multiple devices capable of watching TV, and multiple competing services out there.  I think the time has come to scrap the license fee completely, and fund the BBC from general taxation (if we agree that we need a state broadcaster) and/or from other sources such as selling Top Gear to Iran etc.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, wrighty said:

I pay my licence fee because I'm generally a compliant soul regarding these things, but I think it's had its time.  When it came in it paid for BBC1, BBC2, and assorted radio stations.  You never needed a license to listen to the radio, it was only if you had a TV capable of receiving BBC TV.  This was distinct from Independent TV funded by advertising.

The distinction is now blurred completely by streaming, recording, multiple devices capable of watching TV, and multiple competing services out there.  I think the time has come to scrap the license fee completely, and fund the BBC from general taxation (if we agree that we need a state broadcaster) and/or from other sources such as selling Top Gear to Iran etc.

Exactly this, and there is no justifiable reason why the heaviest users (old people) don’t pay when they expect the rest of us to subsidise them.

Cut it right back and do it out of general taxation 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, wrighty said:

I pay my licence fee because I'm generally a compliant soul regarding these things, but I think it's had its time.  When it came in it paid for BBC1, BBC2, and assorted radio stations.  You never needed a license to listen to the radio, it was only if you had a TV capable of receiving BBC TV.  This was distinct from Independent TV funded by advertising.

The distinction is now blurred completely by streaming, recording, multiple devices capable of watching TV, and multiple competing services out there.  I think the time has come to scrap the license fee completely, and fund the BBC from general taxation (if we agree that we need a state broadcaster) and/or from other sources such as selling Top Gear to Iran etc.

At one time you did have to have a radio licence which was 10/ I think. A TV licence also covered radio, but you could still have a radio only licence up till around 1970. It covered plug in receivers and was killed off by the ubiquity of TV licences and portable radios. I should get out more, but I'm currently infectious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, wrighty said:

You never needed a license to listen to the radio, it was only if you had a TV capable of receiving BBC TV.  This was distinct from Independent TV funded by advertising.

Actually there was a radio licence which wasn't abolished till February 1971.  By that time it was assumed that nearly everyone had a television and those who didn't would be too poor and it would be too much effort to charge them separately.  But the payment for TV effectively covers it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CrazyDave said:

Exactly this, and there is no justifiable reason why the heaviest users (old people) don’t pay when they expect the rest of us to subsidise them.

Why not go the whole hog and have everyone euthanised when they reach the age of 75, so they are no longer able to enjoy the rewards of having paid into a system that was always supposed to help to look after them.

At that age, they are beyond their normal life expectancy, and therefore expendable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...