Elon Musk Refuses To weigh In On Questionable Texas Abortion Legislation

Elon Musk has declined to comment on Texas restrictive new abortion law after Governor Greg Abbott said that the tech magnate supported the state’s social policies.

On Thursday, Greg Abbott appeared on CNBC and insisted that companies would not quit the state over the controversial new law, which bans abortions once a heartbeat can be detected, typically about six weeks.

He said that Elon Musk had to get out of California because in part of the social policies in California and that Elon consistently told him that he preferred the social policies in the state of Texas.

The Tesla and SpaceX CEO, who moved from California to Texas last year, later tweeted a response to a clip of the interview but stopped short of commenting directly on the law.

Elon Musk wrote that in general, he believed that government should rarely force its will upon people, and, when doing so, should try to maximise their cumulative happiness, but he stated, he would prefer to stay out of politics.

Texas new abortion law is the most restrictive reproductive rights law in the country.

The law, known as the Texas Heartbeat Act, bans abortion once a fetal heartbeat can be detected, before many women even know they’re pregnant.

It makes no exemptions for rape or incest and allows Texans to report people, including Uber drivers, who help or take women to get abortions. The only exception is if there’s a danger to the woman’s health.

In an extremely unique twist, enforcement will be done by private citizens, who can sue anyone they believe is breaking the law.

Greg Abbott spoke with CNBC on Thursday, insisting that the law, which comes along with a recent set of polarising bills, will not drive business away from Texas.

Greg Abbott said that it needs to be noted that there’s a lot of business and a lot of Americans who like the social positions that the state of Texas is taking.

He maintained, that this was not slowing down businesses coming to the state of Texas at all and that in fact, it was accelerating the process of businesses coming to Texas.

Elon Musk has already started expanding his operations in his new home state, and the move from California is expected to save him billions of dollars in taxes as Texas has no personal income tax.

Men and governments shouldn’t be entitled to an opinion on abortion – if you don’t want an abortion, then don’t – if you do, then that’s up to the woman, it’s her body!

And I bet it was a group of men that voted on this legislation. But of course, this is Texas, the land of primitive thinking, and women should always have the final say with their own bodies.

Elon Musk is a smart man staying out of politics, but then why should he comment on anything political, he runs businesses, not the government.

Spineless politicians are sinking the nation and then they call it progress, but entrepreneurs succeed, and raise the nation out of debt.

Now we have a bounty hunter squad, but where do you draw the line with abortion? But hey, no uterus, no opinion, and Elon Musk must know that too.

And the general population shouldn’t be used to promote this anti-abortion agenda, which is nuts, especially when the law doesn’t take into account rape or incest, that’s just inhumane.

Love Cheat Matt Hancock

Adulterous Matt Hancock was humiliated when his intense clinch with his aide Gina Coladangelo, was captured on camera in June.

Now the love rat ex Health Secretary is taking on another risk.

The MP, who split from his wife and the mother of his children after his affair came to light, will run the London Marathon next month, despite the probability of getting ridiculed by rabid onlookers.

He said that this was his first London Marathon and that he was delighted to raise money for St Nicholas Hospice Care, and that he’s already started training.

On his JustGiving fundraising page, someone by the name of Dominic Cummings wrote that they hoped that he was better at this than he was at sourcing PPE.

Perhaps Matt Hancock is going through a mid-life crisis, the affair, the keep fit obsession – the whole package, and all this from a man who set up laws to have lonely grannies arrested for having a cuppa with their granddaughters while he was breaking every law he helped to make. He’ll be on Strictly Come Dancing next.

But of course, he wants to keep his face in the public domain, despite the hatred some people have for him, although this man must be some sort of sadist. Why would he put himself through this abuse, but at least he’ll see the camera’s this time, and know where some of them are.

Of course, it’s bad what he did, but he should be allowed to live his life. After all, he’s not the first person in government to cheat, and certainly won’t be the last.

