Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
# 40...only when the blogs are `hackneyed like yours.
If you agree please sign up..
Dear Reg,
Over the next few days, the BBC Board of Trustees could be deciding who to appoint as the next Director General - one of broadcasting's most important jobs.
The media have already begun to take bets on who the successful candidate will be, whilst outspoken politicians have already started point scoring by suggesting the job should go to a candidate who is party political. [1]
Lord Patten and the rest of the BBC Trustees have the final say on who gets the job. Let's show them we won't stand for political game-playing when it comes to such an important choice.
38 Degrees members have said that one of the most valuable things about the BBC is its independence. Together we can show Lord Patten that we'd like him to keep it that way.
Please add your name to the letter to Lord Patten now:
https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/protect-bbc-independence
The BBC is famous all over the world. People rely on its news reporting. Its programmes are enjoyed in countries thousands of miles away from the UK. The new Director General will be in charge of it all. It's vital the right person ends up in the job - and that means someone who understands that the BBC's independence must never be compromised.
We know that 38 Degrees members can influence the BBC's decisions. Two years ago we helped save 6Music by convincing bosses to drop their plans to close the station. And BBC bosses must be glad we saved the station now - 6Music just won "UK Radio Station of the Year" at this year's Sony Awards.
Lord Patten knows that the BBC Trustees must protect the BBC from political interference. But he doesn't know how many of us want him to make sure that's a top priority when the new Director General is chosen.
Write to Lord Patten now:
https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/protect-bbc-independence
Thanks for being involved,
Hannah, Belinda, Marie, Cian, David T, Becky, James, David and the 38 Degrees team
PS: The BBC Board of Trustees are going to be interviewing candidates soon, so there isn't much time to let them know how important this decision is. Please write to Lord Patten now:
NOTES
[1] Boris Johnson's article about choosing the next BBC Director General:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/borisjohnson/9263772/The-statist-defeatist-and-biased-BBC-is-on-the-wrong-wavelength.htmlhoward mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i would prefer someone who understands what public service broadcasting actually means.
there are enough channels showing soaps and reality shows, the bbc should be concentrating on quality rather than high viewing figures.
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,894
Howard, the trouble is that quality for one man might be rubbish to another, they can never please everybody.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#41 Reg: Do you know the meaning of the word 'hackneyed'? This thread is about the economy not the BBC so that post would be more appropriate on the blog but even then it is nothing to do with their appalling coverage of the Thames Pageant, just this daft 38degrees rubbish you like to copy and paste.
I realise as a big government, big spending, high tax advocate you do not want people to understand just how that wrecks the economy and want to divert attention.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
Meanwhile pushing the opinion of one of the minor rating agencies is sure to kick start something? Better to keep a-hankering after that ill-wind that might blow some good a certain way?
The Thames Pageant? I suppose the inclusion of a convicted sex-offender on the royal barge is further proof that we are all in this together?
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
disagree jan it is not about what we like individually, i like a mixture of quality and dire television dependent on what i feel like at the time.
the independent companies have to appeal to the least common denominator to get large audiences so that they can attract advertising revenue.
the bbc at one time used to put on one off plays that won critical acclaim, series like the wednesday play and play for today were required viewing.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
Yes Howard nurturing talent is a far better use of our money than attempting to out-do the commercial stations' drivel-drive.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,894
Most new drama seems to be on BBC4 rather than BBC1 which seems a strange decision, I always thought BBC1 was supposed to be the premier channel.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Barry!
Your write "Alexander: You speak of QE as a painless cost free solution,"
I cannot believe this!
I have clearly stated many times both on this thread and other threads that QE, quantitative easing, the mad printing of money by the Bank of England, is a recipe to disaster if it goes on.
This is an essential part of my economics.
How on Earth you get to the conclusion that I advocate the opposite, really goes beyond me!!!
Especially since the Government have heeded my advice and consequently the Bank of England have decided NOT to print another £50 billion of quantitative easing.
