Comments on: TV Licencing http://www.fallen-angel.co.uk/2008/09/21/tv-licencing-2/ Rob's Homepage Tue, 25 Oct 2011 11:03:30 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1 By: Rob http://www.fallen-angel.co.uk/2008/09/21/tv-licencing-2/comment-page-1/#comment-551 Rob Tue, 18 Nov 2008 00:02:03 +0000 http://www.theshitefantastic.net/fallen-angel/?p=167#comment-551 Incidentally, feel free to comment if you have an opposing view. I'm all for debate. However, cheap point scoring is not debate. I've had to delete a couple of posts in this vein. Blunt attacks on the shows I enjoy aren't, as far as I'm concerned, debate. Feel free to disagree and argue otherwise, but an attack just makes you look like a cunt. And reference to Jonathan Ross' salary is banned. Yes, I agree its a criminal sum, but its usefulness as an argument has been invalidated through mindless repetition and overuse. (And since apparently Mark Thompson of the BBC doesn't think he's worth that much either it's not much of an point to score against them really now, is it?) Incidentally, feel free to comment if you have an opposing view. I’m all for debate. However, cheap point scoring is not debate. I’ve had to delete a couple of posts in this vein.

Blunt attacks on the shows I enjoy aren’t, as far as I’m concerned, debate. Feel free to disagree and argue otherwise, but an attack just makes you look like a cunt.

And reference to Jonathan Ross’ salary is banned. Yes, I agree its a criminal sum, but its usefulness as an argument has been invalidated through mindless repetition and overuse. (And since apparently Mark Thompson of the BBC doesn’t think he’s worth that much either it’s not much of an point to score against them really now, is it?)

]]> By: Pandemonia http://www.fallen-angel.co.uk/2008/09/21/tv-licencing-2/comment-page-1/#comment-419 Pandemonia Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:50:38 +0000 http://www.theshitefantastic.net/fallen-angel/?p=167#comment-419 I heartily agree. I do think that it might be more effectively taxed through income rather than as a flat rate so as to provide a more graduated cost to those with low or limited incomes. On the downside it would remove the transparency of the charge (not that it?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s that transparent anyway ?¢‚Ǩ‚Äú money does not only go to the BBC. Channel 4 gets some too I believe).

The real problem is deregulation which allows women in knickers to fill channels a) very cheaply and b) with reasonable viewing figures. I mean, let?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s go the whole hog and fill museums with porn ?¢‚Ǩ‚Äú it?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s what the public want to see!

Or is that not the best argument? A line from the second best programme is ?¢‚Ǩ?ìGive a monkey control over its environment and it?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢ll fill the world with bananas!?¢‚Ǩ¬ù

]]>