This never made any sense to me. The licensing fee is required even though there's always been more to TV than just public broadcasting? Owning a TV was never s

This never made any sense to me. The licensing fee is required even though there's always been more to TV than just public broadcasting? Owning a TV was never sufficient to impose this. Wouldn't it have made more sense from the very beginning to sell receivers instead? No, that would naturally limit the viewer count. Clearly the intent was to push propaganda and the license isn't significant to the funding, but rather a vote of loyalty.