Let the BBC live?

There is a general discussion going on these days about whether or not the BBC should be funded by what is essentially a tax. Anyone who has a device capable of receiving television in the UK is automatically required to pay a 'TV licence' that goes straight to the BBC.

Now I am a free marketeer, so my instinct is that this is wrong. TV should be chosen by the people and they can pay for what they want... or even better they don't have to pay at all because there are breaks for adverts to be shown and this allows the TV companies to pay for themselves. This works in most countries including the US from where we import many fine programs (the ubiquitous 'friends', 'Scrubs' the amusing comedy 'Big bang theory'etc). So instinctively I'm inclined to look at the insane amount of money that Jonathan Ross gets from doing what I essentially do everyday (be social, out going and ask people what they have been up to/working on) and I think what a load of rubbish, make them work for a living live everyone else, but I can't quite do it!

So why does my ever present free marketing spirit become more reticent when I consider the BBC? Quite simple: TV is garbage! I mean really now, I haven't watched a program on ITV for as long as I remember, the only programs I watch on Channel four have been imported from the USA. There is literally nothing on commerical TV produced in the UK that I have, or want, to watch.

The problem with commercial TV is that it is dependent on ratings so what we get is 'lowest common denominator' programs, that is programs that are so simple that everyone can watch them without requiring the slightest use of the neglected organ in your skull. This means that UK TV is just filled with mindless 'reality TV' shows that have the same draw on me as a request to massage the feet of someone with a fungal infection. It is just nasty.

I was talking to an 'intellectual' from Saudi Arabia a few weeks ago and he was saying how everyone listens to the BBC in Saudi, people have a huge respect for it internationally and this is in places that aren't exactly 'West friendly'. Looking at my own experience, I can see why. BBC iPlayer is on my favourites list on my internet browser... I don't think I've even checked if ITV have an online content provider. That says it all.

This is before we get onto issues like iPlayer, Radio 4 and Radio 1 which while Radio 1 plays music largely available on other stations I just can't imagine a commercial radio station producing the sort of thing found on Radio 4.

Lets put it another way when I'm driving home at 1 in the morning and the only thing available of the other stations is 'nn-tish nn-tish nn-tish nn-tish nn-tish nn-tish nn-tish nn-tish nn-tish nn-tish nn-tish nn-tish' I am really, really glad that the BBC radio 4 exists and it isn't paid for by the hard core dance lobby.

With the money that BBC has in excess (through a moderate tax on everyone) excellent programs are produced and technological progress can be made (iPlayer) in which it would otherwise be too expensive to invest. My favourite programs ever made in the UK are Blackadder and Yes, Minister, both produced by the BBC (albeit years ago). All the while British culture is exported through BBC worldwide which is good for the nation too.

Finally the issue of it being a tax, yes it is a tax, lets be honest, calling it a licence doesn't really make it less of tax. But it is a tax for which the money paid goes directly to the product. It is not like other taxes where the money is taken off you then funneled into a big sack where the government then gives it to whoever they fancy, you know exactly where the money is going to go. This is good, because the BBC knows that if it ever stops producing quality and starts producing rubbish it is going to get kicked out into the cold faster than you can say 'Rupert Murdoch'. As a result (unlike with most government) they have the hot breath of redundancy just close enough so that they have to work hard and yield results otherwise they'll get their P45.

The more I think about it the greater it would be if all tax was like that. How much quicker the DVLA might answer the phone if they knew that if they didn't they may end up in the dole queue? How many retarded government schemes would be dropped if there was a direct specific tax to fund them, I would love to hear the conversation to even explain it:

"well sir, we're going to take money out of your earnings so that we can pay for youths caught joy riding to have driving lessons, so that they can joy ride safely" (this actually happened)

Many useless taxes wouldn't even be started because they are so pointless no one would go for it and those that didn't work after a few years would quickly get binned.

So there you have it, want to solve the tax problems? Get yourself a 'tax licence'.

