Broadband tax of £6 per year to fund rural fibre rollout ? The Register
The British government plans to impose a 50 pence monthly levy on every phone and broadband line to fund the rollout of fibre to rural areas, it was announced today.
Isn't it probable that this is just another tax that will not be used as announced?
Could the Irish government pull a similar stunt?
Would a duck swim?Originally Posted by TradCat
Not always.
An Irish duck would soar to the stratosphere before starting a dive which would be predicted by ornathologists but scoffed at by Duckernment, Quackelopers and Duckate agents.
In conclusion an Irish duck wouldn't swim due to lack of liquidity.
The UK has a much larger population than us though, far more than geographical size differences, would €6 a year really make that much of a difference here?
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Dios
I'm sure they could be persuaded to make it more. But the general point is that ear-marked taxes never get used for their intended purpose.
This tax is about controlling the internet.
The Irish government already did something like this years ago Irish government awards EUR4.15 million for Sligo broadband | Fiber Optics Weekly Update | Find Articles at BNET
However last time I saw any statistics on it the vast majority of it was dark, I don't know the reasons behind it.
Rural areas should NOT have broadband as they don't have the numbers.
Country folk make me sick sometimes. They go on about how horrible cities are and the big gardens their children have to play in but then don't accept the flip side, and demand the same services the city has.
What next? Sligo wants a Luas.
Then the problem becomes chicken-and-egg. People move away from rural areas and businesses won't locate there because they lack infrastructure. Meanwhile we won't build infrastructure there because there's not enough people or businesses.
I don't think that they shouldn't have broadband, but those that want it should pay the real economic cost of having it. As you say, far too often people in rural areas want their cake and eat it.
A little lesson on geographic and political terms for dummies :
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote