| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 13:58 - Mar 14 with 1681 views | AtThePeake |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 13:31 - Mar 13 by Bobbyjoe |
A rare victory for us woke lefties! |
 |  |
|  |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 14:54 - Mar 14 with 1575 views | Porlicks |
Applications for asylum per 1,000,000 inhabitants.
Cyprus 10,865
Austria 4,452
Libya 2,115
Greece 2,114
Germany 1,781
Belgium 1,662
Bulgaria 1,592
Switzerland 1,520
Netherlands 1,404
Spain 1,377
France 1,319
Mexico 1,035
Uganda 912
Italy 898
United Kingdom 837 |  |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 15:56 - Mar 14 with 1491 views | A_Newby |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 22:01 - Mar 13 by EllDale |
I was once told by a Granada TV employee that they dreaded a scenario whereby the BBC was funded by advertisements.
They believed that the good advertisers would rather be on BBC than ITV because they had better programmes and that this would mean a serious drop in revenue for the latter.
Just imagine for example the clamour for advertising space in breaks during Strictly Come Dancing or, ironically enough, MOTD. |
My problem is with the BBC as an organisation.
It takes a left-wing centrist view when it comes to its funding by taxpayers and a right wing market view when it comes to its remuneration policy for people who work for them (this also happens in the upper echelons of the civil service, NHS, and local authorities).
They justify paying an ex-footballer more than £1 million for presenting football on the BBC by saying that this is the “market rate”, and he could earn more in the commercial sector for example at Sky.
Maybe he could but that is not a reason for the BBC to pay him that much, let him leave the BBC and replace him with another presenter on say a tenth of his salary. The football programs would not suffer.
The BBC paying the so-called “market rate” is actually distorting the market and putting up the staff costs to all other media outlets.
For example, if the BBC closed completely tomorrow and all its employees including its talent (people in front of the camera) were available on the market. Do you think the industry wages paid would stay as high? I don’t think they would, that is market forces.
You will generally find that most people working in the media industry support BBC taxpayer funding model as they are aware of the knock-on effect on their own incomes if the BBC were to lose its license fee money.
Looking at the criteria that are used to justify their high pay to both talent and executives. The BBC talk about audience ratings.
These for a commercial media organisation are important, the amount you can charge for advertising and therefore the income your organisation can earn is dependent upon these figures.
For the BBC the audience share does not really matter, it gets the same taxpayer funding no matter the ratings. The BBC audience ratings have universally dropped over the last 20 years whilst its taxpayer funding has increased.
The BBC as a condition for receiving public funding must publish the salary of any employee earning over £150,000 per annum. It publishes a list for “talent” (about 75 people in 2022) which is widely reported in the press.
https://www.radiotimes.com/tv/bbc-pay-2022-full-list-newsupdate/
It also publishes a list for senior staff (200+ people) who earn over £150,000 pa. This is not as widely reported even though many of the salaries are higher than those of the “talent”.
https://www.bbc.com/aboutthebbcwhoweare/staff/
It does not release some salary details in its self-styled “commercial arm” which they say is exempt as it is “self-funding”.
I personally would stop the taxpayer funding and sell off the BBC piecemeal. Then as private organisations they can pay any salaries they want and have any policies or not on social media use they like. |  | | |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 16:42 - Mar 14 with 1415 views | tony_roch975 |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 15:56 - Mar 14 by A_Newby |
My problem is with the BBC as an organisation.
It takes a left-wing centrist view when it comes to its funding by taxpayers and a right wing market view when it comes to its remuneration policy for people who work for them (this also happens in the upper echelons of the civil service, NHS, and local authorities).
They justify paying an ex-footballer more than £1 million for presenting football on the BBC by saying that this is the “market rate”, and he could earn more in the commercial sector for example at Sky.
Maybe he could but that is not a reason for the BBC to pay him that much, let him leave the BBC and replace him with another presenter on say a tenth of his salary. The football programs would not suffer.
The BBC paying the so-called “market rate” is actually distorting the market and putting up the staff costs to all other media outlets.
For example, if the BBC closed completely tomorrow and all its employees including its talent (people in front of the camera) were available on the market. Do you think the industry wages paid would stay as high? I don’t think they would, that is market forces.
You will generally find that most people working in the media industry support BBC taxpayer funding model as they are aware of the knock-on effect on their own incomes if the BBC were to lose its license fee money.
Looking at the criteria that are used to justify their high pay to both talent and executives. The BBC talk about audience ratings.
