3 ms·

And in some countries the tax is a one-time payment included in the price of a tv, radio, etc. That's better in my opinion, and it may force them to produce jus

by cm3 10y ago

And in some countries the tax is a one-time payment included in the price of a tv, radio, etc. That's better in my opinion, and it may force them to produce just what the mandate requires, not daily soaps, game shows, all the while showing ads during the day. If we're consequent, we could easily reduce it to two channels, with an hour per day where the local news are available on an otherwise national broadcast. This is already available on the WDR feeds to some extent. One would be Phoenix++ (plus partially localized Phoenix++ feed) and the other ZDFInfo++. Most of the content is repeated anyway, so two channels with on-demand view on the website is sufficient. Game shows and other forms of entertainment are not about education and keeping the population informed via government funded channels. You might argue it's too late to change it now, but the TV landscape would quickly adjust and formats would move to other networks where they belong and are still broadcast without DRM. The whole 7.6bn/year fund being used for stuff people wouldn't actively select to pay that much for problem reminds me of the misappropriation of the road tax of 8bn/year which trucks pay on a per-km basis. 8bn should be more than enough to build and maintain public roads, but it's apparently used for other needs, all because taxes are not purpose-bound by law. What's the political solution? They're trying to extend highway taxes to private vehicles too in order to build roads. The German government is in dire need of a more logical treasury that's accountable to the electorate outside of 4-year-period-elections for misappropriation or over-/under-spending. If the roads in a city are not maintained for decades, then those paying vehicle tax and other annual fees, must have a right to refuse payment, just like they can do with their landlord. After all, taxes are payments to your national landlord, nothing else.

allendoerfer 10y ago
In general I agree with you, taxes and tax-like systems (church, healthcare, social systems, IHK and the others, broadcast) should be separated as much as possible, but ultimately the system will collapse if we do so. The social systems cannot fund themselves and the outlook is even worse. I think it is not even theoretically possible to cut the subsidies for the pension funds, and even if it was possible, it would choke the young generation because of the increased dues all while Germany already has the second lowest birth rate in the world. The birth rate would fall even lower, thus increasing the costs for the next generation even higher. The bullshit expenses like broadcast and so on can absolutely be reformed, but that's just a few billions here and there. The overwhelming majority of the spending (130 bn € per year, next biggest is the military with just 34 bn €) for the social system cannot decrease, thanks to the demographic it has to be increased every year until the birth rate is stabilized, which as described cannot happen if young people are busy paying for pensions. And btw. the tax revenue from federal roads was 6 bn € last year, while the the ministry of transport spend 8 bn € on it's federal roads. Of course there are also 33bn revenue from the gas tax, which was introduced with the argument that roads need to be paid for, but yeah as described, if we cut the tax, pension funds will die. Revenue from VAT and income taxes are just ~ 80 bn € each, appropriate spending would just collapse the system instantly. Here are the sources as an interactive chart, unfortunately only in German: https://www.bundeshaushalt-info.de/ https://www.bundeshaushalt-info.de/
- cm3 10y ago
  You're right, but I think that the population can be educated and convinced of the necessity of certain taxes without them feeling ripped off. Therefore, I have this hope that a more transparent and purpose-bound tax system can work and finally discourage tax payers from complaining about taxes as if infrastructure and services grow on trees. What I mean is that I've met many people who view tax evasion as a national sport of sorts, and the professionalism rises the higher their income, unfortunately, while those with lower income are less capable of leaving 30 to 50 percent of their income on the table. I'm not advocating a rich-people tax or anything like that. Just apply tax laws evenly, without making exceptions or implementing loop-holes for those who can hire a tax lawyer/accountant. I believe that once people know why certain taxes are paid and see what they're used for, they will be less likely to be frustrated about it. Now, there's the risk of people not caring about issues somewhere else and thus not wanting to support that, but that also can be solved with education. There's so much useless stuff put into people's minds via psycho-advanced ad campaigns that it's possible to use that for good as well. With all that being said, maybe the Germans are less likely to be educable in that regard, and thus you're perhaps right that a fair and logical tax system won't fly. If so, it might work in Japan's society.
Xylakant 10y ago
This is obviously tangential to the original issue, but your interpretation of the task given to the public broadcast stations is incredibly narrow. The law explicitly includes social and cultural aspects and deliberately does not limit the task to dissemination of news or educational tasks only. Entertainment is explicitly included in the mandate. And as much as I dislike soaps, most of the music played on the radio in general, most game shows, they definitely are part of our culture, thus covered by the mandate: § 11 Auftrag Auftrag der öffentlich-rechtlichen Rundfunkanstalten ist, durch die Herstellung und Verbreitung ihrer Angebote als Medium und Faktor des Prozesses freier individueller und öffentlicher Meinungsbildung zu wirken und dadurch die demokratischen, sozialen und kulturellen Bedürfnisse der Gesellschaft zu erfüllen. Die öffentlich-rechtlichen Rundfunkanstalten haben in ihren Angeboten einen umfassenden Überblick über das internationale, europäische, nationale und regionale Geschehen in allen wesentlichen Lebensbereichen zu geben. Sie sollen hierdurch die internationale Verständigung, die europäische Integration und den gesell- schaftlichen Zusammenhalt in Bund und Ländern fördern. Ihre Angebote haben der Bildung, Information, Beratung und Unterhaltung zu dienen. Sie haben Beiträge insbesondere zur Kultur anzubieten. Auch Unterhaltung soll einem öffentlich-rechtlichen Angebotsprofil entsprechen. http://www.die-medienanstalten.de/fileadmin/Download/Rechtsgrundlagen/Gesetze_aktuell/15_RStV_01-01-2013.pdf http://www.die-medienanstalten.de/fileadmin/Download/Rechtsg...
- cm3 10y ago
  That's the law, yes, but when it was written there weren't private TV networks. Therefore, it needs to be updated. I'm not saying there shouldn't be culture per se, but the amount of money spent in the networks is disproportionate to the positive effect it has these days. Say they spent the money on mobile apps and websites, then maybe it would be more contemporary-appropriate. The main issue isn't with the 18 EURO per month, it's how it's used. If they cannot use it appropriately, it should be at least cut back so that it's just 5 EURO per month. One could argue that technologically we could and probably should easily replace most of the programming with something that requires paid-for access keys. That way, one can reduce the mandatory part to a bare minimum while still allowing those who want it to get rest of the content. Then the argument would be that it has to be accessible by everyone, though with that argument you could say analog TV may not be turned off as long as there is still one analog TV set around. I'm glad that Germany doesn't force a church tax or alternative payment to some similar org like Finland or many other nations do. At least one bug that doesn't exist in Germany.

by cm3 10y ago

allendoerfer 10y ago

In general I agree with you, taxes and tax-like systems (church, healthcare, social systems, IHK and the others, broadcast) should be separated as much as possible, but ultimately the system will collapse if we do so. The social systems cannot fund themselves and the outlook is even worse. I think it is not even theoretically possible to cut the subsidies for the pension funds, and even if it was possible, it would choke the young generation because of the increased dues all while Germany already has the second lowest birth rate in the world. The birth rate would fall even lower, thus increasing the costs for the next generation even higher. The bullshit expenses like broadcast and so on can absolutely be reformed, but that's just a few billions here and there. The overwhelming majority of the spending (130 bn € per year, next biggest is the military with just 34 bn €) for the social system cannot decrease, thanks to the demographic it has to be increased every year until the birth rate is stabilized, which as described cannot happen if young people are busy paying for pensions. And btw. the tax revenue from federal roads was 6 bn € last year, while the the ministry of transport spend 8 bn € on it's federal roads. Of course there are also 33bn revenue from the gas tax, which was introduced with the argument that roads need to be paid for, but yeah as described, if we cut the tax, pension funds will die. Revenue from VAT and income taxes are just ~ 80 bn € each, appropriate spending would just collapse the system instantly. Here are the sources as an interactive chart, unfortunately only in German: https://www.bundeshaushalt-info.de/ https://www.bundeshaushalt-info.de/

