|
|
In article ,
[email protected] says... On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 18:24:40 -0000, ad You be surprised how many people have not got a T.V and yet may have a phoneable to do these functions. I would be surprised if they numbered over 100. Maybe so, but it is still 100 people. |
|
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 09:25:30 -0000, ad
wrote: It is just silly, you got a small screen and yet you are expected tpo pay for a license to use it. So people with a 14" TV should pay less than someone with a 42" TV? Do you ever think through your messages before you hit send? -- Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards, please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text. Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question. |
|
|
"ad" wrote in message k... In article , says... What's changed? Nothing. You have to have - and have always had to have - a licence for any equipment capable of receiving a TV signal. Not one thing has changed - apart from the technology. But it is not a T.V signal as such, this service is over a phone network. The sooner this government comes to is senses and get rid of this T.V tax the better. That's rather a different point isn't it? Personally, I'm in favour of the licence but if you're not it doesn't matter how fairly it's implemented. This is the same argument people use to hate speed cameras. I think speed limits should be raised - especially on motorways - but it's never a bad idea to enforce the law. If you don't like the law get it changed. |
"ad" wrote in message k... In article , says... What's changed? Nothing. You have to have - and have always had to have - a licence for any equipment capable of receiving a TV signal. Not one thing has changed - apart from the technology. But it is not a T.V signal as such, this service is over a phone network. The sooner this government comes to is senses and get rid of this T.V tax the better. That's rather a different point isn't it? Personally, I'm in favour of the licence but if you're not it doesn't matter how fairly it's implemented. This is the same argument people use to hate speed cameras. I think speed limits should be raised - especially on motorways - but it's never a bad idea to enforce the law. If you don't like the law get it changed. |
Max Demian said the following on 19/01/2005 18:52:
Students living away from home; Who are allowed to use a TV running off it's own internal batteries provided their parents have a licence. (Although i assume charging it may be classed as running off mains power, unless the battery had to be placed in a seperate charger for charging?) Kev |
"Adrian" wrote in message
. 1.4... Andrew Scott ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying : There was a story in one of the papers last week which stated that only 1 in 5 people actually watch BBC. Daily "We Hate The BBC" Telegraph? The Sun? (prop. R. Murdoch) The Times? (prop. R. Murdoch) Peter |
"ad" wrote...
says... There was a story in one of the papers last week which stated that only 1 in 5 people actually watch BBC. When The analouge switch off eventually comes, That do not surprise me, since I have had Sky, I have not really watched BBC, apart from Little Britain, I did not watch BBC much, before I had Sky. Fair enough, but have you stopped to consider what this will do to your brain? It seems to be fairly marginal already. Matti |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:01 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com