proposed 50p tax on each landline

[Moriath]

To pay for faster bb in the UK

Fair ?

[Raven]

Its the only way to do, BT don't want to pay for it because they aren't allowed to benefit due to retarded monopoly laws. Someone has to pay it.

In fairness its probably yet another Labour pipe dream though.

[Edmond]

Not for me, as where i live the lines coming in are made of aluminium, and although i am supposed to have 'up to' 8mb, in reality i get about 1.5mb

BT engineer told me that because they are aluminium and not copper then thats the best i will get. If BT are gonna change the lines coming into my house for 50p, then yes, i'll pay it, but i doubt they will

[Tom]

Sorry, but part of living in a rural community is accepting that access to services will generally be poorer than that found in a suburban community.

If you live on a farm and want better broadband, pay for it yourself.

[Edmond]

Originally Posted by Tom

Sorry, but part of living in a rural community is accepting that access to services will generally be poorer than that found in a suburban community.

If you live on a farm and want better broadband, pay for it yourself.

I dont live on a farm or a rural community Tom, i never said i did??

The reason they are aluminiun is because in the early to mid 60's when my estate was built, the price of copper went through the roof, so the G.P.O as it was at the time moved over to the cheaper alternative of ali. It was fine back then, but as with the progression of faster digital networks, the old system cant handle it

[Zenith.UK]

Same here, I'm not exactly in an urban area but it's not the middle of the countryside either. I'm in a village about 2-3 miles outside the main town area and I get about 4Mbit. DMT Tool tweaking gets that up to 5.2Mbit but with the need to reset the router every 4-5 days.
My exchange is also Wholesale Market 1 meaning BT is the ONLY BB provider and no LLU presence. There is also no cable provision in my area at all.

The annoying thing is that I'm literally 100m from the village's main BT cabinet, so if BT ever pulled out their finger, I'd be getting the maximum speed through FTTC.

To answer the original question, yes it is fair.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Edmond

I dont live on a farm or a rural community Tom, i never said i did??

Neither did I.

[DaGaffer]

Don't have a problem with it in principle - I don't buy Tom's "tough shit" argument. I do wonder why it has be done with fibre though; 3G and 4G would deal with the problem just as effectively and probably for a lot less. Its the solution they've gone for in other countries (here in Ireland for one).

[Trem]

But is it a one off 50p tax for everyone or is it a monthly thing?

They should just use the BBC fee for this rather than channel (fucking big brother) 4.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by DaGaffer

Don't have a problem with it in principle - I don't buy Tom's "tough shit" argument. I do wonder why it has be done with fibre though; 3G and 4G would deal with the problem just as effectively and probably for a lot less. Its the solution they've gone for in other countries (here in Ireland for one).

Ok, I'm going to build a house 10 miles from the nearest town, and demand that the local council install services to it. Hundreds of thousands of pounds, paid for by the taxpayer, just so I can live in the middle of nowhere.

Fair?

There was a bloke on the radio asked this today, and all he could come up with was home shopping, clever electricity meters, and other similar things. All those can be done with a 56k modem.

What is the benefit of taxing everyone, just so a few people in remote locations can watch iPlayer, or download mp3s? To me it sounds rather unnecessary.

[Mabs]

Originally Posted by Tom

Sorry, but part of living in a rural community is accepting that access to services will generally be poorer than that found in a suburban community.

If you live on a farm and want better broadband, pay for it yourself.

well no actually

surely it would be easier done by county/zone/borough rather than as a blanket thing ?

[Chilly]

let the market cope. If they want it, they can pay. Else they can live in shitty inner cities like the rest of us.

[DaGaffer]

Originally Posted by Tom

Ok, I'm going to build a house 10 miles from the nearest town, and demand that the local council install services to it. Hundreds of thousands of pounds, paid for by the taxpayer, just so I can live in the middle of nowhere.

Fair?

There was a bloke on the radio asked this today, and all he could come up with was home shopping, clever electricity meters, and other similar things. All those can be done with a 56k modem.

What is the benefit of taxing everyone, just so a few people in remote locations can watch iPlayer, or download mp3s? To me it sounds rather unnecessary.

And if you were going to build a house in those circumstances, you might have a point, but what if you've always lived there? You're automatically disbarred from ever having internet access? Maybe we should pull out their electricity cable while we're at it as its clearly a drain on the rest of us.

A few years from now, when the internet has virtually wiped out high street retailing for media products and a few other categories besides, then a broadband connection will become a basic need. It will also have employment benefits; a teleworker who can only work in a densely populated area kind of misses the point...

[MYstIC G]

Broadband isn't a right. Dial up counts as internet access.

[Moriath]

Originally Posted by Trem

But is it a one off 50p tax for everyone or is it a monthly thing?

They should just use the BBC fee for this rather than channel (fucking big brother) 4.

proposed as an ongoing monthly thing so 6 quid a year.

I dont see why i should have to pay for infrastruture i wont use cause i already on 50Mb and pay ap remium for that in the first place.

BT should just go back to being a government organisation and provide the back bone for all the other companies to work on