I mean, let’s face it some have done a lot worse, cheated on their wives with another man, yet they’re hailed a hero for coming out and given an award. Well, that’s just plain hypocritical, but then they weren’t telling the rest of us to stay 2 metres apart at the time.

To be fair, I don’t think people are that concerned anymore, and this guy can’t hide away forever, and at least he’ll be raising money for a good cause.

And I’m not sure what the root of the hatred is against him. Is it his performance in the position of Health Secretary? Then everyone’s entitled to their opinion and have a right to express it.

If it’s about his broken marriage, then that matter is solely for those directly affected, and let’s face it, we’re living in a country where up to 50 per cent of all marriages fail, so nobody’s really in a position to throw stones, are they?

But then I don’t suppose a broken marriage is good for the children that are involved, and being in the political public eye does make a person public property, and as public property, you leave yourself open to scrutiny, and this man not only ruined his career but the lives of two families. But really, we should look at our own lives before we judge, and it appears that we’re turning into a sad, resentful little Britain just so that we can ridicule one man.

And what did this man do? Oh yes, he fell in love with another woman, but we really shouldn’t be punishing him for it because it’s something that millions of people have done over the centuries. He’s no different to anyone else, he’s just a human being, although he did do it at a rather unseemly time. Let’s face it, his timing was lousy!

Will The New Type Of Petrol Wreck Your Vehicle

Green godsend, or a vastly damaging and expensive folly? That’s the question that needs asking about the UK’s new ‘eco-friendly’ E10 fuel that is about to dominate the UK’s forecourts as the next standard petrol option.

Containing 10 per cent ethanol, from this month it will increasingly replace the existing standard, E5 (only 5 per cent ethanol), in unleaded pumps at filling stations.

The Government is pushing E10 in a new initiative to better reach its carbon targets. It claims that ethanol, which is obtained from crops such as wheat and other grains and sugar beet, is significantly cleaner than fossil fuels because burning it produces less carbon dioxide (CO2).

Ministers enthusiastically predict that the change to E10 could cut our nation’s CO2 emissions from transport by 750,000 tons a year, the equivalent of taking 350,000 vehicles off the road, but are they right to promote this new fuel so aggressively?

Several scientific experts warn that E10 would cause at least as much damage to the environment as traditional petrol, if not more.

They add that raising petrol’s ethanol levels will also raise the cost of driving for many, and worse, could leave huge numbers of drivers with damaged vehicles or useless ones which can’t use the fuel because the engines are too old.

Meanwhile, many petrol garden mowers and other machinery, such as strimmers and leaf blowers could be rendered inoperable because their engines can’t cope with the fuel and those that drive a 1960s vehicle or even a 1970s motorbike. Neither could run on E10 because of their antiquated engines.

And by keeping old vehicles going, rather than having them melted into scrap and purchasing new ones would be the least damaging environmental path.

But it’s not just ageing jalopies that are in danger. The RAC estimates that some 600,000 petrol vehicles currently on UK roads will be damaged by E10 if they use it.

Furthermore, many modern, even brand new cars could be damaged, even written off, if motorists leave them sitting with E10 in their tanks, and if you don’t believe it, just ask the owners of classic vehicles who already know the damage that ethanol can wreak, even in its weaker E5 form.

Ethanol is an alcohol, and it softens and dries out the rubber parts in a fuel system, causing petrol lines, the small hoses through which fuel is moved, to crack and leak, as well as damaging vital seals in the engine.

Will it be more affordable to make, probably. Will it be more expensive to buy, probably, but it will probably be coming to a gas station near you very soon. And stand by for more car fires on older vehicles as hoses crack and crumble.

Intermixing petrol with alcohol means you’ve already had 3 to 4 per cent of the energy removed. So, call it a price hike because you need to buy more for the same distance, and then your performance car just lost its performance.

But then that sounds like the oil lords we’ve come to admire and adore – count me in and screw me over.

