Refuse to pay your TV licence fee - UK Agriculture Fight back

By all accounts pensioners are being jailed for non payment, don't think the establishment would be averse to locking up some farmers....might even be populist in some circles!!
There has been a joke circling tinternet for a few years about why we should put our OAP’s in prison and prisoners in old folks homes, the TV license was part of it.
 
Personally think BBC is excellent value for money when you consider what you get, advertising free tv and radio stations covering an entire range of genres. Full coverage of Summer and winter Olympic games, Wimbledon, World and European football finals and that’s just some on the sport. Yes there is some rubbish but they need to cater for all. My annoyance is the amount they pay to certain presenters. There should equal pay and a salary cap.

I don't care if you think it is good value or not. I don't want to have to pay for the bloody BBC, at least give people a choice. No, I do not want to fund an organisation that gives Jeremy Vine a 300K salary thank you. I am more than happy to pay Amazon £80 a year and enjoy their content. If the BBC make a decent wildlife or nature documentary once every two years then I may consider buying that particular content. I do not want to be paying over £150 a year to watch their crap programming and highly biased news channel. It should be funded by subscription only.
 

lloyd

Member
Location
Herefordshire
I don't care if you think it is good value or not. I don't want to have to pay for the bloody BBC, at least give people a choice. No, I do not want to fund an organisation that gives Jeremy Vine a 300K salary thank you. I am more than happy to pay Amazon £80 a year and enjoy their content. If the BBC make a decent wildlife or nature documentary once every two years then I may consider buying that particular content. I do not want to be paying over £150 a year to watch their crap programming and highly biased news channel. It should be funded by subscription only.

It may aswell be funded from advertising as it seems far from impartial anyway.
 

Steevo

Member
Location
Gloucestershire
I don't care if you think it is good value or not. I don't want to have to pay for the bloody BBC, at least give people a choice. No, I do not want to fund an organisation that gives Jeremy Vine a 300K salary thank you. I am more than happy to pay Amazon £80 a year and enjoy their content. If the BBC make a decent wildlife or nature documentary once every two years then I may consider buying that particular content. I do not want to be paying over £150 a year to watch their crap programming and highly biased news channel. It should be funded by subscription only.

It's the newsreaders that get me......they're good at their job for sure, but it seems a crazy amount to pay for it.

https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/news...-to-go-on-pay-equality-full-list-of-salaries/
 

lloyd

Member
Location
Herefordshire
I don't mind how they finance themselves so long as I am not obliged by law to pay it and given no other option. I don't even watch BBC programming and certainly would not watch BBC news. I cannot afford any kind of involvement with the law, however.

It's as outdated as foxhunting and bl**dy cruel to farmers
so it should be restricted to pay to view.
 

Steevo

Member
Location
Gloucestershire
You got to be joking, 600K for reading the news?

BBC needs to be cut down to size.

What gets me is....would people really stop watching BBC news if they lost their well known presenters? I know BBC say they need to pay matching salaries to keep these people, rather than being poached by Sky etc. I could understand that logic with celebs who do their own thing and are quite unique - Clarkson style Top Gear for example, but newsreaders, radio personalities etc. seems a different logic to me.

A global cap on sportsman's wages would be a pretty logical idea too I think.......but that's another (non-BBC) story.

Over £500,000 a week seems madness to me Just imagine the carbon footprint that would go along with wages of that amount.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/top-10-highest-paid-footballers-14987456
 
You got to be joking, 600K for reading the news?

BBC needs to be cut down to size.
News readers are just that, 600k you must be joking, mate?
Admittedly some news readers are multi talented and are more than just mere news readers who rarely show their talents as they a normally behind the sceen than up front, in NZ Angela d' Audney was a classic example, just a news reader but with a 40 year contribution broadcasting.
 
Location
Cleveland
I don't care if you think it is good value or not. I don't want to have to pay for the bloody BBC, at least give people a choice. No, I do not want to fund an organisation that gives Jeremy Vine a 300K salary thank you. I am more than happy to pay Amazon £80 a year and enjoy their content. If the BBC make a decent wildlife or nature documentary once every two years then I may consider buying that particular content. I do not want to be paying over £150 a year to watch their crap programming and highly biased news channel. It should be funded by subscription only.
If that wet rag Jeremy whine is on 300k it’s a travesty
 

Lowland1

Member
Mixed Farmer
It's 43p per paying household per day the idea of a licence paid per appliance owning household whilst seeming outdated today does give them independence from government interference. Try complaining about the state broadcasters in Russia or China and see how far you get. Yes you could opt out and just watch TV on demand but i believe the BBC sets a standard by which the others are judged. I think the NHS is rubbish and as such have private insurance my kids did n't go to state schools and i spend more time driving on the B1190 than the M1 but that doesn't mean i shouldn't pay for others to use these things. The BBC biased i dunno but its hardly Fox news and Test match special did have more English commentators during the Ashes than Australians so maybe. I continue to pay my licence until you can get it abolished and for Radio4 alone its worth it.
 
BBC is well past it’s sell by date.it needs to be pay to view ,by our choice and not be bullied into it.or take advertising.i despise the bbc left wing bias and I’m sure the government tell them what to tell us too.was bad enough giving pensioners free licences which they deserve and then make them pay again.its impossible to get farmers to agree but it would be a good idea to all stop paying.maybe the courts would get clogged up with non paying farmers and pensioners in the future.
Nick...
We use aerial in washing machine. So wouldn't be expected a licence-fee to persil. Ballocks to BBC!
 

35% of English and Welsh farmers possibly/probably depressed

  • 152
  • 3
Written by Michelle Martin from Agriland

The Royal Agricultural Benevolent Institution (RABI) has today, Thursday, October 14, published the findings of The Big Farming Survey, which shows 35% of English and Welsh farmers are either possibly or probably depressed.

The survey, based on over 15,000 responses, concentrates on the health and well-being of the farming community in England and Wales in the 2020s.

The Royal Agricultural Benevolent Institution (RABI) is a national charity that provides support to the farming community across England and Wales.

Mental health​


Mental well-being, the survey notes, describes our ability to cope with the ‘ups and downs’ of everyday life.

According to the survey, 14% of the farming community is ‘possibly depressed’ while...
Top