Broadband tax condemned as 'unfair' by MPs

  Input Overload 06:15 23 Feb 2010

click here

I've had BB since just after it was available , I now pay a fair amount per month for a 50 Meg Bit connection from Virgin. Why should I subsidize others after paying £1000s over the past 11 plus years for BB?

I give up other pleasures in life because I choose to have a fast connection, shouldn't others?

What do you think?

  octal 06:40 23 Feb 2010

It seems as if the government are putting the internet as an essential service like water and electricity, I've always classed the internet as a luxury service, nice to have it, but it's not top of my list of essentials. Yes I do resent have a levy on my fix phone line as I see that as a completely unrelated service, I'm probably wrong, it's like putting a levy on my electricity service to pay for the upgrade to the water service, but still, it's the government and they seemed to do just as they please without reference to what we think.

  Quickbeam 07:30 23 Feb 2010

"...shouldn't others?"
Yes, those that spend 0ne or two hundred pounds a week on booze n' fags can make their own sacrifice if they want broadband.

  morddwyd 09:31 23 Feb 2010

Well I think it's a good idea.

And while they're at it they can put a tax on all those with cable television so that the companies can be subsidised to put it in for me!

Why stop there?

Tax all the commuters with fast rail links in the south east so that the East Coast Line can be electrified.

  Monoux 09:45 23 Feb 2010

see also click here

  walesrob 09:57 23 Feb 2010

I don't see having internet access as a luxury. I used to, but now, I have all my bank statements, mobile phone bills and other important stuff via the internet only. I understand the Government's need to get 100% coverage in the UK to at least a 2mb standard, but I'm quite sure no amount of taxation will achieve that. Here in rural West Wales, my local exchange is already getting 2mb and up to 8mb, but thats it, theres no plans at such a small exchange as ours to introduce LLU or 21cn protocols, and as a result, we will be always be lagging behind when it comes to broadband, stuck with BT ADSL platform products and limited in the number of broadband deals available. Anyway, we are already getting at least - and I guess most people can get - 2mb, why tax us on something most of us already have? I'm not convinced, it seems such a narrow minded tax, and it seems unfair that someone with a landline and without internet access has to pay 50p per month on something they don't intend to use. A bit like adding 50p a month on car tax to pay for a new school.

  OTT_B 10:28 23 Feb 2010

So, who owns the infrastructure that needs upgrading? I thought (possibly wrongly) that it was privately owned by BT Openreach. If that is the case then how can the government introduce a tax to fund it? Ok, so 'tax' is possbly not the right word - perhaps it's more like allowing a compulsory charge to be added to customers bills.

In any case, I thought the point behind privatisation was that the company is supposed to be an independantly commercially viable business, responsible for its own technologcal development.

  Kevscar1 10:29 23 Feb 2010

It is a luxury, all the things you mention you still did or got before the internet.

  octal 10:55 23 Feb 2010

I'm sorry to disagree, the internet is a luxury, there are far more important things than the internet. I used to manage quite well without it and could do so again if it was switch off tomorrow, admittedly life would be a bit more awkward but I would manage. As long as I've got a clean supply of water, heating and a source of food, then everything else is a bonus to enjoy.

  Cymro. 11:07 23 Feb 2010

Very true octel.
Who is it that really MUST HAVE superfast Internet connection anyway? Businesses, yes. Well if it is going to increase their profits then let them pay for it. People who are in to such things as downloading video and such like as a hobby. Well a hobby is just that a hobby something that is not essential and so should be paid for by those who want it. Getting one group of people to subsidise another groups interest is always difficult to justify.

  folsom 12:12 23 Feb 2010

I don't think we are talking of "superfast" here, just a reasonable speed of 1MB would satisfy me, but because we are thinly spread in rural areas we are totally ignored in order to pander to the likes of people wanting 20MB speed to enable them to play silly games and the like..

Rant over.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Samsung Galaxy S9 review

ManvsMachine and other artists put Apple's iMac Pro to the test using powerful rendering tools

What to expect at Apple's 27 March education event

Comment filmer l’écran d’un iPhone ?