Not really the tax is about getting 2mb speeds to everyone.
£6 broadband levy may be trebled for homes with multiple lines
- Thread starter mattheman
- Start date
Not really the tax is about getting 2mb speeds to everyone.
Check out some of these prices...
http://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&sour...&btnG=Google+Search&meta=&fp=24281d3b39391edb
£35 a month for the first one might not sound too bad, until you see it's for 2GB a month of usage and requires a £717 installation fee
thats weird the purple shirt people offer £35 (might be 30) a month for 15gb though contract with a laptop.
I know what the tax is about, I don't think your post is relevant to my post - we seem to be talking at cross purposes I think
Excellent, then why don't you pay more, instead of taxing us?
This tax won't suddenly make Britain king of the broadband world, it will patch up an ageing and decrepit system so that there is a uniform decent speed.
Last edited:
I presume you are referring to mobile broadband using the cell phone network, not satellite.
Soldato
The reason people only get 2mb speeds though is due to the poor quality of the copper and the distance.
We have plenty of telephone exchanges when you consider the size of Britain, it is mainly that the phone lines suck.
By installing fibre it helps everyone, what I mean is you can't provide everyone with 2mb and not install fibre. They are mutual. (unless they do it via satellite or 3G)
I just wish VM would follow what BT is doing and lay more fibre/cable. Even in housing construction areas where it would be insanely cheap to lay the fibre and cables VM isn't doing it, instead they just wait, untill eventully they will have to spend a ton of money to dig up the road.
With BT doing FTTC, that will at least mean that they can offer 50Mb, and maybe even 100Mb eventully. The main reason BT held back on doing FTTC was not the cost to put it in place, it was that they wanted assurances from Ofcom that they would not put restrictions on how much BT could charge for the new services. When Ofcom said they wont restrict BT, thats when they got to work.
It's not always about the initial cost being too much, sometimes its about there being too much red tape and restrictions to make spending the money to improve the service profitable. If you can't make back the money you spend then whats the point.
With BT doing FTTC, that will at least mean that they can offer 50Mb, and maybe even 100Mb eventully. The main reason BT held back on doing FTTC was not the cost to put it in place, it was that they wanted assurances from Ofcom that they would not put restrictions on how much BT could charge for the new services. When Ofcom said they wont restrict BT, thats when they got to work.
It's not always about the initial cost being too much, sometimes its about there being too much red tape and restrictions to make spending the money to improve the service profitable. If you can't make back the money you spend then whats the point.
Deleted member 651465
D
Deleted member 651465
I always find it funny when people say "get together with your neighbours to buy the service". How does someone do this?
We're moving soon, so I called Virgin media about supplying cable to our new house (as they've been leafleting the building and I noticed the nearest cab is 300m down the road) and they said they would not be able to supply the neighbourhood.
When asked what plans they have to provide us they said "None. We don't have any plans"
About "the sticks" comment... I live no more than 1 mile away from the DVLA (actually on the same road as my next house) so it's hardly rural, yet because of the way the area has developed we're in a black spot.
We're moving soon, so I called Virgin media about supplying cable to our new house (as they've been leafleting the building and I noticed the nearest cab is 300m down the road) and they said they would not be able to supply the neighbourhood.
When asked what plans they have to provide us they said "None. We don't have any plans"
About "the sticks" comment... I live no more than 1 mile away from the DVLA (actually on the same road as my next house) so it's hardly rural, yet because of the way the area has developed we're in a black spot.
Also good for our economy and infrastructure. Wow £6 a year or £21 a year. As long as it is ring fenced I don't see the problem. People need fast internet it is quickly becoming essential, as well as business using it and being limited by slow Broadband.
Soldato
exactly, I detest BT's monopoly and funding it makes me angry but at the end of the day it is peanuts and Internet is an essential part of a business. if someone was to actually work out how much money businesses in the UK lose by not having internet it will probably pay for itself easily just by the number of ADSL faults.
Do you think the likes of Korea and Japan have fibre without any Government intervention?
There are many companies that can't afford a leased line yet the internet is vital to their operations.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,257
As I have already got a fiberoptic link, I should't have to pay a broadband tax, I already paid for my connection as part of all the contributions I made to my cable company who dug up all the flipping roads to build the links in the first place.
More tax for nothing. Genious.
More tax for nothing. Genious.
Soldato
I think the government need to rethink this entire issue and follow Swindon. Everyone should have access to low speed broadband for free (256k) and that should funded through taxes, and they should charge (much much lower than current providers) for faster connections.
Soldato
Soldato
Soldato
There's quite a lot of things between shoes for your children, and three phone lines.
If you now can't afford to put shoes on your children because you have to pay more for your three phone lines; you have your priorities very wrong.
because now internet is becoming essential. and he massive business use and connection with economy. The Uk like every country needs a high speed internet connection. This costs money.
it is a tax. Everything costs money where do you think all of government spending comes from. Unlike many other things the government waste money on, high-speed broadband is not a waste.
Last edited:
Soldato
I have still yet to understand why we're paying for uneconomical internet connections?
Surely this is effectively signing us up for paying for another person's broadband? I'd like my broadband paid for please!
Surely this is effectively signing us up for paying for another person's broadband? I'd like my broadband paid for please!
No it's paying for a uk wide highspeed broadband. which is good for the economy. because somethings are uin-economical but essential. Just like public transport.