Jump to content
aberdeen-music

Digital Britain: 6 levy on phonelines


Le Stu
 Share

Recommended Posts

The only phone line update I will willingly contribute to would be fiber optic. Yes, living in the arse end of nowhere is not much fun if you want decent broadband, but why should I pay for people at the end of a country track to be able to buy Land Rovers and checked shirts online, when I live in Northfield? If they are charging me more for my phone line, I want better broadband speeds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish they'd just abolish the TV license altogether. Practically everyone I know is downloading TV shows via p2p. Perhaps it would be useful if the government could get its nose out and concentrate instead on passing laws enforcing royalty sharing contracts between ISPs and content providers, thus enabling a free-market in digital content? It's my understanding that this is what governments are supposed to do...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some further thoughts on this. Instead of raising the price of owning a phone line to support services that rural areas may not value, why not raise the price of postage to support rural post offices instead. I mean, if there is a case for government subsidy of services then surely that would be more welcome. Us city folks use these internets for our day to day business, afterall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WELCOME TO DIGITAL BRITAIN!!!

digi_1424795c.jpg

Join NOW to collect your free gift*!!!

*Higher taxes and your very own giant over-sized Gordon Brown, Brown 'Digital Britain' USB Pen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Apparently, the 6 levy is going but the new proposals support the bans for illegal downloads.

I have to agree with that, even with a combination of Geffen, Mandelson and Waterman making me really not want to. I mean, this content is blatantly available and it could quite obviously be restricted by ISPs. They're whining about it because that's one of the main reasons people buy services from them.

I have this great back-of-a-fag-packet plan for a free market in P2P content but I can't imagine either governments or corporations going for it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, I can't stop myself...

So, instead of having corporate snoops identifying copyright content, P2P hosts, trackers and issuing subpoenas to ISPs to threaten legal action, why not have independent agencies rate the content and seed quality, identify content ownership and bill the ISPs allowing them to choose how the costs are passed on to the consumers by means of the intelligent software throttling that they already use. Prices would be set by the independent agencies with a percentage share of the price giving them the incentive to find the optimal volume to margin ratio.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Instead of making more taxes why not:

Up income tax to 25-30% on all money earned in a year, ALL! quite high but not high enough to cause mass unrest.

Decrease vat to 10%, making it easier to calculate

Abolish council tax

Abolish Road Tax

Abolish TV License

Add an amount say 50-100 onto the cost of MOT which has to be passed on to the govt by the garage - this would replace road tax - would be easier for the customer as the garage does the work - mot is mandatory so may as well

All makes life easier for the average person, whilst having a more consistent revenue stream from us cash cows for the govt - we get it easier with less stress and the govt gets id predict slightly more cash

The govt would have to become more efficient though which is unlikely to happen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Add an amount say 50-100 onto the cost of MOT which has to be passed on to the govt by the garage - this would replace road tax - would be easier for the customer as the garage does the work - mot is mandatory so may as well

The problem with this is for the first three years you own a new car you are not required to MOT your car so would you have to get a brand new car MOT'd before it leaves the forecourt?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Add an amount say 50-100 onto the cost of MOT which has to be passed on to the govt by the garage - this would replace road tax - would be easier for the customer as the garage does the work - mot is mandatory so may as well

My poorly place negative rep in the other thread applies here, so I don't feel bad now.

What a hideous, mis-informed idea......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with this is for the first three years you own a new car you are not required to MOT your car so would you have to get a brand new car MOT'd before it leaves the forecourt?

I did think about that but then they could just leave it the way it is and not require one for the first 3 years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My poorly place negative rep in the other thread applies here, so I don't feel bad now.

What a hideous, mis-informed idea......

Would be easier for the consumer and has the possibility of being cheaper, wouldn't say it was a hideous idea since the mot is mandatory anyway

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did think about that but then they could just leave it the way it is and not require one for the first 3 years

So if you can afford to replace your car every three/four years you never need to pay road tax??

Sounds like pandering to the rich i'm afraid, unless we tell them they can only drive on toll roads (and you can count the number of them in the UK on one hand).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Instead of making more taxes why not:

Up income tax to 25-30% on all money earned in a year, ALL! quite high but not high enough to cause mass unrest.

