£6 broadband levy may be trebled for homes with multiple lines

[Dj_Jestar]

So I take it this tax only applies to people who are on BT......

You tit.

It's another Tax, with the guise of it being to roll out broadband to remote areas. They aren't even pretending it's for rolling out fibre networks, so why anyone thinks that is beyond me.

And no, it's anyone with a telephone line. Regardless of supplier or line type.

 

[antijoke]

Thought as much.

 

[krooton]

I bet if naked DSL was available in this country then there would be a huge demand for it. BT say there is not enough demand, but how many people know about the concept?

Is it some sort of porn-centric broadband concept?

 

[4p]

You'd leave the country over 11.5 pence a week?

See quote

That is probably just one of many many reasons 4p has for wanting to leave this country.

Nobody calls me 4p unless they know me... *shifty*

 

[mp260767]

Bring it on I say, I'm happy to pay £6 (or even a lot more to be honest) a year if it means I'll be able to get faster than 512k (yes, 512k) speed broadband.

in the same boat here with 1.4mb, but i'm not so much interested in the increase in speed as much an improvement in the quality of the line, noise levels etc are stupidly high .

yes it would mean faster speeds. however they are simply planing on upgrading the copper not running fibre out into the sticks.

now i definately wouldn't mind that, being as the copper i'm on isn't good enough for the local phone system.

did hold out hope when an engineer was fixing a line problem said they were looking at running a new line from the next village up, but it hasnt come to be .

 

[Indy500]

BT have a universal service obligation (for phone lines) already, so I can understand them not being keen to upgrade the backhaul more than they are with 21CN (which will ease congestion and make routing more efficient so they say).

 

[MattTheTall77]

Hold on let me get this straight!

This Labour government has a commitment, issued by itself, to make sure everyone is online with at least a 2mb connexion by
the year, <insert date here>?

We are also to believe that it asked BT Group plc if it could comply with this, the reply being sorry we cant aford to pay for the infrastructure can we come to some arrangement?
Sure says the government we'll charge everyone who has a landline extra cash so that you a private company can compete with cable at no cost to you.

Do me a favour!

If I was a cynic I'd say Gov heavy hitters are kneee deep in British Telecomunications, shares, which incidently used to be part of the post office before Thatchers Gov privatised it in 1981.

If the Gov wishes to make BT Group publicly owned again then by all means I would gladly pay for the upgrade. However I am loathe to pay for a private companys infrastructure to enable it to play on a level playing field with a competitor that had invested in it's own infrastructure.


In short,... You Mad?


Oi!.. Brown.. NO!

------

And why should BT foot the bill on their own? It's the government who wants to do it why should BT pay out so much money, the few additional people would never offset the costs?

And your comment about competitors, if everyone had started off on the same time do you really think the telephone network would be as widespread as it is? VM etc have been able to cherry pick dense populated areas that provide a good return on investment.

Post office is in the same situation hence all the closures, what's the point in running unprofitable post offices or deliveries while competitors can pick profitable areas.

Both may have been better to have kept nationalised as they're pretty essential services.

 

[stockhausen]

... Families with one telephone connection, a separate line for broadband and another for a fax ...

Maybe these "families" should review their use of PSTN lines and perhaps save a few quid

 

[Deleted member 651465]

I know for a fact that BT are pulling fibre wherever possible.

My brother is working with a gang pulling out the old copper (even aluminium ) around the Cardiff / South Wales area.

The only expensive part is termination. It makes no odds if they pull a fibre or copper line.

 

[dirtydog]

Is it some sort of porn-centric broadband concept?

Sadly not No it's just a DSL line without PSTN, ie. no phone line, just internet. Currently I only use my landline for the internet and use mobiles for voice calls. Yet I have to pay BT £30 odd a quarter for this even though they aren't my ISP, because they are providing PSTN which I don't need or want.

 

[PikeyPriest]

Not being harsh, but surely when you make a choice to live in the sticks, you must be aware that internet, access to shops and schools can be limited or poor. To me if you make a lifestyle choice to get away from big population areas (and get house prices to reflect this), why should the country pay for your choice?

You can use iplayer through HSPDA anyway, so why not just give the mobile companies to improve coverage and encourage the use of it? 512k isn't exactly terrible.

 

[dirtydog]

Not being harsh, but surely when you make a choice to live in the sticks, you must be aware that internet, access to shops and schools can be limited or poor. To me if you make a lifestyle choice to get away from big population areas (and get house prices to reflect this), why should the country pay for your choice?

You can use iplayer through HSPDA anyway, so why not just give the mobile companies to improve coverage and encourage the use of it? 512k isn't exactly terrible.

It isn't just people who live in the sticks who have to suffer poor broadband speeds mate, I do and I live in a town.

And I would say 512 kilobits IS pretty terrible these days actually.

 

[4p]

Can somebody summarise why our internet is shockingly bad when in comparision to Europe and especially Japan?

 

[MattTheTall77]

Can somebody summarise why our internet is shockingly bad when in comparision to Europe and especially Japan?

maybe their politicians claim less on expenses?

 

[Indy500]

Can somebody summarise why our internet is shockingly bad when in comparision to Europe and especially Japan?

Their governments invested in a fibre network. They pay more taxes for this kind of thing, but I think it may well balance out when you consider living costs ( especially property costs).

 

[4p]

As long as beer is under £ 2.50 a pint its all good.

 

[mattheman]

This is bull**** - we privatised BT yet the taxpayer is still being forced to fund it with this tax.

I bet if naked DSL was available in this country then there would be a huge demand for it. BT say there is not enough demand, but how many people know about the concept?

It isn't because £6+VAT is a vast sum of money that people are ****ed off, it's the principle of yet another rip-off unfair tax.

if there was i'd alread yhave it.

 

[mattheman]

That would make the per-capita cost incredibly high, hence spreading it out across the whole population. It's the same thing we do with all services: you pay for the NHS regardless of whether you use it, you pay for the fire service regardless of whether you use it, you pay for the police force regardless of whether you use it. It's 2009, access to broadband internet is a pretty important right.

you dont need it like the others.

 

[Locky]

Sadly not No it's just a DSL line without PSTN, ie. no phone line, just internet. Currently I only use my landline for the internet and use mobiles for voice calls. Yet I have to pay BT £30 odd a quarter for this even though they aren't my ISP, because they are providing PSTN which I don't need or want.

This, I dont want or need my phone, only need dsl.

 

[rsatd]

Access to broadband is not as essential as police/fire/nhs service, don't be daft.