A compulsory 'Broadcast tax' next on the list for homes in Ireland

wingnut

I wonder how much RTE pay for all the UK based programming that can be had for free with a freeview satellite. We pay the licence - RTE uses it by programmes you can access for free on other channels. Now THAT is a waste of money.

In fact if we had an RTE that focused on home produced content they could have launched it on Freesat and had not need for the expensive Saorview rollout.

I think we need some kind of national broadcaster but not the bloat that is RTE. I would rather minimal funding for RTE for news and current affairs programming and competitive tendering with the commerical stations for everything else.

I was really hoping that a broadcasting charge would reduce the cost by 1/5 (amount of dodgers) instead it just extra money to be poured into a black hole somewhere at RTE HQ.

VinLieger

newbie2 wrote: »

How do you know it does a piss poor job if you never watch it?

Cus i stopped watching it cus it was so awful? Also i pay close attention to the salaries of its top earners wich are paid ridiculous amounts for the amount of work they actually do, marian finucane for instance who works maybe 8-10 hours a week was paid 492,000 in 2011

alastair

VinLieger wrote: »

And given the widespread adoption os this little thing called the internet dont you think its time we started trying to look at other methods of media distribution?
The ONLY reason this tax is getting introduced is because RTE are loosing money to Netflix, free streaming sites etc and rather than sit down and actually think about a way to compete they are just gonna force us to pay them to do a job that as time goes on will become less and less relevant in a modern media culture

RTE utilise the Internet too. They're not losing anything in particular to Netflix - they've hundreds of competing TV channels, and advertisers care rather more about them - Netflix is a minnow in the larger scheme of things. Media fragmentation poses problems for all public broadcasters - it's not a RTE-specific issue.

Banjo String

newbie2 wrote: »

How do you know it does a piss poor job if you never watch it?

Maybe he's read about it in ab Internet forum
friends/family?

I don't have eircom land line or bb. Don't intend to either.
. Their service is crap compared to others.

(So I hear)

newbie2

VinLieger wrote: »

Cus i stopped watching it cus it was so awful? Also i pay close attention to the salaries of its top earners wich are paid ridiculous amounts for the amount of work they actually do, marian finucane for instance who works maybe 8-10 hours a week was paid 492,000 in 2011

That's like saying Wayne Rooney earns £250,000 per week for only working 90 minutes.

there's been many threads before examining MF's working hours per week. It's safe to say that she does not just work 8-10 hours per week.

(BTW I'm not justifying her enormous salary - just rubbishing your arguement)

VinLieger

alastair wrote: »

RTE utilise the Internet too. They're not losing anything in particular to Netflix - they've hundreds of competing TV channels, and advertisers care rather more about them - Netflix is a minnow in the larger scheme of things. Media fragmentation poses problems for all public broadcasters - it's not a RTE-specific issue.

No but its more of a concern to small timers like RTE who produce very little of their own exclusive content that people would regularly sit down to watch in comparison to whats made in England or the States which RTE buy in specifically to get people watching, but chances are if anyone was interested watching those shows to begin with they have already watched them online weeks or months before when they were relased on their own channels

Jimmy Garlic

alastair wrote: »

I wouldn't see public broadcasting as any luxury - pretty much every state - even impoverished ones see the social merit in it. I also doubt you make absolutely no use of RTE services. But you could be an extraordinary individual.

RTE has about as much social merit as syphilis or gonorrhea. It is a nepotistic and self congratulatory organisation that lacks any real talent within its ranks as a result. Its "stars" are on salaries that they don't deserve a fraction of. It receives ridiculous amounts of public money AND advertises. Its newsroom is basically the government of the days press office. I refuse to pay for Charlie Birds exotic holidays and the pretentious D4 lifestyles of the rest of the RTE "stars". I have never paid a cent to RTE (the so called service that I never use) and I never will.

newbie2

Bird retired from RTÉ on 26 August 2012

VinLieger

newbie2 wrote: »

That's like saying Wayne Rooney earns £250,000 per week for only working 90 minutes.

there's been many threads before examining MF's working hours per week. It's safe to say that she does not just work 8-10 hours per week.

(BTW I'm not justifying her enormous salary - just rubbishing your arguement)

Yes but the market has valued Wayne Rooneys time at that amount and many other clubs would be capable of paying him that amount, if marian finucane was to go to any other radio station in the country do you think she could receive anywhere near that salary? No of course she couldnt, because her salary is bloated up with the tax payers money unlike every other station operating on advertising revenue alone and whos presenters are paid what they are actually worth

alastair

VinLieger wrote: »

No but its more of a concern to small timers like RTE who produce very little of their own exclusive content that people would regularly sit down to watch in comparison to whats made in England or the States which RTE buy in specifically to get people watching, but chances are if anyone was interested watching those shows to begin with they have already watched them online weeks or months before when they were relased on their own channels

RTE's biggest draws aren't actually the bought-in stuff - it's the homegrown content - including the less glamorous talk radio, news and current affairs content. Problem is that it's expensive to produce when compared to the bought in material - and budgets are falling all the time. Netflix makes sod all difference to any of the above.