Decrease vat to 10%, making it easier to calculate

Abolish council tax

Abolish Road Tax

Abolish TV License

Add an amount say 50-100 onto the cost of MOT which has to be passed on to the govt by the garage - this would replace road tax - would be easier for the customer as the garage does the work - mot is mandatory so may as well

All makes life easier for the average person, whilst having a more consistent revenue stream from us cash cows for the govt - we get it easier with less stress and the govt gets id predict slightly more cash

The govt would have to become more efficient though which is unlikely to happen

I'd prefer it if they stuck up VAT and laid off earnings as we have too much consumption in this nation and not enough savings.

I'd like to see the TV license gone as well. Special and public service programming could still be provided from the budget but they should just sell the BBC radio and TV network off as it's mostly a commercial venture anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if you can afford to replace your car every three/four years you never need to pay road tax??

Sounds like pandering to the rich i'm afraid, unless we tell them they can only drive on toll roads (and you can count the number of them in the UK on one hand).

Pandering to the rich are you kidding me? That has to be one of the most idiotic things i've heard on this forum and CLOUD posts here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pandering to the rich are you kidding me? That has to be one of the most idiotic things i've heard on this forum and CLOUD posts here.

How many middle to working class people would be able to afford to trade in/buy a brand new car every three/four years to circumvent the MOT you are saying would only apply after third year but would cost 50-100 pounds more than the current test??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You were the one that advocated more than doubling income tax for people on minimum wage, were you not?

Not as far as I'm aware?

I've always thought that everyone should pay the same percentage of tax on All Income

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many middle to working class people would be able to afford to trade in/buy a brand new car every three/four years to circumvent the MOT you are saying would only apply after third year but would cost 50-100 pounds more than the current test??

But then you cant always satisfy everyone, that is life

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really...?

Now, you're advocating a tax rise of 10% for those paying the basic rate of 20% a year. Not only that, you specified that it should be paid on ALL money earned in a year. So, the personal allowance of 6035 goes out the window. Someone working 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year on minimum wage of 5.80 would earn 12604 a year. Under the current system, they would pay 1205 in income tax this year. Under your proposals, they would pay...wait for it...3619 a year! So, I apologise, my initial estimates were at fault. Your proposals wouldn't double income tax for low earners. It would TREBLE it. And that's before we even take National Insurance into consideration.

My point is, you should perhaps think twice before accusing others of idiocy if this is the kind of thing you're advocating.

Yes, but you can't tax people more than they can afford. By all means, lower the top rate of tax or raise the personal allowance of the lowest paid, but you've actually strayed into advocating the one Thatcherite policy I can't defend, the Poll Tax. It simply doesn't work.

I never mentioned the personal allowance, perhaps I should have said that I agree that should be kept in place.

Raising the tax to 25 to 30% does not double it, to do that would take 40% basic maths, the higher the tax rate the more incentive there is to improve your financial position and skills

Poll Tax? Where did i advocate that? Phantom voices in your head? Didn't they replace that with council tax.

Anyone not making enough money is allowed benefits aren't they? Education to benefit their position is usually free or can be paid using grants

While we're at it I support the bringing back of national service to teach discipline to the young which cannot be given at school. It can also help with basic skills

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you not say (and I quote)?;

So, now ALL doesn't mean ALL. Nice bit of backtracking. Shame it doesn't help your position. Even with the personal allowance in place, the amount a person on minimum wage, and indeed anyone paying the lower rate of tax increases significantly, and it brings millions more people below the poverty line.

I'd advise you not to take that tone, because it doesn't endear you to anyone and makes it look as if your arguments are even weaker than they are.

You're taking exactly the same standpoint as those who advocated the poll tax, ie everyone should pay the same rate regardless of their needs and financial position. Perhaps you didn't realise the history of that particular case, I'd advise you to read up on it.

So, your idea is to tax them too much, feed the money through the Treasury and the various other government departments, and hand back a smaller amount of cash with the caveat that they're only allowed to spend it on what the government says they can? I think I see an easier way to do this...

That's really nothing to do with this topic, which has already strayed too far from it's original premise. Let's keep any further posts along the lines of Digital Britain, and the funding options available please, folks.

I'd advise you not to take that tone, because it doesn't endear you to anyone and makes it look as if your arguments are even weaker than they are.

Advice not taken, are you in a condescending mood this morning? They are weak to some not to others at least they have conviction. Bravo!

So, now ALL doesn't mean ALL. Nice bit of backtracking. Shame it doesn't help your position. Even with the personal allowance in place, the amount a person on minimum wage, and indeed anyone paying the lower rate of tax increases significantly, and it brings millions more people below the poverty line.

