I think that £36k sounds a lot, but then poverty is calculated on that 36k after tax, mortgage (interest not principal) or rent, council tax, buildings insurance and water charges.
So for a family of two adults two children, they need after the above to have £288 a week disposable income after the above is taken out.
Wasn't the article also about middle income earners being 'squeezed' as well as poverty? They featured some sadly wise beyond his years kid for the poverty bit.
Poor old BBC, can't win can they. First they are accused of producing a report about poverty. They didn't produce the report at all, it came from something called the Institute for Fiscal Studies. The BBC simply summarised what was in the report. Now with grim predictability the argument turns to the licence fee with various ''regulars'' on DS taking up their usual positions. You couldn't make it up......
It wasn't the report from the Institute for Fiscal Studies that I was criticising, it was the BBC's coverage, expecting us to feel sympathetic towards a couple earning £36,000 and bringing up one child, when we know that a lot of our neighbours are earning a lot less and still considering themselves to be quite well off.
It just supports my view that a lot of people at the BBC do not live in the real world and that this is reflected in their outlook towards their use of public money on expenses and hospitality etc etc.
It just supports my view that a lot of people at the BBC do not live in the real world and that this is reflected in their outlook towards their use of public money on expenses and hospitality etc etc.
Although it's not "public" money as such, but does come from the public, commercial TV spend plenty on hospitality and expenses.
I've worked for the Beeb in the past, and i know work for one of the big commercial radio groups and freelance for Sky - they are far more wasteful.
It wasn't the report from the Institute for Fiscal Studies that I was criticising, it was the BBC's coverage, expecting us to feel sympathetic towards a couple earning £36,000 and bringing up one child, when we know that a lot of our neighbours are earning a lot less and still considering themselves to be quite well off.
It just supports my view that a lot of people at the BBC do not live in the real world and that this is reflected in their outlook towards their use of public money on expenses and hospitality etc etc.
Not sure how it proves that, most of the press don't live in the real world. Look at the Guardian with their star writer writing good Left wing articles criticising the government from her villa in Italy whilst probably being paid well up in six figures. Plenty more like that in the press.
Anyone who has ever claimed expenses from the BBC will know that it can be a real pain, a few figures in the Mail (out of context usually) don't prove anything. Hospitality - do you really believe that the guests on BBC shows get treated better than those on ITV shows, there have been reports in the past of very large sums being paid by ITV chat shows to get big names on their shows.
It wasn't the report from the Institute for Fiscal Studies that I was criticising, it was the BBC's coverage, expecting us to feel sympathetic towards a couple earning £36,000 and bringing up one child, when we know that a lot of our neighbours are earning a lot less and still considering themselves to be quite well off.
It just supports my view that a lot of people at the BBC do not live in the real world and that this is reflected in their outlook towards their use of public money on expenses and hospitality etc etc.
Except it really doesn't, as the cost of living in the UK varies massively and you never did explain exactly where they were from, or their age (and thus if they would have a large amount of established debt).
Look at the Guardian with their star writer writing good Left wing articles criticising the government from her villa in Italy whilst probably being paid well up in six figures. Plenty more like that in the press.
Yeah just like those right wingers Hitchens and Littlejohn.
Although at least the fits in with their ideologies.
That isn't a say on being forced to fund one broadcaster over another. Its about time we were given a say on this and the EU.
It is exactly that, being churlish as a result of your opinion not being shared by the mass of the electorate, in no way impinges upon your democratic rights.
Now with grim predictability the argument turns to the licence fee with various ''regulars'' on DS taking up their usual positions. You couldn't make it up......
As I said in another thread, this is how you can tell that this anti-TVL argument is getting intensely boring! :yawn::yawn::yawn:
Comments
So for a family of two adults two children, they need after the above to have £288 a week disposable income after the above is taken out.
It wasn't the report from the Institute for Fiscal Studies that I was criticising, it was the BBC's coverage, expecting us to feel sympathetic towards a couple earning £36,000 and bringing up one child, when we know that a lot of our neighbours are earning a lot less and still considering themselves to be quite well off.
It just supports my view that a lot of people at the BBC do not live in the real world and that this is reflected in their outlook towards their use of public money on expenses and hospitality etc etc.
Although it's not "public" money as such, but does come from the public, commercial TV spend plenty on hospitality and expenses.
I've worked for the Beeb in the past, and i know work for one of the big commercial radio groups and freelance for Sky - they are far more wasteful.
Not sure how it proves that, most of the press don't live in the real world. Look at the Guardian with their star writer writing good Left wing articles criticising the government from her villa in Italy whilst probably being paid well up in six figures. Plenty more like that in the press.
Anyone who has ever claimed expenses from the BBC will know that it can be a real pain, a few figures in the Mail (out of context usually) don't prove anything. Hospitality - do you really believe that the guests on BBC shows get treated better than those on ITV shows, there have been reports in the past of very large sums being paid by ITV chat shows to get big names on their shows.
Except it really doesn't, as the cost of living in the UK varies massively and you never did explain exactly where they were from, or their age (and thus if they would have a large amount of established debt).
Phazer
Although at least the fits in with their ideologies.
It is exactly that, being churlish as a result of your opinion not being shared by the mass of the electorate, in no way impinges upon your democratic rights.
There's a viewing tarriff called commercial TV - I suggest you look up why it's much more expensive than the BBC, and why no-one can opt out of it.
So we should have a referndum on funding commercial TV?
I like the sound of that
As I said in another thread, this is how you can tell that this anti-TVL argument is getting intensely boring! :yawn::yawn::yawn: