A license to watch TV?

[Lloyd Danforth]

"The BBC, whose broadcasting in the UK is funded by a licence fee and does not sell advertising time, is most notable for being the first public service broadcaster in the UK. Its first director general, Lord Reith introduced many of the concepts that would later define PSB in the UK when he adopted the mission to "inform, educate and entertain".

From the Wikipedia article about Public service broadcasting in Britain.

[Michael Fisher]

"It is now my duty to make you aware of the following," he went on. "My enforcement officers may visit [my address] without warning, at any time during the day, in the evenings or at weekends. They will assess whether there is evidence of your watching or recording television programmes without a valid TV licence. They could caution you, take your statement and file a report on their findings. Further, they may use detection equipment to obtain proof that a TV signal is being received on this property."

I've had nightmares of a police state before, and this is exactly what I dreamed about: bureaucrats sneaking around neighborhoods with TV-detection devices.

[Lloyd Danforth]

Why would they?

[Forastero]

I hope this doesnt happen in America, I know we are headed in the direction of a totaliarian state, but we are not there yet, not if us free staters have anything to say about it.

[Sweet Mercury]

you need a license for TVs in your house there?
WHAT THE HELL

I fail to comprehend how anybody can refer to England as a "free" or even SLIGHTLY free country
TOTAL facism

Some people base freedom on some very small things and overlook the big ones. They do that here too. But on the whole UK has very little personal or economic freedom compared to what we have, and which is essential to all the other freedoms.

Exactly. People don't base "freedom" on any real basis--specifically economic basis. The left has won in that sense, in that much of our youth defines "freedom" on the ability to whimsically overindulge without anyone telling them not to or preventing them from doing so, while ignoring the fact that people take the products of their labor. They are defining "freedom" based on how trashy or offensive the programming on their television is (which is one level of personal freedom of expression) without acknowledging that ownership if the television invites government cohersion into their lives, which is the antithesis of freedom.

It seems that, in the USA as well as other places, like this UK incident, certian activities just become embedded in the consciousness of the people. They don't seem entirely intrusive, so they aren't worth the "trouble" of questioning them.

As this is described by the few people here who are "in the know," this seems more like a tax than a liscense as we definie the word. Not that this is any better, of course.