Norpig wrote:I just don't see how the Beeb is past it's sell by date though KP. They still make some of the best telly in the world for me. The campaign to trash the BBC is being orchestrated by the right wing media like Murdoch and the Tories.

Norpig wrote:I just don't see how the Beeb is past it's sell by date though KP. They still make some of the best telly in the world for me. The campaign to trash the BBC is being orchestrated by the right wing media like Murdoch and the Tories.
gloswhite wrote:They are good in some things, but not all by any means. Were you aware that the BBC manages Acension Island. At least they were when I was there a few years ago. Why? and who pays for it ?
Norpig wrote:Get a life ten bob you really are a nasty little man aren't you? Jealous of everyone who's actually done something with their lives, so you just keep muck raking you troll.
Norpig wrote:Sorry Sluffy but he comes across on here as nasty and spiteful and looks down on us mere mortals. It was a bit strong but that's how i feel about him.
T.R.O.Y. wrote:Bob’s a bit different, I’ve no issue with him but (like Karly) anyone who can’t handle having their opinions questioned is weak and needs to do some growing up. I don’t understand the culture war against the BBC at the moment, all a bit depressing really if I’m honest.
You really are indulgent, Sluffy. I could easily afford the TV licence if it was ten or a hundred times more than it is but that wouldn't really make it right for a public service broadcaster to facilitate the kind of tax dodges that are inherent in the system or justify the withdrawal of a relief that are appreciated and valued by those who have contributed to the system throughout their lives without ever indulging in any of the kind of tax dodges that now seem to abound amongst the Beeb's slebs.Sluffy wrote:
It's ok mate.
We are all a bit different from one another and some of us no doubt rub others up the wrong way - but I believe in Bob's case, unintentionally.
I don't think his aim for a moment is to piss you or anyone else off on here but to vent against people who seem on the surface 'good' people but when you look a bit deeper seem to be playing the system you and I pay into, millions!
He can't square how they are seen to be presented as people to look up to and when you think about it, he's right.
Nowt he or anyone else can do about it so I guess he's just getting it out of his system on here - and possibly also the fact he's no longer his free TV licence for being 75 or over and is now having contribute to Lineker's hefty wages knowing full well 'jug ears' has been putting that money into schemes to 'evade' paying tax on it!
Perhaps you might cut him a bit of slack as he does indeed have a point but maybe doesn't present it in the best way for young millenniums like you are used to.
Ten Bobsworth wrote:You really are indulgent, Sluffy. I could easily afford the TV licence if it was ten or a hundred times more than it is but that wouldn't really make it right for a public service broadcaster to facilitate the kind of tax dodges that are inherent in the system or justify the withdrawal of a relief that are appreciated and valued by those who have contributed to the system throughout their lives without ever indulging in any of the kind of tax dodges that now seem to abound amongst the Beeb's slebs.
We live in an era where half-truth, spin and falsehood are the norm in almost all walks of life and I just happen to have gained enough knowledge and experience to see through a lot of it and expose it for the sham it really is.
There's no shortage of folk who prefer the truth hidden or buried. It suits them and serves their interest but, for better or for worse, its never quite suited me.
Its not a battle to be won or lost, Sluffy. But I do find it interesting to look beneath the veneer of the sleb culture, media hype and juvenile journalism.Sluffy wrote:
Sorry I wasn't intending to be, just trying to make a little point as to how all TV licence payers are paying a fraction of our fees to the likes of Gary and Sue and how that would not be a pleasant thought for you to be doing.
I'm the same as you in the respect of being honest and open, I guess much of it is down to how I was brought up but there is also a little something somehow ingrained in me to 'do the right thing' even when not doing so would have made my life a lot more easier at times.
A few years ago my daughter was travelling on her gap year and I had encouraged her to take the opportunities that presented themselves to her on her travels as she may never have the chance or opportunity to pass that way again. Well one day I got a call from her and she had a chance to swim with Whale Sharks but was concerned about how the tour companies were exploiting them and she didn't know whether to go or not, to which my reply was that she had to live with herself and would she be more comfortable taking the chance to swim with the sharks, as she might never get that chance again, or more comfortable not doing so and knowing she wasn't party to them being exploited.
I'm pleased to say she chose the latter, she may never get to swim with whale sharks in her life but at least she doesn't have to carry around in her head, her guilt for having done so.
I tell the story simply because that is how I am, I'm bothered far more for not doing the right thing - even though it would benefit me enormously, than doing the right thing even though it does me no favours. I can't help it, I even sometimes regret doing it at the time but I still do it never the less.
It's me that has to live my life and I can live more peacefully within myself knowing I did the right thing instead of the wrong thing even thought that would probably saved me a lot of grief at the time.
Maybe I'm a fool but at least I'm a contented one.
I guess the main difference between us though is that I have accepted that the world is unfair and no longer fight battles I have no hope of winning.
Good luck to you with Vince, Lineker, et al but they are simply battles I have no interest in fighting, they've won and I can see any mileage in worrying about them myself.
Fair play to you for not giving in though, in a way I admire you for it.
Did you really? Don't know how he manages on it, but Lineker's still worth £1.35m of anybody's money, is he?Natasha Whittam wrote:I watched MOTD last night, Lineker was his usually knowledgeable and professional self.
Apologies Bob, sadly I didn't have time to find out about his financial situation, but it was nearly midnight by the time it finished.
You are right. They are small time, over-hyped, overpaid and under-taxed. Some seem to think they are more important than they really are.wanderlust wrote:It's really insignificant in the scheme of things.
Compare that to "Mr Brexit" Dyson who once we'd committed to leaving the EU moved his head office from the UK to the Far East so that he wouldn't have to contribute his taxes to the UK.
Or the raft of offshore Conservative party funders.
These small time TV presenters are not the same class.
Similar topics
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
|
|