Obama Thread

sounds like it, unless you rip off the rabbit ears....
 
The license is a license to have a tv receiver. It is then used to fund the BBC as was the radio reciever license when that existed. Without it the BBC would have to run commercials as it would have no income, unless it was provided out of taxes. Cable and satellite both transmit the BBC service.

Brian
 
Are they forced to carry bbc? Can a consumer block it and get out of paying for it?
 
In other words you either don't know or you don't want to discuss it any more. I understand... :)
 
In other words you either don't know or you don't want to discuss it any more. I understand... :)

Please read Brians post carefully. The licence is for the reciever not the programmes. Got it yet? or shall I explain it another way - I'll explain another way to help you grasp this.

If you only had a VCR recorder and no TV you would still need a licence as the VCR receives the stations. Anything that receives a TV station (of any sort) needs a licence.

KenHigg said:
What about cable or dish? Do I still have to pay the bbc bloodsuckers to watch those as well?

The BBC is totally independent from any outside influence which is why some of the best drama and current affairs programmes are on the BBC.

The independent TV stations carry adverts (which is annoying) but are limited to 11 minutes in any hour.

Col
 
Off topic question, thisisntwally. What is your signature supposed to mean, as those two expressions are not even close to equal?
 
And no one has yet to answer the cable question... Bit touchy on the subject our cousins :)
 
Well, I suppose they could be, but you would have to add a constant of 0.188568506 after integrating.
 
That they are Ken. It sounds like they are kind of getting the short end of the stick. I think it would be like being forced to pay for the NFL network.
 
No - see my previous (and Brian's answer)

Col

yes, i saw where that was answered. thank you for redrawing my attention to it. now what if i ripped out the reciever...nevermind.

kinger - I never did check the math, so if you are correct then i am quite embarressed with 'my' inane limerick and will be sure to change that after you provide a completed proof. Unless i first get around to it myself, which is unlikely.

I'd say a point-whatever constant is close enough to qualify as Near-Rhyme. But thanks for working that out!
 
I wonder why they can dish it out but can't take it. ?

I also wonder if Canada, being a common wealth thing, has to pay a like fee? As far as that goes, do the French? Spain?
 
It is correct as it stands. When you integrate you would have (1/3)z^3 + c. Then you would equate that to log of the cube root of e and solve for c.
 
I also wonder if Canada, being a common wealth thing, has to pay a like fee? As far as that goes, do the French? Spain?

Can you explain this a little better please? why would France and Spain pay a fee?

Col
 
It is correct as it stands. When you integrate you would have (1/3)z^3 + c. Then you would equate that to log of the cube root of e and solve for c.

Well sweet. I'm glad you took care of that, as its been 5 years since i've done anything but derive (econ. you know how it goes) and that could have taken a while. I did have the opportunity this morning to work out that there is a 46% probability that we avoid 'regime change' in my office, given the four new positions which have been opened...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom