Does the same argument apply to Netflix and disney then? They also produce a huge amount of content, should we all have to pay a Netflix subscription even if we don't watch it? How about sky sports? They fund a lot of sports and provide entertainment for millions of people, should I be obliged to pay for it despite having no interest in ever watching it whatsoever?
The BBC isn't some massive favour granted to us that we should all be fore-lock tugging grateful for and honoured to be allowed to contribute to.
If you watch it I agree you should pay, but the argument that you should pay just because it creates a lot of programs even if you dont watch them is ridiculous?
These threads always end up full of people talking complete nonsense about what they think you do/don't need a license for when it's all very clear on the website.
OP I've not had a license for 8 years at my current property (and therefore have never watched the BBC, nor any other terrestrial channels live, as per the declaration you have to make) and nobody has ever come round to check. If they did you have no obligation to let them in.
As far as I know until recently there was no way of them knowing whether you were watching it or not however now you have to sign in with an email address whenever you try to access iplayer on a laptop or smart TV so presumably it would be quite easy for them to check whether said email address also had a license - BTW the reason I know this was because I was trying to access S4C which has programs hosted on iplayer which you are allowed to watch without a license.
If you can afford it the best thing would be to pay up until the end of Wimbledon then cancel after. You'll get a partial refund if you've paid the whole year in advance. Then you have 11 months without it to decide if you get sufficient use that its worth the annual fee. Technically you could sign up for one month every year but its a faff compared to Netflix, Disney subscriptions etc.