Yes well done, so i missed out a little bit about the personal allowance, everyone makes mistakes eh, should have been ALL money after P.A. Hey well perhaps if they are below the poverty line they should do something about it don't you think? The means and methods to do so are readily available.

You're taking exactly the same standpoint as those who advocated the poll tax, ie everyone should pay the same rate regardless of their needs and financial position. Perhaps you didn't realise the history of that particular case, I'd advise you to read up on it.

I never referenced poll tax! You Did, I mentioned Council Tax only, thinking that everyone should paying the same rate of income tax is not advocating the 'Poll Tax' but anyway continue my education on the 'poll tax' if you wish.

So, your idea is to tax them too much, feed the money through the Treasury and the various other government departments, and hand back a smaller amount of cash with the caveat that they're only allowed to spend it on what the government says they can? I think I see an easier way to do this...

Partially correct until you get to the 'they're only allowed to spend it on what the government says' from then your just picking things out of thin air, phantom voices again?

Getting back on track: BT Should be nationalised as should the entirety of Royal Mail and Train Companies, electric and gas companies, any essential services

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only new tax that this country needs is a Tobin Tax on financial transactions, as long

as any money raised was used to make up the shortfall caused by private iniquity.

The time is ripe for a Tobin tax | Business | guardian.co.uk

Hardly anyone wants adverts on the BBC, so if the License was abolished without other provision being made, then we would lose one of the few world class organisations left in this country, making the bloody place even worse. Apparently it costs money to produce watchable stuff.

Digital Libertarianism is a mixed bag of goodies, as if everything is free, what will have value. Although there had to be a redress of the balance of power away from the Bandit Capitalism of the music and media businesses, Artistes who make good stuff do deserve to make some sort of living off of it, maybe Charlie Brookers Magic Coins idea will have some legs in it.

Charlie Brooker | My plan to save newspapers | Comment is free | The Guardian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes well done, so i missed out a little bit about the personal allowance, everyone makes mistakes eh, should have been ALL money after P.A. Hey well perhaps if they are below the poverty line they should do something about it don't you think? The means and methods to do so are readily available.

Really. Please tell me what these means and methods are. There are millions of people in Britain eagerly awaiting your insight and we're fully prepared for a collective "D'oh!" moment as you explain how stupid we've been to miss something so obvious.

(I couldn't find a picture of an award winning rooster to put here so you'll all just have to use your imagination)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only new tax that this country needs is a Tobin Tax on financial transactions, as long

as any money raised was used to make up the shortfall caused by private iniquity.

The time is ripe for a Tobin tax | Business | guardian.co.uk

How is this any different from exchange controls, though? I think it's very likely you will see these tariffs in the near future as it's certainly happened in past periods of economic depression ,the effects of which were not happy.

Hardly anyone wants adverts on the BBC, so if the License was abolished without other provision being made, then we would lose one of the few world class organisations left in this country, making the bloody place even worse. Apparently it costs money to produce watchable stuff.

Yes, and HBO, for example, does this just fine. I would much rather pay subscribe to an advert free channel of my choice than be coerced by law to pay the TV license. I barely use BBC services and these days you can't even own a computer and internet connection without having to pay it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone not making enough money is allowed benefits aren't they? Education to benefit their position is usually free or can be paid using grants

Although there are a certain amount of benefits someone who is employed can claim, these only top up your earnings to subsistence level.

A certain amount of education is usually free FOR THE UNEMPLOYED; usually just enough to get them a low wage job. Someone on a low wage gets nix, nada, zero etc etc. I've spent over 600 re-educating myself in the past year, and there's no frigging jobs in my chosen field at the moment.

You starting to get an idea as to why they call it the poverty trap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Motleyal
I'm advising you, as a moderator, to cut out the trolling and abusing others who don't share your opinion and point out the glaring flaws in your arguments. This kind of thing is against site rules, and if you carry on in this vein you may find your account suspended.

WHAT? Dave, i agree with the whole abusing others bit, but Trolling, your as gulity of it in this thread and he has been yeh? And as soon as he starts questioning, or disagreeing with you, you threaten to suspend his account! Thats total mis-use of your moderator powers in my opinion.

No doubt I'll get a warning for trolling with this post, or have the threat of having my account suspended for disagreeing with Dave, but it's a fair point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...