Category Archives: licence fee (BBC poll tax)

The BBC is the real villain of football’s commercialisation

Dalrymple notes that the British state broadcaster, which is funded by a poll tax, pays hundreds of millions of pounds a year for its right to televise association football matches. He asks:

What on earth is a public body doing, funnelling huge sums from taxpayers’ pockets into organisations that could perfectly well stand commercially on their own two feet, and that require no public subsidy to survive and prosper?

He points out that the BBC

acts to drive up the very price of the rights it seeks, in order to provide a service that could perfectly well be provided without it.

He likens the state broadcasting poll tax, or ‘licence fee’, to foreign aid. It is, he says,

the means by which the poor in a rich country subsidise the rich in a rich country.

British social policy defined

An idiocy wrapped in a lunacy wrapped in an absurdity, to produce misery and squalor

Dalrymple writes:

A tax on knowledge is a terrible thing, but a tax on ignorance, prejudice, evasion and half-truth is worse. That is what every British household with a television must pay, for the privilege of having the earnest but frivolous lucubrations of the BBC purveyed to it, whether it wants them or not.

This poll tax — or licence fee, as it is known — is the equivalent of nearly $200 per household a year, and is thus worth evading. Unfortunately, it costs nearly three times as much to catch evaders as the licence fees would have raised if paid. One proposal is to halve the licence fee for single mothers. Dalrymple comments:

In other words, we should subsidise a subsidy, in the name of a universal right to misinformation and trashy entertainment (and at the same time confer yet another incentive for single parenthood).

The crude and corrupt British state broadcaster

Screen Shot 2016-04-24 at 17.15.49For the right to receive television broadcasts in their homes, British households must pay a poll tax equivalent to about $210, which subsidises the British Broadcasting Corporation. 

This broadcasting system, writes Dalrymple, exemplifies two of the guiding principles of contemporary British public life:

  • the active promotion of adolescent vulgarity and sniggering crudity
  • the shameless looting of the public purse

Needless to say, the BBC

is losing viewers and listeners all the time; a growing proportion of the population never tunes in to any of its programmes.

The BBC certainly cannot claim any longer

that it produces, as it once did, the kind of intelligent programmes that commercial broadcasters shun.

Dalrymple points to vast payments made to the BBC’s fifth-rate ‘comedians’. These payments, he notes,

represent a gift from state functionaries (who themselves have also looted the public purse unmercifully)

on condition that the ‘comedians’

keep contributing to the ideologically-driven vulgarisation of the culture.

There has been a return, says Dalrymple,

to the 18th-century days of state patronage, with this difference: that the men who exercised it back then were men of taste and discrimination. They knew a Dr Johnson when they saw one.

The extreme unattractiveness of British popular culture

Dalrymple points out that the deep insufficiency of British popular culture, which is utterly without value yet which is insidiously championed by the corrupt, poll-tax-funded state broadcaster, is one factor (beside many others) driving certain young people into radical murderous Islamism.

This is what they look like, the type of 'comedians' so lavishly funded by the British taxpayer

Smug, puerile, smart-alec, repulsive: the ‘comedians’ lavishly funded — through a poll tax — by the British taxpayer