1. Home
  2. UK Do-It-Yourself Forum
  3. Wind saving our bacon again
  4. Page 2

Wind saving our bacon again

Very difficult to say with the BBC and other broadcasters.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)
Loading thread data ...

If British Airways wasn't successful when a nationalised company, it simply means they had the usual useless management team in charge. Probably not even allowed to buy a new pencil without permission in triplicate from some government official.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

michael adams posted

Such a trimmed-down BBC would cost little to run and could be funded out of general taxation.

In fact, I wouldn't even let it broadcast news.

Reply to
Big Les Wade

Most British businesses have useless management. The nationalised stuff excels at wastage.

Reply to
Richard

Precisely my point. The government is not designed to be able to run things efficiently.

Reply to
Tim Streater

Odd that HBO and other US networks have left the BBC for dead when it comes to drama. I have a sneaking suspicion it's the BBC driving down standards.

Reply to
stuart noble

There are actually, the schools, cops, universities, airports, ports, roads, the NHS, BBC etc etc etc.

Those that are (as

Have fun listing any of the schools, cops, universities, airports, ports, roads, the NHS, BBC that cost less and do as much.

Thing about

So can government operations tho there isn't any point in taxing those.

Yes, there are certainly some things that are better not done by government. Car manufacturing is another obvious example.

But it isn't true of Airbus for example.

But that isn't a viable approach with the schools, cops, universities, airports, ports, roads, the NHS, BBC etc etc etc.

It was with the bulk of council housing.

Reply to
John Chance

AIUI anyway HBO is a subscription service. Along with others. The networks ABC etc. are free to air but are loaded with commercials.

HBO have bigger home market for subscribers for a start, and anyway there's more to TV than drama. Sport and documentaries for a start. Some people may be happy watching endless documentaries about how the US won world war II. Others maybe not. Thetas why they're all on Freeview over here.

In the US HBO costs $192 p.a which works out at ?120 and thats just drama alone

The BBC costs ?145.50. Just ?25.50 more than HBO.

AIUI, the general perception is that overall with the exception of one or two programmes, US Network TV is rubbish.

michael adams

...

Reply to
michael adams

But does some things better than non government can do, most obviously with the cops, schools, roads, airports, ports, BBC etc.

Reply to
John Chance

Even with all that exaggerated doom and despondency, the BBC wouldn't necessarily come to an end as you surmise.

Reply to
F

It's not exaggerated doom and despondency at all. I took the trouble to lay out the three funding options for you.

So would you care to explain where the BBC would have got its money from if Brillos ideas had been implemented back in 1999, if not by those means ?

michael adams

...

Reply to
michael adams

You WANT the license fee? IT';s theft, taking money for a channel you may or may not want to watch.

Reply to
Tough Guy no. 1265

No. I want the Licence Fee.

When trolling, its probably best not to lay yourself open to spelling lames.

michael adams

...

Reply to
michael adams

Thanks for pointing out you're lame. And I wasn't trolling, the license fee is plain wrong. Why can Sky not sue the BBC? Sky should get an equal portion of the fee.

Reply to
Tough Guy no. 1265

And now you've never heard of spelling lames.

Is there no limit to depths to which you won't sink ?

michael adams

...

Reply to
michael adams

Add me to the list of never having heard of spelling lames.

Reply to
Richard

Your 'So no...' are not necessarily true.

Your whole diatribe seems to be based on an intense and irrational dislike of Andrew Neil rather than anything else so there's little point in continuing with this.

Reply to
F

Yes, that was the conclusion I came to. I should have realised sooner.

Reply to
Tim Streater

Why are they costing too much? Start with central government imposed tiers of 'performance management', chasing ridiculous targets, and contracting out (competitive tendering etc). There is nothing intrinsically expensive about state owned services.

Like the banks, then? Good luck with that ;-)

Pay the capital to build it up and run it and sell it at a loss more like. Although I'd concede BA was a bit of an odd industry to nationalise. And I think we all know about how the tax system doesn't work. Why is aviation fuel not fully taxed?

Reply to
RJH

No Tim it was me who should have realised sooner that somebody who actually names his source, for one single quoted wind reading at that, as though the identity of the source made any difference at all, hasn't really got a clue what he's talking about.

You see Tim the calculations have already been done.

Here's the headline Tim because I imagine you're not much of a one for detail - unless of course they're from a TV celebrity such as Andrew Neil

"Why the Best Path to a Low-Carbon Future is Not Wind or Solar Power"

It's all there on the link for you, compiled by Charles Frank of the Brookings Institute

Its shows that hydro, if available, a big if, is cheapest followed by nuclear as the cheapest way to a LC future.

Wind power or lack of it is already factored in. The calculations have already been done. So what earthly purpose is served by Andrew Neil quoting a single days wind reading, or more to the point you starting a thread about his doing so ?

What Andrew Neil and yourself should be concerning yourselves about is, why despite all the obvious economic benefits, Germany and Japan are mothballing nuclear capacity.

michael adams

...

Reply to
michael adams

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.