Yes UnimaginitiveDadThemedUsername you are been forced to buy something, you are if you want to have a Television set, and who is going to go without that just to prove a point to the BBC and more to the point why should we have to? Please if anything just answer that because I am certain you can?t justify it morally. At least you can own and watch a television without having to pay Sky either through subscribing or watching their adverts if you so choose and the same goes for ITV and other channels, why can?t we do the same with the BBC?
Why should only the BBC get public funding? Why not Sky or ITV I am sure they could make better programs too if we did the same with them? Do you really not get what I am saying or do you just think people should be forced to fund it because you yourself like it which I tend to find is often the case with people who support it and IMO that is just selfish not moral, why not let people choose? Are you really that afraid that most people in actual fact don?t really think it is worth it and don?t actually want to be paying the BBC this money, sounds like it to me.
Incidentally I have known people who have had to go without because they couldn?t afford it, some people right now are struggling to even feed their families, do you honestly want people not only to struggle to keep their heads above water but also not even to be able to watch television? Are you honestly saying that there aren?t people who are desperately in need of that £120 a year tax cut? If not then at least you would have to agree there are better ways we could spend this money. Would you honestly not prefer to see it spent on child poverty? Or if David Cameron really cares so much about disabled children then why not spend it on them and protect some of their services he has so disgustingly cut! He is keen to give us these ?choices? when it?s something he wants to cut but not when it isn?t. Isn?t there a better use for the BBC?s public money? Shouldn?t we have the same debate he wants us to have with welfare with this too?
This is not about which political bias you support, by the way I read the independent not the telegraph although I am used to people trying to paint me out as some sort of militant nutter for having this view on TV licensing, but people who do that are missing the point, it?s not about the value or the quality of whether it supports your own political bias or how much you personally like the service, the fact of the matter is that this way of operating for any limited company with share holders is wrong. I would object to it whoever it was that was doing it.
And forget the poor attempt of the iplayer cop out, excuses like that are just pathetic, most people want to watch Television on a Television and why can?t they, why should they have to pay the BBC to do that, who made them the Godfather of television, it?s like they think they own it?
Also the BBC are trying to get the law changed so that you can?t even watch online without paying them which I imagine they will probably achieve. Why can?t the BBC use technology like Sky does that lets people choose whether to subscribe? Then those who want it can have it and those who don?t wont and the BBC will get exactly the amount of money they deserve to spend on making their programs, no more no less and everything will be fair, what possible moral argument can you use to object to this? I shouldn?t be forced to fund a particular company just because other people like them. It?s TV not health care for heaven?s sake, if we were spending it on that then I wouldn?t be objecting.
I like Persil washing powder but I don?t support a law that says you can?t buy Daz without buying my favourite washing powder too because it will make the product better for me and allow me to buy it at a cheaper price, that?s basically what people who support it are saying, that to me is just so selfish and totally fascist, where is the freedom to choose?
People have been so brainwashed into thinking this is an acceptable way for a LTD company to operate that they not only accept it but even support it, it?s almost like Stockholm syndrome. Think about the morality of it, what other product or service would you accept it with? Who else would you let tell you that you can?t buy their competitors service unless you have their too, regardless of whether you want it or not. Name one other example?
Forget about reading the telegraph I think some people have been watching too much of the BBC?s propaganda that tells them how wonderful it is that we are forced to pay. ?Unique? funding, LOL, more like legal extortion and harassment.
My apologies I really do not mean to insult anyone but I genuinely do find this very morally wrong and the fact that the people who don?t pay get dragged through the courts and made to look like the bad guys just makes me sick. I don?t know I guess many people will always just think I am mad one and never understand where I am coming from.