Again this will just hit the poorest people who can’t afford a newer vehicle, but then I suppose that’s the point – intentionally making the masses poorer and this doesn’t just pertain to cars because every eco idea causes more pollution than staying as we are.

New E10 fuel, long term will cause more environmental harm.

Cars going all-electric again causes just as much or more in terms of harm.

Even those so-called ER activists cause environmental harm every time they protest with traffic congestion, causing more pollution because roads are blocked, and then there’s the rubbish that they leave behind – so much for them being concerned about the environment!

Amazon Asks Delivery Partners Not To Screen Potential Drivers For Marijuana

To overcome a deficit of delivery drivers, Amazon is asking its delivery partners to prominently advertise that they don’t screen applicants for marijuana use.

The US is grappling with driver shortages across many industries, from commerce to transportation, and are promoting hiring incentives such as bonuses.

For Amazon’s local contractors, which operate the ubiquitous blue Amazon delivery vans, the delivery giant is now asking them to dangle another, no penalisation for weed use.

Drivers will not be permitted to drive while under the influence, but Amazon thinks that many have been put off applying because they fear a test will bring up previous use of the drug.

According to a report by Bloomberg, the company has told its partners that advertising the fact that they won’t test for pot could boost applicants by 400 per cent, but didn’t say how it arrived at that figure.

Additionally, the company said that THC screening can cut prospective workers by as much as 30 per cent.

Already, some of the advertisements are popping up.

Six days ago Portland, Oregon based, Apcore Logistics put an advertisement on the job posting site Linkedin for delivery drivers.

At the top of the listing, it said in big bold letters, NO THC DRUG TESTING, and on Wednesday, another Portland-based company Lattitude Logistics placed an ad on Indeed with comparable style.

At the top, the posting said NO CANNABIS TESTING with an addendum BONUSES EVERY PAYCHECK.

Bloomberg reported that one Amazon partner said marijuana had been the principal reason drivers failed drugs tests.

After it stopped at the behest of the company and started only screening for amphetamines and opiates, she told the outlet that more drivers began passing.

Others, however, say they’re concerned about insurance liabilities, especially in states where marijuana use remains prohibited.

So far, 19 states have legalised marijuana either for medicinal or recreational use.

The vast preponderance of delivery driver postings by delivery partners on places such as Linkedin and Indeed say they still require operators to pass drug tests.

Other partners have said they worry that ending marijuana testing, it could encourage drivers to get high before getting behind the wheel. Another partner told Bloomberg that if one of their drivers crashed and killed someone and tested positive for marijuana, then that was their problem, not Amazon’s.

It appears now that America is continuing to lower their standards for everything, but hey, things change, but then perhaps this is why packages are taking a week to deliver instead of a day.

Perhaps next Amazon will start delivering weed as well. Now I’m sure that the kind of outside the box thinking some people will get behind.

Perhaps they are thinking of going into the weed game and will start to deliver, although I wouldn’t touch it, particularly if it all comes from China!

Drug tests can detect marijuana for up to 90 days in your hair, anywhere between 3 days to a month or longer in urine, depending on how frequently that person uses it. Up to 48 hours in saliva, and up to 36 hours in blood.

Amazon isn’t saying that they don’t mind if you smoke. What they’re saying is that they don’t mind if you smoke on your day off, and how is it any different from being drunk on Saturday and going to work sober on Monday?

Amazon drivers can’t smoke while driving, just like they can’t drink while they’re driving.

Is The Door Ajar For Piers Morgan At GMB?

Questions remained last night over whether there’s still a slim chance that Piers Morgan could return to host Good Morning Britain after he was triumphantly cleared of breaching broadcasting rules by Ofcom.

The presenter’s former ITV colleagues and a string of esteemed broadcasters yesterday hailed the regulator’s decision confirming his right to free speech after dismissing more than 57,000 grievances about his criticism of Meghan Markle including not believing a word she told Oprah Winfrey about her experiences of suicidal thoughts.