BP has the oil, now lets make sure the money goes to the right place

BP has just been given the contract to exploit the largest oil reservoir in Iraq, not far from Bazra.
The estimate that once fully exploited Iraq may become the third largest oil producing nation in the world after Russia and Saudi Arabia.

So what do we think people?

I suppose I could rave on about how this is essentially the mission of invading Iraq finally coming to fruition. After all these years finally the coalition has what it wanted.
I could write about how terrible it is that the war was about oil. I could talk about how tragic it is that so many service men and women have died in the pursuit of 'black gold'.
I could write about how this is such a shocking infringement of the national sovereignty of Iraq or how the greedy oil companies are wringing their hands with anticipation.

Strangely though those things although significant I am not actually in a rush to condemn.

I'll explain why. Well I'll explain why for most of them.

First I don't care that the war was about oil, anyone who thought that the war was about WMD I can only assume has had a fully frontal lobe lobotomy recently. I mean come on, you really thought that Iraq could launch a nuclear weapon against the west in 45mins? they couldn't get a pizza to you in 45 mins let alone a nuclear weapon!

Even before I'd studied international law and realised that the 45 mins is conveniently just the right amount of time to justify a war legally, I could see that anyone who thought Iraq had such technically and logistical prowess was being very imaginative.

So yes, the war was about oil. But we knew that already.

Is that bad? Well yes and no. Frankly I can understand both lines of thought. On the one hand I may quite possibly have trouble reconciling my conscience with the fact that people are going to have to fight in the pursuit of a natural resource, but at the same pragmatically I know that fighting to ensure that we have oil is only one step behind fighting for food to eat. The fact is the food you eat is carried on a truck (running on petrol) loaded onto a ship (running on oil) unloaded in a dock (by machines running on petrol) carried to a supermarket by a truck (running on diesel) and finally picked up and put in your car to take home (running of petrol). The unhappy fact is oil is no longer just about oil anymore it is about food, health care, the ability of a military to defend a nation, the ability of a nation to function.

If one country can cut off the supply of oil to another nation that is tantamount to being able to cut off the supply of air to a person, the fact is they aren't going to last. So is securing oil really any more than just ensuring your nation has the air it needs to breath for the foreseeable future?
That one... is a tough question, I'll admit.

One that isn't a tough question... taking the oil from Iraq itself. Are we stealing Iraq's natural resources? Yes, do I have a problem with this? No not even slightly.

Looking at the countries in the world that do have oil most of them whether it is Libya or Chile or pretty much most nations you can think of with a major oil output, they all have on thing in common, the oil doesn't go to the people, it does to those at the top, usually to support their corrupt regimes.

The money doesn't filter its way down to the working classes, BP isn't going to be robbing Iraq, it is going to be robbing its dictators, leaders and officials... who frankly will manage to live on.

BP isn't going to be making too much money either, they are going to be paid $2 per barrel that they produce, which while over billions of barrels is a fair amount of money compared to the actual value it is a fraction of the price.

This makes me wonder who is going to get the other $60-100 per barrel, but that is another point.

In fact in all this I care only about two things:

1. That some of the money that is made from the oil goes where it doesn't go in most other nations; the working man. I don't know how they could do it but there is going to be a way whether it is paying for schools, hospitals, paying doctors, whatever. In fact I would love to do the job of being the guy who gets to spend it. Can you imagine? "Here is 700 million pounds, do what you think will benefit the people of this nation most" good work if you can get it (assuming you don't have idiots trying to shoot you).

2. Lots of money must also go to the soldiers and the services generally. Anyone who has been injured should be PROPERLY compensated. None of this half payment job, if someone is maimed they should have their lives made as comfortable as money can make it. Also a few million can be spent on making vehicles that can brush off the blasts of IED's and everyone should patrol in them. Finally; helicopters, lots of them the generals out in Iraq should want for nothing after all they are the ones that secured this resource i the first place and you don't muzzle the ox that treats the corn.


If these two points are followed then the world will be a happier place I feel, it won't be perfect, but it'll be that little bit better