The Great Disconnect: Why the UK is Legally Unplugging from the BBC Tax

The British public is undergoing a quiet revolution. What was once seen as a national duty—paying the BBC licence fee—is increasingly viewed through a lens of legal skepticism and fiscal resentment. As Jacob Rees-Mogg highlights, the current political climate has fractured the social contract, leading to a surge in citizens seeking legal ways to discontinue the tax [00:18].

The Fracture: Sentiment and Fairness

The primary driver of the current "opt-out" movement is a perception of systemic unfairness. Viewers are particularly incensed by proposals to grant free licenses to those on benefits while middle-income earners and pensioners are left to shoulder the cost [00:27]. This has shifted the sentiment from supporting a public service to resisting what many call a "straight bribe" to core voters [01:19].

The Legal Exit Strategy: How and When to Discontinue

The best time to discontinue the license is when your viewing habits no longer include live broadcasts or the BBC iPlayer. The law is clear: you do not need a license for DVDs, on-demand streaming (Netflix, Disney+), or catch-up services from other broadcasters [03:15, 04:35].

Many in the community argue that the "when" is now, as digital alternatives have rendered the BBC’s monopoly over "essential" viewing obsolete. By shifting to YouTube or delayed "time-shifted" viewing, citizens can legally bypass the fee while still accessing high-quality information [06:52].

Market Forces: Sink or Swim

The consensus among commenters is that the BBC must be exposed to the "cold shower" of market forces. If the BBC is as valued as it claims, it should survive on a voluntary subscription basis. Forcing workers to subsidize a service they do not use is increasingly untenable. By legally opting out, the public is forcing a market correction: the BBC will either evolve into a competitive, high-quality service or sink under the weight of its own obsolescence [09:58].

How to avoid paying the TV Licence fee legally

Jacob Rees-Mogg · 377k views

Scarcity and Choices in Economics

 

Scarcity and Choices in Economics: A Journey Through Time

scarcity (not having enough of everything we want) and trade-offs (having to choose one thing and give up another) are the very heart of economics. The whole field grew from trying to understand these basic ideas.

Early Days: Just Not Enough

Before economics became a science, people just naturally understood that resources were limited.

• Ancient Thinkers (like Aristotle): They talked about managing homes and wealth, showing they knew resources weren't endless.
• Medieval Times (like Thomas Aquinas): They discussed "fair prices," which again hints at how to share limited goods justly.
• Mercantilists (16th-18th Century): These folks wanted their country to get as much gold as possible. They knew gold was scarce, so they pushed for more exports and fewer imports. This was a clear trade-off: more gold meant less of other goods from outside.

---

Classic Thinkers: Facing Limits

The first true economists started looking at how societies deal with limited resources.

• Adam Smith (1700s): The "father of economics." He wrote about the "invisible hand" guiding markets. While he didn't use the word "scarcity," his ideas about dividing up work to make more goods showed he understood we need to make the most of what we have. It's about efficiently using limited resources.
• Thomas Malthus (Late 1700s): He famously worried that people would have too many babies, and food wouldn't keep up. This was a stark warning about scarcity leading to a terrible trade-off: more people meant less food per person.
• David Ricardo (Early 1800s): He gave us "comparative advantage." This idea says countries should make what they're best at, even if another country is better at everything. Why? Because resources are scarce, and by specializing, everyone can get more through trade. This perfectly shows how to make a trade-off (give up making some things) to gain more overall.

---

The "Marginal" Revolution: Every Last Bit Counts

This was a huge turning point, making scarcity and trade-offs central.

• Jevons, Menger, Walras (Late 1800s): They came up with "marginal utility." This means how much extra happiness you get from one more unit of something. If something is scarce, that last bit is really valuable. Their work showed how individuals make choices, always weighing the value of one more unit against its cost – a classic trade-off for maximizing satisfaction.
• Alfred Marshall (Late 1800s/Early 1900s): He tied together supply and demand. Supply is limited (scarcity), and demand is about what people want (unlimited wants). He also clearly defined "opportunity cost": what you give up when you choose something else. This is the ultimate way to think about trade-offs.

---

Modern Economics: Scarcity Everywhere

Today, scarcity and trade-offs are applied to almost everything.

• Keynes (Early 1900s): During the Great Depression, he showed that even with lots of workers available, they might be "scarce" if nobody was hiring. His ideas about government spending were a trade-off: spend money now to boost jobs, even if it means debt.
• Austrian School (Mises, Hayek - 20th Century): They argued that knowledge itself is scarce and spread out. So, central planning can't work because no single person knows everything. Markets, with their prices, help share this scarce information to make better trade-offs.
• Chicago School (Friedman, Becker - 20th Century): They applied economic thinking to almost everything, even family life and crime. They said people always make choices based on costs and benefits, even in non-money situations. For them, every choice is a trade-off involving scarce resources, even time.
• Public Choice (Buchanan - 20th Century): This group looked at how politicians and voters make choices. They argued that even in government, resources are scarce, and decisions involve trade-offs, just like in a market.
• Behavioral Economics (Kahneman, Tversky - 20th/21st Century): While they showed people aren't always perfectly rational, their research still revolves around how people make choices with limited resources (even limited brainpower) and the trade-offs they make.

---

In short, scarcity and trade-offs are the bedrock of economics. Every economic idea, from ancient times to today, tries to understand how people and societies make choices when there's not enough of everything to go around.