Last night a newspaper outlet reported that ITV’s director of television Kevin Lygo, described as a huge supporter of Piers Morgan, was on a one-man mission to bring him back, although an insider said he was currently fighting a losing battle internally.

The development came after the UK’s broadcasting watchdog called attempts to quell MailOnline columnist Piers Morgan a chilling restraint on freedom of expression after the Duchess of Sussex was amongst a swarm of people who complained that his questioning of her account of royal racism and suicidal thoughts was harmful and offensive to viewers.

Following the announcement, however, ITV revealed they have no current plans to invite him to present Good Morning Britain, with one source saying that Piers Morgan chose to leave and that they accept his decision.

And a newspaper outlet said that despite Mr Lygo’s lobbying, Good Morning Britain bosses viewed there was a slim to no chance that Piers Morgan would return to the ITV show, which he quit in the aftermath of the coverage of Meghan and Harry’s Oprah Winfrey interview which Ofcom went on to investigate.

It remains to be seen if other hosting roles at the network could be made available.

Speaking about losing his GMB job yesterday after the Ofcom decision, Piers Morgan said that he didn’t want to lose his job in the first place, but that he only really wanted to work for someone who supports freedom of speech and free expression, and that he felt that ITV had let him down and let their viewers down.

Petitions to have Piers Morgan reinstated in his GMB role are still being signed, with three different appeals on Change.org reaching a cumulative total of 264,201 signatures.

Executives at ITV are currently hunting for a possible permanent replacement as the programme struggles with viewer numbers, and it’s thought that Martin Lewis and Richard Bacon are amongst the favourites.

Piers Morgan ran from the set like a frightened puppy. He speaks of free speech but then he ran from the set when someone dared to use their free speech to express a difference of opinion.

Perhaps Piers Morgan only said what most viewers were thinking, but it’s not what he says, it’s the way that he says it that offends. People should be allowed to say what they think, but they should think it through before they open their big fat mouths.

But love him or loathe him, he only says what most people are thinking, but are too afraid to say, although he should be careful how he says things because not everyone is the same and some may take offence – not to what he’s saying, how he’s saying it, as he usually comes across as being especially rude and cruel, and frequently comes across as being a detestable bully, but on the other hand, perhaps he does have some kind of agenda.

New York Extends Its Eviction Moratorium

New York legislators voted Wednesday on extending an eviction moratorium for renters who are behind on rent because of the pandemic, as approximately $2.3 billion in rent relief funds go unused.

The moratorium was also revised after the Supreme Court last month struck down part of the law.

Governor Kathy Hochul called the Legislature to return with a goal of putting evictions on hold until January 15.

New York’s previous eviction moratorium, which included foreclosure protections for property owners, expired Tuesday.

The extension gives more time to distribute the roughly $2.3 billion of mostly federal funding earmarked for the Emergency Rental Assistance programme.

The programme was approved in April and opened to applications on June 1, but as of August 23, only $203 million of those funds had been distributed.

According to US Treasury estimates, 28 per cent of New Yorkers behind on rent who applied to the programme were still waiting for a response, while 70 per cent had yet to apply.

In making her case for calling the session, Hochul said she believed that many New Yorkers could go homeless if evictions were permitted to proceed.

She said that they weren’t going to intensify what’s already a crisis in terms of the homelessness problem, and they weren’t going to let people who through no fault of their own lost income, would not be able to pay and faced eviction.

According to a survey by the US Census Bureau, as many as 700,000 or 21 per cent of New York renters are behind on rent, totalling approximately $2.3 billion in debt.

New York trails only California, which has more than 750,000 people behind on rent, totalling more than $2.8 billion in debt.

New York legislators also changed how the moratorium works.

In an August 12 ruling, the US Supreme Court nixed part of the law that enabled tenants to delay eviction proceedings just by filing a form stating they’d had a pandemic related hardship.

The court said that landlords should have the ability to challenge those hardships in court.

The new bill allows landlords to challenge applications for tenants they believe have not suffered economic hardship in court.