These for a commercial media organisation are important, the amount you can charge for advertising and therefore the income your organisation can earn is dependent upon these figures.
For the BBC the audience share does not really matter, it gets the same taxpayer funding no matter the ratings. The BBC audience ratings have universally dropped over the last 20 years whilst its taxpayer funding has increased.
The BBC as a condition for receiving public funding must publish the salary of any employee earning over £150,000 per annum. It publishes a list for “talent” (about 75 people in 2022) which is widely reported in the press.
https://www.radiotimes.com/tv/bbc-pay-2022-full-list-newsupdate/
It also publishes a list for senior staff (200+ people) who earn over £150,000 pa. This is not as widely reported even though many of the salaries are higher than those of the “talent”.
https://www.bbc.com/aboutthebbcwhoweare/staff/
It does not release some salary details in its self-styled “commercial arm” which they say is exempt as it is “self-funding”.
I personally would stop the taxpayer funding and sell off the BBC piecemeal. Then as private organisations they can pay any salaries they want and have any policies or not on social media use they like. |
Absolutely - let's stop all high earners.... TAX THE RICH |  |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 17:14 - Mar 14 with 1366 views | judd |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 16:42 - Mar 14 by tony_roch975 |
Absolutely - let's stop all high earners.... TAX THE RICH |
It would be a start if moral crusaders went through the BBC PAYE system rather than as self-employed sub-contractors and the tax avoidance that brings with it. |  |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 17:29 - Mar 14 with 1345 views | sxdale |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 17:14 - Mar 14 by judd |
It would be a start if moral crusaders went through the BBC PAYE system rather than as self-employed sub-contractors and the tax avoidance that brings with it. |
If tax avoidance is legal, then is is down to the government to close the loopholes, just cos you're left wing or a moral crusader doesn't mean you have to be all sackcloth and ashes. As Billy Bragg said "I like toast as much as much as any man, but not for breakfast, dinner and tea"" | | | |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 17:42 - Mar 14 with 1324 views | D_Alien |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 17:29 - Mar 14 by sxdale |
If tax avoidance is legal, then is is down to the government to close the loopholes, just cos you're left wing or a moral crusader doesn't mean you have to be all sackcloth and ashes. As Billy Bragg said "I like toast as much as much as any man, but not for breakfast, dinner and tea"" |
It's not illegal what he's trying to do tax-wise, but just hypocritical in the extreme to go on a moral crusade at the same time
Billy Bragg's songs (and other words) are shit |  |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 18:09 - Mar 14 with 1279 views | sxdale |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 17:42 - Mar 14 by D_Alien |
It's not illegal what he's trying to do tax-wise, but just hypocritical in the extreme to go on a moral crusade at the same time
Billy Bragg's songs (and other words) are shit |
Well if you're going to be rude about Billy then so are your opinions sunshine  | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 18:15 - Mar 14 with 1272 views | D_Alien |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 18:09 - Mar 14 by sxdale |
Well if you're going to be rude about Billy then so are your opinions sunshine |
At least i've paid my taxes | |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 18:20 - Mar 14 with 1263 views | sxdale |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 18:15 - Mar 14 by D_Alien |
At least i've paid my taxes |
Unlike me, oh f***  | | | |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 18:30 - Mar 14 with 1236 views | D_Alien |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 18:20 - Mar 14 by sxdale |
Unlike me, oh f*** |
It's not about you though, is it | |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 18:46 - Mar 14 with 1212 views | Porlicks |
Does anybody want to to talk about the actual facts of immigration to the UK? It might suprise you that the Daily Mail is only partialy (not) right | |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 19:02 - Mar 14 with 1201 views | sxdale |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 18:30 - Mar 14 by D_Alien |
It's not about you though, is it |
 | | | |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 19:12 - Mar 14 with 1191 views | James1980 |
The Daily Heils position hasn't changed since the 1930s | |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 19:15 - Mar 14 with 1188 views | watford_dale |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 18:46 - Mar 14 by Porlicks |
Does anybody want to to talk about the actual facts of immigration to the UK? It might suprise you that the Daily Mail is only partialy (not) right |
Happy to respond and leave SX and Dalien to it, that may go for some time yet.
Don't we suffer from net migration every year - 504,000 left the UK last year and therefore require balance so the current demographic of the population can be maintained. | | | |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 19:28 - Mar 14 with 1175 views | James1980 |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 19:15 - Mar 14 by watford_dale |
Happy to respond and leave SX and Dalien to it, that may go for some time yet.