cm3 10y ago
You're right, but I think that the population can be educated and convinced of the necessity of certain taxes without them feeling ripped off. Therefore, I have this hope that a more transparent and purpose-bound tax system can work and finally discourage tax payers from complaining about taxes as if infrastructure and services grow on trees. What I mean is that I've met many people who view tax evasion as a national sport of sorts, and the professionalism rises the higher their income, unfortunately, while those with lower income are less capable of leaving 30 to 50 percent of their income on the table. I'm not advocating a rich-people tax or anything like that. Just apply tax laws evenly, without making exceptions or implementing loop-holes for those who can hire a tax lawyer/accountant. I believe that once people know why certain taxes are paid and see what they're used for, they will be less likely to be frustrated about it. Now, there's the risk of people not caring about issues somewhere else and thus not wanting to support that, but that also can be solved with education. There's so much useless stuff put into people's minds via psycho-advanced ad campaigns that it's possible to use that for good as well. With all that being said, maybe the Germans are less likely to be educable in that regard, and thus you're perhaps right that a fair and logical tax system won't fly. If so, it might work in Japan's society.

Xylakant 10y ago

This is obviously tangential to the original issue, but your interpretation of the task given to the public broadcast stations is incredibly narrow. The law explicitly includes social and cultural aspects and deliberately does not limit the task to dissemination of news or educational tasks only. Entertainment is explicitly included in the mandate. And as much as I dislike soaps, most of the music played on the radio in general, most game shows, they definitely are part of our culture, thus covered by the mandate: § 11 Auftrag Auftrag der öffentlich-rechtlichen Rundfunkanstalten ist, durch die Herstellung und Verbreitung ihrer Angebote als Medium und Faktor des Prozesses freier individueller und öffentlicher Meinungsbildung zu wirken und dadurch die demokratischen, sozialen und kulturellen Bedürfnisse der Gesellschaft zu erfüllen. Die öffentlich-rechtlichen Rundfunkanstalten haben in ihren Angeboten einen umfassenden Überblick über das internationale, europäische, nationale und regionale Geschehen in allen wesentlichen Lebensbereichen zu geben. Sie sollen hierdurch die internationale Verständigung, die europäische Integration und den gesell- schaftlichen Zusammenhalt in Bund und Ländern fördern. Ihre Angebote haben der Bildung, Information, Beratung und Unterhaltung zu dienen. Sie haben Beiträge insbesondere zur Kultur anzubieten. Auch Unterhaltung soll einem öffentlich-rechtlichen Angebotsprofil entsprechen. http://www.die-medienanstalten.de/fileadmin/Download/Rechtsgrundlagen/Gesetze_aktuell/15_RStV_01-01-2013.pdf http://www.die-medienanstalten.de/fileadmin/Download/Rechtsg...

cm3 10y ago
That's the law, yes, but when it was written there weren't private TV networks. Therefore, it needs to be updated. I'm not saying there shouldn't be culture per se, but the amount of money spent in the networks is disproportionate to the positive effect it has these days. Say they spent the money on mobile apps and websites, then maybe it would be more contemporary-appropriate. The main issue isn't with the 18 EURO per month, it's how it's used. If they cannot use it appropriately, it should be at least cut back so that it's just 5 EURO per month. One could argue that technologically we could and probably should easily replace most of the programming with something that requires paid-for access keys. That way, one can reduce the mandatory part to a bare minimum while still allowing those who want it to get rest of the content. Then the argument would be that it has to be accessible by everyone, though with that argument you could say analog TV may not be turned off as long as there is still one analog TV set around. I'm glad that Germany doesn't force a church tax or alternative payment to some similar org like Finland or many other nations do. At least one bug that doesn't exist in Germany.