ten bob tax

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Pages:  1 2 Next
Current: 1 of 2
Wednesday 23 September 2009 1.06pm
Is it correct that a tax is going to set against fixed line telephones to pay for super dooper fast broadband in ten years time? a modest fifty pence a month apparently...flipping cheek...
Wednesday 23 September 2009 5.45pm
Yes, it's true - and yes it's a blimmin cheek.
Thursday 24 September 2009 8.18am
I wonder Boss St.B. if we can 'opt out' if we say we have no computer! funny how politicians can always push through laws that benefit someones pockets...but allow stupid ancients laws to exist in courts that allow violent people escape justice because they were initially charged with the wrong thing...thinking of poor Gloria and the manslaughter charge..44 injuries..:-(
Thursday 24 September 2009 5.19pm
Nope - no opt out. Basically, if you have a fixed line phone then get ready for the tax. That must be about 99.999% of the population.
Thursday 24 September 2009 6.07pm
Not much different to us having to pay taxes to fund any other political objective, whether we support it or not (replacing Trident, invading Iraq, etc)

...if you press it, they will come.
Friday 25 September 2009 1.57pm
Your right Ivanhoe..sigh...and they cost a darn sight more!
Friday 25 September 2009 8.58pm
Yes but this tax is in 'yer face, up front and personal. Like some drunk squaring up to you saying "Oh yeh, you want some, do ya, well come on then".
Sunday 27 September 2009 11.34am
A single packet of Kettles crisps in Sainsburys BHS is 12 shillings (60p).
BT say they are upgrading the SE1 postcode to 20mb in November with no increase in charges. I'm on a one year 10 a month contract with BT and get 6.5mb per sec average. Was going to change to Virgin in Feb renewal when it goes up to 15.99 (I think) but if BT upgrade to 20mb I might stick with them as never had a problem.

As for 50p -- From MSN:
According to a 2008 survey, only 65% of homes in the UK have an internet connection. That leaves some 8.5 million homes without one. That equates to 4.25 million in tax everyone month where the person paying would get no benefit whatsoever. Effectively they would be forced to pay for something they don't want.
Of course many of those homes would eventually sign up, but not all. The aim is only to provide the capability to get high-speed internet, not the actual connection itself. If the goal was to actually give people access, not just the ability to have access, this may be a fairer tax.
Sunday 27 September 2009 6.58pm
That's a lot of ten bobs Phoney! I still cant my mind around it that o.a.p's without internet have to pay though...

p.s. I am on Virgin and have never had a problem...
Monday 28 September 2009 10.30am
phoney wrote:
Effectively they would be forced to pay for something they don't want.

So...not unlike the Olympics, then.
Pages:  1 2 Next
Current: 1 of 2

To post a message, please log in or register..

Keep up with SE1 news

We have three email newsletters for you to choose from: