SABC wants TV licences scrapped and replaced with a household levy - that MultiChoice must collect

Priapus said:
You guys know Germany has this model in place right?
Since 2013 all citizens have to pay. Regardless if they have a device or not to watch tv or listen to the radio. Currently their fee is 18 euros per house per month.

I can see where the SABC are coming from. The current model is outdated and doesn’t work. Germany ditched that model in 2013 for the same reasons.
Click to expand...
2013 called, it wants it's outdated tv license model back. Seriously SA doesn't need to follow every failed trend and policy in the world.

Priapus said:
There are exemptions to the tax; same a Germany has exemptions. So if the people in shacks are excluded; then I think that is fair. They're below the poverty line and shouldn't be made to pay this.

Same as if you're unemployed in Germany; you don't pay.
Click to expand...
How is it fair to exclude the majority? The only reason there is to not upset the voter base. Btw income status is no longer considered a valid reason for exemption so what now if we follow the German model?
 
Last edited:
Priapus said:
You guys know Germany has this model in place right?
Since 2013 all citizens have to pay. Regardless if they have a device or not to watch tv or listen to the radio. Currently their fee is 18 euros per house per month.

I can see where the SABC are coming from. The current model is outdated and doesn’t work. Germany ditched that model in 2013 for the same reasons.
Click to expand...
The issues in ZA are:
1) In SABC has experienced serious corruption resulting in huge losses and death - so why should taxpayers give them money.
2) A SABC house hold tax == tax on middle class - we need a "user pays principle" - you don't watch you don't pay.

And no more taxpayer bailouts of the SABC.
 
SABC, the national broadcaster that can't even afford to broadcast it's national team's sports games
 
The state broadcaster said that this household levy should be based on the ability to access the SABC’s services rather than the actual use of its services.
Click to expand...

So it's about the possibility of accessing SABC services per household? And how will they do that, come to your house to do an audit on what devices you have?
 
Last edited:
dsi said:
So it's about the possibility of accessing SABC services per household? And how will they do that, come to your house to do an audit on what devices you have?
Click to expand...
All households would be deemed to have access. So again it's not about the ability to access, just like etolls are not user pays.
 
Swa said:
All households would be deemed to have access. So again it's not about the ability to access, just like etolls are not user pays.
Click to expand...
Ok so like an additional house hold tax for a service that one may or may not have access to.
 
There was a discussion about this on 702 yesterday. If the damn host didn't talk over the guest the whole time, I might have had something useful to add here.
 
Swa said:
2013 called, it wants it's outdated tv license model back. Seriously SA doesn't need to follow every failed trend and policy in the world.


How is it fair to exclude the majority? The only reason there is to not upset the voter base. Btw income status is no longer considered a valid reason for exemption so what now if we follow the German model?
Click to expand...

The majority stay excluded ...
They are ANC voters, and have preferential racial status.
 
They have put themselves into that hole after digging it for decades...and if the hole is too deep and you can not get out and no one is around...good fcuking luck...
 
Since the SABC has the obligation to broadcast unprofitably in all 11 (and sign) languages, it has a right to claim some funding from the citizenry to supplement its commercial operations.
But why not just get a fixed government budget allocation as recompense for this obligation, instead of devising messy, inefficient collection schemes that are controversial, annoying, time-wasting and bound to fail?
 
Gatecrasher said:
Since the SABC has the obligation to broadcast unprofitably in all 11 (and sign) languages, it has a right to claim some funding from the citizenry to supplement its commercial operations.
But why not just get a fixed government budget allocation as recompense for this obligation, instead of devising messy, inefficient collection schemes that are controversial, annoying, time-wasting and bound to fail?
Click to expand...

Failure - It is the African Way
 
First DSTV, then Netflix, then Disney, then your ISP, then pretty soon they'll want you to pay for a TV licence if you use any sort of social media
 
skeptic_SA said:
There was a discussion about this on 702 yesterday. If the damn host didn't talk over the guest the whole time, I might have had something useful to add here.
Click to expand...
John or Clement? They both do that, very irritating.
 
As long as they, make it, so they collect from the ever dwindling tax base, only, they doom themselves to failure. Especially as their main audience is the non paying majority.
 
Lmfao.......how does it become "every household" if you are just targeting Multichoice??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter