Author Topic: License to watch tv?  (Read 1475 times)

Offline Excel1

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 614
License to watch tv?
« Reply #60 on: July 19, 2007, 06:34:31 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by McFarland
Commercials only bother people who are impatient.


When you get a 3 minute commercial break for every 4 to 5 minutes of programme time during the climatic part of an episode of Lost you'll blow right pass impatience and straight in to homicidal maniac territory.

As bad as commercial TV can get no way would I want to see the return of the days of having to pay a license fee to subsidise state owned TV and radio. These days in NZ they have to pay their own way and at the same time return a dividend to a greedy gov't...which mostly explains the high number of commercials. And if we don't like the commercial infested networks there is always the alternative choice of pay TV. User pays rules, as it should do. Why should anyone who owns a TV have to pay a tax like we use too, to prop up TV and radio stations that they might not ever watch or listen too, the concept is archaic and socialist.

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
License to watch tv?
« Reply #61 on: July 19, 2007, 08:15:55 AM »
curval...yes.. that is what I said... they will take your property.. if you resist they will kill you.

fbbone... Ruby ridge was about shotguns?   No.. it was about not paying a tax on a type of shotgun.    that is like saying that stills are about booze.

It is true to an extent but no one would care about sawed off shotguns or booze if the taxes were payed.

lynx..  despite not really understanding your expressions.. I think you are saying that I am kidding.

I was not kidding.  I do not want to support state TV.    I don't really watch much TV but I want as little government in it as possible.   I have no interest in sporting events and everything else... I just record anyway to watch at my leisure.  If it has commercials I have a 30 sec button on my DVD recorder that jumps ahead 30 sec at a time.   It is not inconvienient.

I watched your tv a little several years ago when I was there and commericials would have been more entertaining..  talking heads and grown men in shorts kicking a ball around in the mud...

The simpsons was the best thing I could find on the tv.

lazs

Offline Momus--

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 651
License to watch tv?
« Reply #62 on: July 19, 2007, 08:59:24 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Ripsnort
My TV is free of tax, except what I pay on the cable bill.

I like it this way.


You do realise who ultimately pays the cost of the advertising that funds "free" commercial TV don't you?

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
License to watch tv?
« Reply #63 on: July 19, 2007, 09:02:09 AM »
who momus?   who pays?

If we can buy goods cheaper than you then what is the problem?   I find that england is far more expensive to buy anything than it is here.   Your system doesn't do it for me.  You seem to have less choice and higher prices.

lazs

Offline wooley

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 293
License to watch tv?
« Reply #64 on: July 19, 2007, 01:15:57 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
who momus?   who pays?

If we can buy goods cheaper than you then what is the problem?   I find that england is far more expensive to buy anything than it is here.   Your system doesn't do it for me.  You seem to have less choice and higher prices.

lazs


At $2 to the pound, of course BRITAIN is expensive. However, your point is taken, its not a cheap place to buy certain things. I'm curious about what you think there is less choice in though? I can't think of anything I can buy here in the US, I couldn't get just as easily back in the UK (other than the assault rifle no home should be without).

I'm also curious about your comment about the BRITISH 'system'. All in all, my experience (having lived in both countries recently) is there is very, very little difference between living in UK and US.

Costs of living - overall - are about the same. Direct taxation is about the same in both countries. Property tax is lower (and fairer) in the UK (compared with California at least). Indirect taxation is higher in the UK (sales tax etc), but that is offset by lower health-care and education costs. Gas, cars and electrical good are generally cheaper in the US, but groceries and utilities are cheaper in the UK. Basically - you win some, you lose some. I'm possible a little bit better off here at the moment, but that would likely reverse if I were to have kids or (heaven forbid), myself or my wife were to get seriously ill.

Government intrusion in daily life (despite the sensationalist claims by certain members on this board to the contrary) is pretty much the same. The US government takes just as many liberties with the rights of its citizens as the UK government does with its.

Back on the original topic, I think the confusion about the TV license stems from comparing the BBC with a commercial TV companies. The BBC is - in fact - a public service broadcaster and is therefore rightly paid for by public funds. Any assumption that that makes it a propaganda mouthpiece for the government would be wrong. In fact, it's charter expressly forbids it from aligning itself with any political movement. What that means is the  BBC provides some of the highest quality journalism available anywhere in the world without the need to include editorial comment. American news broadcasting and current affairs programs are virtually Party Political Broadcast by comparison (Bill O'Reilly anyone?).