Landlord groups and state Republicans, however, say the change doesn’t go far enough, and Joseph Strasburg from the Rent Stabilization Association, a landlord group, told CBS 2 that they’re going to ask their attorney to make a motion to enforce the Supreme Court order and to stay the new legislation.

Rental assistance should go directly to the landlord, not to the renter, that way the landlord gets their money directly and can still pay their mortgage if they have one on their home.

But this is all about delays until the landlords are so much in debt that they lose their properties to foreclosure or some greedy property investment corporation, who will give them pennies on the dollar, but then this is the plan folks.

Why doesn’t New York pay the rent of those that they claim to support instead of putting it on the backs of the landlords? The reason why is because they want these landlords to go into default because you can’t have a socialist society if people own their properties, and this is just a government takeover of private property.

The government aren’t working for you anymore, especially when that government introduces laws restricting what you can do with your property, and people should wake up because this is about the government taking over private property, and in the end, you will never own anything if this is permitted to continue.

They just want you to be poor serfs reliant upon them!

Don’t Use The H-Word

Downing Street defended Boris Johnson after admitting he’s been in the West Country with his family since Sunday.

No 10 said the Prime Minister was continuing to work on matters including the fallout from the withdrawal from Afghanistan while away with pregnant wife Carrie and their son Wilfred.

The Prime Minister’s official spokesperson said that Boris Johnson was expected back at his desk in London on Thursday, but declined to describe the trip as a holiday.

Pressed whether Boris Johnson was working full time, the spokesman responded that the Prime Minister was continuing to work.

The time provoked critique from politicians trying to support constituents with loved ones still in Afghanistan.

Leeds North West Labour MP Alex Sobel said that if it wasn’t a holiday, what was it? And he said that MPs hadn’t had a briefing call since Thursday and that he was on over 200 family members stuck in Afghanistan and not a single response on a single case.

This makes Boris Johnson the worst possible leader at the worst possible time. But then when is a good time? Perhaps when he’s no longer the Prime Minister.

This man appears to have a permanent holiday. The only time he pops up is when he’s raiding the dressing up box or wearing a hi-viz to costume play as a member of the working class.

And coming to an airport near you soon. “Sorry Madam, you can’t fly today because your digital passport is out of date because you failed to have your 6th booster jab last week.”

When Boris Johnson became Prime Minister, he should have accepted that his life would dramatically change, and surely he must have realised by now that it’s not a holiday every day of the week.

Parliament needs to realise that as well. After all, they’re just about the only place of work that shuts down for the summer. Could you imagine the Bank of England doing that, or prison services and such? There would be chaos, but Boris Johnson there is chaos, but he seems to be the only one that’s living in Alice In Wonderland and is still chasing that damn rabbit.

And if Boris Johnson retired, he wouldn’t be missed because he’s totally ineffectual whether he’s here or not, and if it’s work, why take the wife and son. He must be as dense as treacle if he believes people are going to swallow that one, and why on earth did this comedian put himself forward to be Prime Minister when he has neither the ability nor interest in doing the job.

Of course, Boris Johnson’s lifetime dream was to become Prime Minister, but he’s struggling, and little by little that light might dawn on voters, that this impostor is a disaster who lies, bluffs and twists his way nonchalantly through life, destroying what he doesn’t understand or care about – ordinary people, which is everything except his own self-centred desires.

And clearly, Boris Johnson has a somewhat different definition of work from the rest of us, and it seems that when the going gets tough, Boris Johnson goes on holiday. We saw it with the floods, COVID, exams disasters and now Afghanistan.

Continuing to work the spokesman said, well, that will be a first for Boris Johnson.

And MPs have almost become celebrities now, where once upon a time they were hard-working, now they’re just in it for the money and photo opportunities.

Foreign Offenders On Our Streets

Reading terror attacker Khairi Saadallah, 26, was released from prison just 16 days before killing three men in a knife rampage

The number of foreign criminals freed from prison onto our streets has reached a record high of around 11,000.