Jimmy Garlic

newbie2 wrote: »

Bird retired from RTÉ on 26 August 2012

The fact that that I don't know that shows how much I don't watch it.

Banjo String

alastair wrote: »

Yes - once you grasp that you're already obligated, we will have got somewhere. The change from tv licence to broadcast tax will make no difference to your pocket.

In fairness, I stated this clearly in the OP.

(You must've missed it)

and that it will apply regardless of whether you have a television, computer or any other device that can pick up public information.(Even applies to pwople who have none of the above) 

Will they decide next that everyone should pay motor tax regardless if you own a car, 'as everyone has access to the roads'?

alastair

SamHall wrote: »

In fairness, I stated this clearly in the OP.

(You must've missed it)

So - to recap - you're already obligated to pay a tv licence, and a changeover to a broadcaster tax will impact you not a tot. Wouldn't you admit that the broadcast tax mechanism for funding RTE is rather more sensible than the pretence that a tv tuner somehow warrants taxation? Motor tax at least makes sense in that it has a relationship between use and overhead. There's hardly anyone here that doesn't make some sort of use of Irish public broadcasting services, and the TV tuner model for taxing broadcasting is rapidly becoming redundant for reflecting the use of those services.

My only concern would be who's eligible for exemptions - OAP's etc. - other than that it seems like a sensible enough move. Arguments about salary scales etc have little to do with the mechanism for supporting public broadcasting.

VinLieger

alastair wrote: »

So - to recap - you're already obligated to pay a tv licence, and a changeover to a broadcaster tax will impact you not a tot. Wouldn't you admit that the broadcast tax mechanism for funding RTE is rather more sensible than the pretence that a tv tuner somehow warrants taxation? Motor tax at least makes sense in that it has a relationship between use and overhead. There's hardly anyone here that doesn't make some sort of use of Irish public broadcasting services, and the TV tuner model for taxing broadcasting is rapidly becoming redundant for reflecting the use of those services.

My only concern would be who's eligible for exemptions - OAP's etc. - other than that it seems like a sensible enough move. Arguments about salary scales etc have little to do with the mechanism for supporting public broadcasting.

Well if everyone needs and uses it so much why cant it be an opt in subscription instead of an across the board tax for everyone? Now they have switched to digital with saorview its entirely possible to do this

Banjo String

Alastair.

My concern has never been a financial/monetary one.

Our freedom of choice decisions are being slowly taken away from us.

Makes Noonan etc hypocritical when they suggested tax payers getting it tight should give up sky in order to pay lpt.

yet they're not giving tax payers an option to ditch rte 'service' as they want make criminals out of anyone wishing to ditch the TV completely in order to save on the licensing fee.

If you don't see that, I'm worried for you.

Why can't they make it subscription based?

You've been asked this numerous times now.

newbie2

If RTE was subscription based then it's agenda would be driven by those who pay their subscriptions not like at the moment where it's agenda is for the people of Ireland (whether you believe it's impartial or not is another matter).

Not every person in Ireland likes the same thing. RTE have to cater for everybody. Hence we get shows like 'ear to the ground' and 'Off the rails' for example. RTE also have a remit to 'entertain'. Purchasing foreign shows and broadcasting them can sometimes to some people seem ludicrus, but to others it's perfectly acceptable and enjoyable.

alastair

VinLieger wrote: »

Well if everyone needs and uses it so much why cant it be an opt in subscription instead of an across the board tax for everyone? Now they have switched to digital with saorview its entirely possible to do this

Opt-in taxes have proven to have something of a compliance problem, haven't they?

And RTE services comprise more than the TV broadcasts - even if you thought turning saorview into a pay-per-view system made sense.

alastair

SamHall wrote: »

Alastair.

My concern has never been a financial/monetary one.

Our freedom of choice decisions are being slowly taken away from us.

Makes Noonan etc hypocritical when they suggested tax payers getting it tight should give up sky in order to pay lpt.

yet they're not giving tax payers an option to ditch rte 'service' as they want make criminals out of anyone wishing to ditch the TV completely in order to save on the licensing fee.

If you don't see that, I'm worried for you.

Why can't they make it subscription based?

You've been asked this numerous times now.

No need to worry about me. Your freedom of choice is unhindered. It's the transfer of a tax you pay from one mechanism to another. You don't get an al-a-carte choice on where the remainder of your taxes go, do you? Same story here.

VinLieger

alastair wrote: »

No need to worry about me. Your freedom of choice is unhindered. It's the transfer of a tax you pay from one mechanism to another. You don't get an al-a-carte choice on where the remainder of your taxes go, do you? Same story here.