Don't we suffer from net migration every year - 504,000 left the UK last year and therefore require balance so the current demographic of the population can be maintained. |
Schroedinger's immigrants coming over to simultaneously TEK YER JERB and scrounge of the state. | |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 19:40 - Mar 14 with 1165 views | watford_dale |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 15:56 - Mar 14 by A_Newby |
My problem is with the BBC as an organisation.
It takes a left-wing centrist view when it comes to its funding by taxpayers and a right wing market view when it comes to its remuneration policy for people who work for them (this also happens in the upper echelons of the civil service, NHS, and local authorities).
They justify paying an ex-footballer more than £1 million for presenting football on the BBC by saying that this is the “market rate”, and he could earn more in the commercial sector for example at Sky.
Maybe he could but that is not a reason for the BBC to pay him that much, let him leave the BBC and replace him with another presenter on say a tenth of his salary. The football programs would not suffer.
The BBC paying the so-called “market rate” is actually distorting the market and putting up the staff costs to all other media outlets.
For example, if the BBC closed completely tomorrow and all its employees including its talent (people in front of the camera) were available on the market. Do you think the industry wages paid would stay as high? I don’t think they would, that is market forces.
You will generally find that most people working in the media industry support BBC taxpayer funding model as they are aware of the knock-on effect on their own incomes if the BBC were to lose its license fee money.
Looking at the criteria that are used to justify their high pay to both talent and executives. The BBC talk about audience ratings.
These for a commercial media organisation are important, the amount you can charge for advertising and therefore the income your organisation can earn is dependent upon these figures.
For the BBC the audience share does not really matter, it gets the same taxpayer funding no matter the ratings. The BBC audience ratings have universally dropped over the last 20 years whilst its taxpayer funding has increased.
The BBC as a condition for receiving public funding must publish the salary of any employee earning over £150,000 per annum. It publishes a list for “talent” (about 75 people in 2022) which is widely reported in the press.
https://www.radiotimes.com/tv/bbc-pay-2022-full-list-newsupdate/
It also publishes a list for senior staff (200+ people) who earn over £150,000 pa. This is not as widely reported even though many of the salaries are higher than those of the “talent”.
https://www.bbc.com/aboutthebbcwhoweare/staff/
It does not release some salary details in its self-styled “commercial arm” which they say is exempt as it is “self-funding”.
I personally would stop the taxpayer funding and sell off the BBC piecemeal. Then as private organisations they can pay any salaries they want and have any policies or not on social media use they like. |
I think it is important to have an independent broadcaster, who can hold the govt to account and can broadcast without fear. The current system of having #10 appoint the director general is beyond me. Much as having a politician who can decide on a prisoners parole, even though they have zero qualifications or experience to make such an assessment.
BBC salaries, agree - you want to get paid, same as any other public sector organisation - don't tell me it costs for the talent, let the talent work their magic in the private sector and there they will get paid.
I would halve all BBC salaries in an instant, they make all their private money from having a BBC profile.
Maybe amalgamation of the channels so they may have a stab at a decent programme schedule and stop chasing generation alpha (born 2010 - 2020) because they don't obey tv schedules. Mainly because they, like, can't concentrate on anything, like more than like 5 minutes. | | | |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 19:46 - Mar 14 with 1155 views | James1980 |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 19:40 - Mar 14 by watford_dale |
I think it is important to have an independent broadcaster, who can hold the govt to account and can broadcast without fear. The current system of having #10 appoint the director general is beyond me. Much as having a politician who can decide on a prisoners parole, even though they have zero qualifications or experience to make such an assessment.
BBC salaries, agree - you want to get paid, same as any other public sector organisation - don't tell me it costs for the talent, let the talent work their magic in the private sector and there they will get paid.
I would halve all BBC salaries in an instant, they make all their private money from having a BBC profile.
