pedg

No, your thinking it typical of the right. Come up with what you think are great ideas but when you get to the nitty gritty its a totally crap unimplimentable idea. So what you do is ignore the fact something is not implementable and just go back to pushing your big idea.

I though you and sergei thatcher were the ones claiming it was a tax? Make your mind up.

Yes it should. If the money that goes to the BBC was included in your general income tax then you would be opening a very slippery slope of people opting out of paying for things they don't personally want. Its only because its a separate payment that you feel able to argue with it. Just try mentally including it with all the other taxes you pay (as you appear to consider it a tax) where a lot of that money probably goes to area's you would not pay for if you had a choice.

And how exactly would you enforce people not paying from using the BBC services? Or do you want the BBC to take adverts, taking revenue from the struggling ITV companies forcing their programs even more downhill?

TV licence in mandatory, but then I guess excessive greed amongst bankers appears to be to.

I think the word is.. Tough, you do. So if you could continue paying up so the rest of us can get quality TV rather than overpriced american series that were originally made popular on free to view channels and then gazumped by murdock that would be very kind of you thanks! I promise not to try and opt out of my tax payments for the armed forces in return.

So you are taking one advert from several years ago and generalising based on that? Personally I can't remember the last time I saw a 'get your licence or else' advert but it was probably: a) Several months ago. b) No threatening

There, corrected it for you.

After all what could be better for pointing out even the most tenuous nature of perceived bias of the BBC than a completely bias blog.

http://www.pompeytrust.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=241:fans-meeting-at-pfc-230211&catid=34:demo-category HTH I assume he went on to say.. "as we have been contacted by a Nigerian solicitor who has explained that for a small fee we can have the 10 million pounds left in a bank account by Al Faraj for us."

When do they start?

More likely to claim that they have been forced to resort to a shared Vodafone 3G dongle for all their net access and that the outage made them miss the window for uploading the payment details.

You might never watch ITV either but you are paying for that through the prices of all the items and services you buy who keep ITV going with their advertising spend. Unlike not owning a set and opting out of paying your TV licence you can't opt out of paying for ITV unless you refuse to purchase anything advertised on their channels. If you gave people the choice of: a) Not paying their TV licence and having to do without the BBC Channels (and their website, which despite your dislike of is the most popular website in the UK) b) Having a similar amount taken off their annual shop and not having ITV. I know which I would choose, and it would not be a.

At the rate they are going in a year or so creditors will find the agreement has been modified again so that they owe pompey several pence in the pound.

The guardian has a media jobs section, none of the other major papers do. Sky advertise jobs in the guardian as well, does that make them left wing now as well??

I wonder if those still there on their large contacts still have win bonuses? Possibly a few more pennies to find??

He probably means here...

Just noticed We have reached another milestone with page number 750. Onwards towards 1000 given no end in sight at the moment.

Indeed, pompey are a club where the term "under thirteen's" refers more to their attendance than their youth policy.

Needs a suitable violin soundtrack....

When is their next pay day? Pity February is such a short month....

So its nothing to do with anything like project knight then... http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/feb/18/guardian-barclays-tax-secrets

Banks where people and businesses hold accounts and give loans and mortgages are a necessary evil. Banks that bet millions on obscure derivatives that even the person doing the trading probably does not understand could disappear completely with little effect on most people.

If everything was hunky dory with the world at the end of the last election then I suspect the libdems would have stayed away from the Tories and watched what happened in the hope that another election soon after might see them get more seats. However I think what Clegg did was brave as I think he realising that given the state of the economy etc it was not the right time for several months of weak government with the likelihood of another election always on the horizon. Given joining with labour would have also been a week government as other smaller parties would want their pound of flesh to join in and could easily leave his only real choice was to join with the Tories. As a lifelong Libdem voter (and for the first time EVER managed to actually vote for the winning candidate) I can understand why he did it but it still leaves a bad taste in the mouth. I suppose the question we will never know the answer to is how much worse would the current government be if the tories had got a majority in the election.

Make that 5th due to Charlton losing