No but most of my taxes go to things like keeping the roads maintained doctors paid etc you know stuff that makes the country run, i dont see any benefit to paying RTE massive salaries for an abyssmal service i dont use, basically fix the fucking thing make it run better, more efficientally, cheaper, with half way decent programming and services and id have no problem paying taxes into it until then stop trying to patch the problems with more money

alastair

VinLieger wrote: »

No but most of my taxes go to things like keeping the roads maintained doctors paid etc you know stuff that makes the country run, i dont see any benefit to paying RTE massive salaries for an abyssmal service i dont use, basically fix the fucking thing make it run better, more efficientally, cheaper, with half way decent programming and services and id have no problem paying taxes into it until then stop trying to patch the problems with more money

For all its failings, it's worth €3 a week. And it's a drop in the ocean compared to waste elsewhere.

spank_inferno

alastair wrote: »

it's worth €3 a week.

Well, that is your opinion.
One I don't think is shared by the majority.

alastair wrote: »

And it's a drop in the ocean compared to waste elsewhere.

So that justifies the state broadcasters waste?

alastair

spank_inferno wrote: »

So that justifies the state broadcasters waste?

Of course it doesn't, but it certainly puts some context around where cost-saving priorities should lie, and where they would have most impact on tax spend.

We spend less than most european states on supporting public service broadcasting, and we have a strong percentage of audience for public broadcasting, given the range of alternatives on offer, when compared to most of Europe. Whatever your feelings about Tubridy's take home pay etc, those are the facts.

Banjo String

alastair wrote: »

For all its failings, it's worth €3 a week.

Anyone else thinking this should have no bother subscribing so.

Why is it rte/govt aren't willing to offer this? In your opinion?

VinLieger

SamHall wrote: »

Anyone else thinking this should have no bother subscribing so.

Why is it rte/govt aren't willing to offer this? In your opinion?

Cus nobody would subscribe or at least no where near what they currently receive through the compulsory tax

Banjo String

VinLieger wrote: »

Cus nobody would subscribe or at least no where near what they currently receive through the compulsory tax

Exactly.

I say let the Tax payers decide their own 'entertainment packages'.

alastair

SamHall wrote: »

Anyone else thinking this should have no bother subscribing so.

Why is it rte/govt aren't willing to offer this? In your opinion?

There's an awful lot of scabby feckers out there, who begrudge paying for any services (see property taxes etc), and it would be impossible to make the gamut of RTE services subscription-based (radio?, cost of making all saorview boxes/sets card controlled?). Some aspects of RTE services might suit a subscription model, but overall it makes no sense.

listermint

alastair wrote: »

There's an awful lot of scabby feckers out there, who begrudge paying for any services (see property taxes etc), and it would be impossible to make the gamut of RTE services subscription-based (radio?, cost of making all saorview boxes/sets card controlled?). Some aspects of RTE services might suit a subscription model, but overall it makes no sense.

You are under the opinion we are getting services!!!

People are paying a property tax and gettting NOTHING in return. The grass isnt being cut by the CC its being left to grow. The roads are in the worst state they have been in years. Potholes go unfixed for months and months (if they are ever fixed its badly and short term) the surface of the roads are torn up since the snows last year and still arent repaired. You dont get waste collection as you have to pay for that. The water charges are separate so property doesnt cover that. What exactly are you getting in return ?

The water charges are a farce as can be seen by the national scandal in galway and dublin in relation to water quality. these charges guarantee nothing as the funds wont be ring fenced. The network is in crap and will stay that way as the money is exported elsewhere.

Hospitals, well.... il leave the HSI for the moment.

Guards ? try waiting in a station for service / phoning for a squad car. Station closures left right and centre.

So tell me this whos scabby then? What are we getting for the splurge of cash that is being swiped out of my wages every month.

And as for that insurance surcharge to cover other peoples messes. Christ


And you have the gaul to call people scabby begruding services. WHAT services ? wheres the quality or return for my investment.?

alastair

listermint wrote: »

You are under the opinion we are getting services!!!

People are paying a property tax and gettting NOTHING in return.

Oh please - not this nonsense. What's your local authority and we'll review the list of services they provide on their website.

Guards and hospitals have nothing to do with local authority funding btw.

Banjo String

alastair wrote: »

There's an awful lot of scabby feckers out there, who begrudge paying for any services (see property taxes etc), and it would be impossible to make the gamut of RTE services subscription-based (radio?, cost of making all saorview boxes/sets card controlled?). Some aspects of RTE services might suit a subscription model, but overall it makes no sense.

more or less than those who might begrudge being forced to pay for services they don't want, need, or have the equipment needed to receive?

alastair

SamHall wrote: »

more or less than those who might begrudge being forced to pay for services they don't want, need, or have the equipment needed to receive?

Begrudgery isn't a particularly compelling case against the merits of public service broadcasting. Some of ye wear that badge with pride. And there are precious few people in this country who don't make use of RTE services in some form - quite possibly none.