Maybe amalgamation of the channels so they may have a stab at a decent programme schedule and stop chasing generation alpha (born 2010 - 2020) because they don't obey tv schedules. Mainly because they, like, can't concentrate on anything, like more than like 5 minutes. |
In terms of value for money I reckon the beeb is excellent, considering the quantity of output the licence fee provides. | |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 20:00 - Mar 14 with 1138 views | sxdale |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 19:46 - Mar 14 by James1980 |
In terms of value for money I reckon the beeb is excellent, considering the quantity of output the licence fee provides. |
I think the BBC is not as good as it used to be but maybe that's more down to my age and nostalgia not being what it used to be. I don't think that there are enough new programs, too many cookery, antique, celebrity programs for my liking, if they paid some of there top earners less that might allow them to do more. They should concentrate more on radio, and local programs after all the BBC is supposed to be the nations broadcaster not a cash cow for already rich presenters. | | | |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 20:02 - Mar 14 with 1134 views | tony_roch975 |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 17:14 - Mar 14 by judd |
It would be a start if moral crusaders went through the BBC PAYE system rather than as self-employed sub-contractors and the tax avoidance that brings with it. |
Absolutely - put everyone on PAYE & TAX THE RICH | |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 20:12 - Mar 14 with 1106 views | James1980 |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 20:00 - Mar 14 by sxdale |
I think the BBC is not as good as it used to be but maybe that's more down to my age and nostalgia not being what it used to be. I don't think that there are enough new programs, too many cookery, antique, celebrity programs for my liking, if they paid some of there top earners less that might allow them to do more. They should concentrate more on radio, and local programs after all the BBC is supposed to be the nations broadcaster not a cash cow for already rich presenters. |
But for 44p a day considering the content that's available without the interruption of advertising it's pretty good value.
TV and Radio Stations Iplayer. The content on iPlayer alone is impressive. | |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 21:06 - Mar 14 with 1062 views | 49thseason |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 14:54 - Mar 14 by Porlicks |
Applications for asylum per 1,000,000 inhabitants.
Cyprus 10,865
Austria 4,452
Libya 2,115
Greece 2,114
Germany 1,781
Belgium 1,662
Bulgaria 1,592
Switzerland 1,520
Netherlands 1,404
Spain 1,377
France 1,319
Mexico 1,035
Uganda 912
Italy 898
United Kingdom 837 |
Population Density per Sq Km
Cyprus 136
Austria 109
Libya 4
Greece 81
Germany 240
Belgium 383
Bulgaria 64
Switzerland 219
Netherlands 508
Spain 94
France 119
Mexico 66
Uganda 229
Italy 206
United Kingdom 281
England 434
Wales 150
Scotland 70
N Ireland 141
Initial grant rate 2019 Appeal grant rate 2019 Grant rate 2021 Appeal grant2021
UK 52% 44% 72% 49%
France 25% 21% 24% 32%
Of around three million rejections in the EU between 2012 and 2021, 1.9 million were in just France, Germany and Greece (the three top countries of prior residence for those subsequently coming to the UK).
France has one of the lowest asylum grant rates amongst EU member states while the UK has one of the highest grant rates in Europe. France’s rate at the initial decision stage has fallen since 2016 while the UK’s has risen significantly and now stands at 77%, with the final grant rate after appeal being even higher. |  | | |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 21:12 - Mar 14 with 1058 views | D_Alien |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 21:06 - Mar 14 by 49thseason |
Population Density per Sq Km
Cyprus 136
Austria 109
Libya 4
Greece 81
Germany 240
Belgium 383
Bulgaria 64
Switzerland 219
Netherlands 508
Spain 94
France 119
Mexico 66
Uganda 229
Italy 206
United Kingdom 281
England 434
Wales 150
Scotland 70
N Ireland 141
Initial grant rate 2019 Appeal grant rate 2019 Grant rate 2021 Appeal grant2021
UK 52% 44% 72% 49%
France 25% 21% 24% 32%
Of around three million rejections in the EU between 2012 and 2021, 1.9 million were in just France, Germany and Greece (the three top countries of prior residence for those subsequently coming to the UK).
France has one of the lowest asylum grant rates amongst EU member states while the UK has one of the highest grant rates in Europe. France’s rate at the initial decision stage has fallen since 2016 while the UK’s has risen significantly and now stands at 77%, with the final grant rate after appeal being even higher. |
Thanks for that 49th, it probably goes some way to answering my question earlier in the thread about why so many migrants get into a boat on the shores of France to try to make it illegally to the UK | |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 21:13 - Mar 14 with 1053 views | James1980 |
We take 0.0035 per Sq Km
Germany take 0.005 per Sq Km [Post edited 14 Mar 2023 21:20]
| |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 22:09 - Mar 14 with 1013 views | judd |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 20:02 - Mar 14 by tony_roch975 |
Absolutely - put everyone on PAYE & TAX THE RICH |
Those availing of public funds at the very least.
Especially when one is generally just reading simple words out. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