I cannot accept it when someone turns my words exactly upside down and then attributes to me the result.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
A reflection Alexandr of the fact that 'your' economic policy makes even less sense than Labour's - when when they actually had one that is.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
jan
they usually test new stuff out on channels 3 and 4 to see if they will take off.
back in the 70's it used to be bbc 2, fawlty towers started off there.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
That is alright with me, Barry, if you don't agree with my economics, the main thing was to get the facts right with regards to what I have stated and what not.
But today the Band of England did say they are not printing another £50 billion QE.
This means their economics on this occasion correspond with mine.
The only countries that should print more money, once they left the euro, would be the four Mediterranean ones currently in bailout status, sometimes referred to by economists as PIGS. Personally I find this abbreviation unnecessary.
For them, QE would be a forgone conclusion to repay their high interest bonds, but they'd have to leave the eurozone first.
I don't know what your view is on UK QE, would be interesting to know, however, as you referred to Labour in your above post, it was the Labour Cabinet who did the first QE in 2008 to bail out the banking crisis in Britain.
In that occasion it was necessary, but since then, the present Coalition Cabinet have also done QE printing, and I think they were getting into a bad habit of digitally circulating money in this way.
The BoE would not do any QE unless the Cabinet, in particular the PM and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, gave the go-ahead.
Of-course they have economic advisers to the Government, who evidently have come to the conclusion that the risk of habitually printing off tens of billions of new pounds to buy assets from banks would make the pound toxic, something like a toxic debt.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
The result of a toxic pound would be far worse than mere inflation at 5%.
It could lead to a collapse in the share markets and a run on the banks, with hyper-inflation ensuing.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
# 50.After two years we still await for the government to present an economic growth policy.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
reg,they havent got one as far as i can see.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
I have said what they must do for growth, all of it would have the Reg's of this world screaming to high heaven. It seems though Cable and other LibDems have caused a deadlock over this.
They need to reduce the top rate of income tax to 40p or even better to 35p - this would be self-funding.
They need to make further spending cuts to fund additional tax cuts to corporate taxes and employment taxes.
They need to implement fully the recent report in cutting red tape for businesses particularly small businesses.
That will help generate growth, real growth where it counts and where we need it.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
barry,hong kong fooooeey,the goverment has got the dosh,so why not use it to kick start gdp.
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,707
The government doesn't have the money
Not sure that significant cuts in top rate tax without adjustment in either bottom rate tax or personal allowance levels send the right political message - also whilst no-one likes to hear it the less well off are less inclined to save so any increase in their disposable income quickly feeds through into increased spending etc.
I do agree that there needs to be a relaxation of some of the red tape small businesses in particular have to wade through - certainly anyone employing less than 10 people needs relief from the plethora of bloody stupid forms government wants filled in on a regular basis. As for the minimum wage, whilst I am in favour of it, I can see that this may be a disincentive to small businesses, but any reduction in its universal application needs to be accompanied by increases in tax credits or some other mechanism to ensure workers receive a living wage.
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
HOWARD;
I think maybe the BBC bit, needs to be a seperate new thread as quite a different subject dont you think?
ALL;
its clear osbourne being i place for two years, and with all the problems of his own party looking to oust his own leader.
Then of course theres the cobbled together bit, where its clear the lib dems have now jumped ship.
so much uncertainty.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Ross - you make some good points and in my brief post I did not repeat what I have often said before that the nil rate band should be raised to £12k.
Yes, the lower paid are more inclined to spend but we also need investment and we need to reduce the disincentives to invest and work harder to get growth. A survey I highlighted some while back identified 37p as the 'optimum' rate of tax, namely the rate that generates the maximum revenue for HMRC, above that tax revenues decline. The 35p suggestion allows for the 2p NI currently paid at the highest level. As I said that would be self funding, indeed would be more than self funding.
I disagree with you about tax credits as the law of unintended consequences is resulting in these being a contributory factor to holding down salaries alongside the minimum wage and immigration. The latter has this though as an 'intended' consequence!.