I like living in the US. I like the weather, I like the attitude of the people. But the realities of day-to-day living is that there is next to no difference between the two countries.

Wooley.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2007, 01:18:27 PM by wooley »

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
License to watch tv?
« Reply #65 on: July 19, 2007, 02:40:30 PM »
so long as nothing you like is illegal or.. the tax system is tailored to a particular lifestyle you enjoy...  you could interchange the countries and not notice.

the people in england were friendly and there were very few minorities around..

 everything seemed old and worn out and musty.. the electronics.. say TV in this case were ancient looking..  regular tube type TV was selling for a great deal more than it would have for a big screen here.  fuel prices were insane and shopping was limited.

The food seemed more expensive to me not less.   And everything had a high tax on it.

The problem comes when you live a certain way and then try to adapt.. I would say that it is much much easier for a brit to adapt to the US than vice versa..

For one... he will understand everything said to him even if he can't make himself understood.   If he wants a firearm... he simply goes and buys one... if he wants a TV he buys it and plugs it in..   If he wants cable he picks and pays or satalite.

If he wants to eat or drink in the car while driving no one pays any attention... he doesn't have trouble adapting to our idiotic seatbelt of helmet laws cause he has had em for years.

That may be why we see so many brits here.   the opposite is not true.  An American in england is a stranger in a strange land.   Unless he is from seattle the weather will probly have him wishing he could have his gun back so that he could blow his brains out..  He won't be able to understand anything anyone is saying and he will wish he had his old health care provider or at least... could visit his own dentist when he starts noticing the teeth around him.

While a brit here is happy with any law that the government might throw at them.. an American in england will be angry and confused.  he will wonder why he has to pay a TV tax for a crap tv and crap stations and why he can't buy a used, big old sedan to get around in and why, even if he could it wouldn't fit on the roads and he couldn't afford to fill the tank anyway.

lazs

Offline wooley

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 293
License to watch tv?
« Reply #66 on: July 19, 2007, 03:41:47 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
...there were very few minorities around...


I take it you didn't make it to Leeds or Bradford then. Or Birmingham. Or SE London. Or the south-side of Glasgow...

Quote
. everything seemed old and worn out and musty..


Lets see how US cities look in a couple of hundred years time.

Quote
the electronics.. say TV in this case were ancient looking..  regular tube type TV was selling for a great deal more than it would have for a big screen here.


Electronics are expensive compared with here. But they are not ancient. Digital and widescreen TV was widespread in the UK long before the US. Lets not even start on cell-phones.

Quote
fuel prices were insane


Guilty mu'lord

Quote
shopping was limited. [/B]


Depends where you were - just like the US. I would challenge you to tell me one thing you could go out and get this afternoon that you couldn't also get in any British city. The shopping in cities like London, Leeds and Glasgow is some of the finest in the world. Plus the UK cities have city centers which make public transport viable, so at the end of a hard day's retail therapy you can have a couple of beers and not worry about who's driving home.

Quote
The food seemed more expensive to me not less. [/B]


Eating out is. Groceries are not.

Quote
And everything had a high tax on it.[/B]


I did say sales tax was high (17.5% if you're interested).

Quote
The problem comes when you live a certain way and then try to adapt.. [/B]


And there-in lies the problem. Many (by no means all) Americans are just not good at adapting. I guess its a consequence of living in a continent-sized country. Most Americans will never leave America and so the need for adaptability doesn't come up.

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
License to watch tv?
« Reply #67 on: July 21, 2007, 11:33:44 AM »
wooley.. not sure if I agree with you on adapting...  We live in a very large country where there is a huge difference in just about everything from one place to another.

If you mean that all our money is the same and most of the traffic laws then I would agree.

As for the minorities.. ghettos don't count.  small little pockets don't count.  I am talking the overall percentage of the population.   We are much much much more diverse.. even a cursory glance at the numbers will prove my point.

I seen people in england who were making more than me.. what I thought was a good wage but... they couldn't even buy a home with some land around it.   Here, a person can own hundreds of acres and a huge home without too much problem.  I own two and some land.   I am far from wealthy.

I have 3 cars and a motorcycle and a safe full of guns including handguns.   V8's and hot rods... can't have em there... couldn't adapt to that.   You could come here tho and not have guns and not have hot rods... you could have the same lifestyle or.... not.. your choice... you could buy a TV and watch anything that came on or... buy cable...your choice... how is that hard to adapt to?

Are you saying that having more choices is just as hard to adapt to as having less?   I may be just old fashioned but I want to live in the place that offers the most choice and anything less would just irritate.

lazs