Official numbers show that at the end of June, 10,882 foreign national offenders had been released from prison but not deported.

All were subject to deportation because they were given prison sentences of at least 12 months.

The staggering total was up by almost 1,500 in a year, which means that four foreign offenders a day, on average, were released to live in the community in the past 12 months.

The latest total has soared by 176 per cent since 2012 when the figure stood at less than 4,000.

More than 3,000 foreign offenders have been living in the community for more than five years after completing their prison terms, and Home Office data revealed that a further 4,000 have been on the street for between one and five years – the numbers surged during the pandemic.

Hundreds are believed to have gained their freedom after applying for bail under laws that said they could only be kept in immigration detention if there was a realistic possibility of imminent removal.

Because international flights were grounded in the early stages of the pandemic, and international travel remains problematic, the offenders successfully demonstrated that they should be released.

Instead of staying locked up until they’re thrown out of the country, they’re being released to be managed in the community, but many abscond, potentially putting the public in danger.

Deportation is also normally blocked by human rights issues, such as offenders maintaining their lives will be at risk in home countries such as Syria.

Last month a Home Office charter flight to Jamaica saw 43 offenders hauled off an aircraft at the last moment, with some insisting they would be in danger from criminal gangs in their home country.

In the meantime, the Home Office is deporting far smaller numbers of foreign subjects who have no right to live in the United Kingdom, including convicted offenders, failed asylum seekers and immigration offenders.

A newspaper outlet reported how in the year to March there were only 2,420 enforced returns, down from a peak of more than 21,000 in 2004.

David Spencer, of the Centre for Crime Prevention, think tank, said the latest numbers were unbelievable and profoundly disconcerting for law-abiding British nationals.

He said that they were told that Brexit would make it easier for them to regulate their borders and expel foreign offenders but the figures clearly show that this isn’t the case.

It appears that our politicians, from all parties, don’t care about the indigenous population.

Our government doesn’t seem to be fit for purpose and is failing the British people.

If these people come to our country and abuse our hospitality by perpetrating a crime then they should be deported immediately, not to be trialled in our country at our expense, but to be trialled in their country at their countries expense.

However, statistically speaking, once they get their feet on British soil, they’re highly unlikely to be deported, and the United Kingdom has become a cesspit created by our government.

These criminals are saying that they fear for their lives back in their own country, so they’re not being deported, but what about the rights of British citizens, they have a right to feel safe in their own country.

Boris Johnson, it’s time to make a new law. All foreign nationals that perpetrate a crime while in our country must lose their rights and be deported straight back to their country.

But of course, while Boris Johnson continues to be the master of chaos and confusion, this aberration will continue.

Could Motorists Be Taxed For Every Mile They Drive?

Downing Street has opened the door to charging motorists for every mile that they drive, saying the tax system must keep pace with the switch to electric vehicles.

It came after Tony Blair’s think tank warned that billions of pounds of new taxes would be required to fill the possible shortfall created by moving away from petrol and diesel vehicles.

A report published, said that road pricing, under which drivers pay per mile or per minute spent on the roads, could replace the £30 billion revenue generated from motoring taxes every year.

Asked about the think tank’s proposals, Boris Johnson’s official spokesperson didn’t deny the idea and said the Government would set out its own plans in due course, and he said that they wanted to ensure the tax system encouraged the take-up of electric vehicles and that revenue from motoring taxes kept pace with that change.

One Whitehall source said that while officials weren’t yet working proactively on road pricing schemes, there was a circle to be squared there.

The paper, by the Tony Blair Institute For Global Change, urged ministers to explain how they intend to replace current motoring taxes inside a year, warning it may become politically impossible if they delay too long.

But the idea was rejected by motoring groups, with the AA saying a road pricing scheme was likely to backfire because many motorists will see it as a poll tax on wheels.

The group added that motorists should be given a guaranteed free miles allowance before any charges kick in.

In July, the Government unveiled its transport decarbonisation strategy, part of the push to reduce carbon emissions to net-zero by 2050, but failed to demonstrate how it will close the financial gap created by moving away from fossil fuels.

The Tony Blair Institute report predicts that, by 2040, the Treasury stands to lose as much as £260 billion in revenue without any new taxes.

This would be due largely to the reduction in fuel tax and vehicle excise duty (VED) receipts, both of which fully electric cars are excluded from.

The paper also warns that delaying too long threatens to weaken the Government’s levelling up agenda.

This is because people in the more prosperous South are more inclined to be able to afford the higher upfront costs of electric cars, but will pay next to no tax to use them.

But I worry that in the end, there won’t be half the vehicles on the roads because people are struggling now, never mind heat pumps, and all the rest of the green nonsense they’re attempting to push down our throats, and if this goes through, it will most likely be the well off and elites on the roads, as well as in the air, and Boris Johnson should walk back his world-leading over-optimistic plans and Blair should go somewhere he’s wanted.

This policy will devastate families who live all over the country, and those who have to drive miles to get to work, and families won’t be able to afford to visit, or drive miles to take their children to school or get to work every day.

This is complete garbage, and they shouldn’t be targeting motorists in the first place, which creates a tax deficit bubble. Many people can’t afford an electric vehicle in any part of the country until manufacturer’s start producing smaller electric vehicles, and introducing a price per mile will finish off town centres and shops. It will also drive people out of jobs and it’s just another tax on families.

BBC’s £159-A-Year Licence Fee Will Not Increase

The BBC licence fee will rise by less than inflation over the next five years as ministers are concerned over the increasing costs of household bills.

Discussions between the government and the BBC over the £159 a year TV licence are set to close in the coming weeks, and ministers are said to have rejected calls from the corporation for the price to rise in line with inflation like previous years.

A government source said that the BBC was a hugely important national institution, but that equally these were difficult times, and the source added that nobody wanted to punish the BBC but that it had to be subject to the same efficiency as everyone else.

Another source said the BBC had warned that not increasing the licence fee in line with inflation could lead to significant cuts to quality programming.

The fee currently earns the corporation £3.2 billion a year, but there are calls from Tory MPs to reduce it as they point to the success of paid-for streaming services such as Netflix.

One Tory MP said that it doesn’t play well in the red wall and that they didn’t believe that they should be getting any more when they pay Gary Linekar God knows how much.

Ministers have so far resisted suggestions that the licence fee should be frozen or cut, and according to a source, they’re likely to take a mixed approach with below-inflation increases over a few years before it rises in line with inflation near the end of the five years.

Greg Dyke, former director-general of the BBC, said that it was difficult to see why it shouldn’t increase with inflation given the competition it now faces. He said that the BBC has had a good run in terms of quality drama, for instance, but that costs lots of money, and that a lot of money goes on the news and that it needs to be properly financed.

Lord Grade of Yarmouth, a former chairman of the BBC, said that times were hard and that the BBC wasn’t immune from what was going on in the rest of the country.

The government is said to be concerned about increases in the cost of living.

The BBC seems to be obsessed with rap and street culture which are of no interest to the preponderance of licence payers, and it’s criminal that we have to pay a licence fee for the likes of Gary Linekar and the rest, but it seems the jokes on us good folk.

The TV licence should be scrapped because it was intended for a time when technology was very different and there was a real monopoly for a national broadcaster, but now we can choose between hundreds of providers, and there are many that don’t even watch the BBC channels.

The old world is over, and let’s be honest, it’s a complete rip-off and a disgrace at how much it costs, and we’re now watching its slow and inevitable death, and the BBC should be planning for the impending moment when they will have to adapt to the competition, and many people don’t see why they should be paying so much for their service, and the BBC is in denial of what will ultimately happen.

And there’s no doubt about it, the TV licence needs to be scrapped, but then Boris Johnson likes having a state-owned broadcaster, who will broadcast whatever he tells them to. Just stop paying for the licence fee, and don’t let any capita insectors into your home.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started