The new 'Phone tax'

Heinz

DVardysShadow wrote: »

This is one economic theory. Communism is another economic theory. Both are fine apart from greed

Human nature!

shadowspy24

I wouldn't be surprised if they start to add this tax onto next month's bill. It's surprising how quickly they can enforce tax rises but when there is a tax cut it usually takes a while to filter through.

paperclip4201

DVardysShadow wrote: »

This is one economic theory. Communism is another economic theory. Both are fine apart from greed

What?
This economic theory does not rely on communism at all, infact it relies on capitalism.

Communism wouldn't allow private companies near our broadband at all, because it would rely on common ownership (y'know, the commune part of communism?). This is more of an economically centrist policy - uses the competition element of right wing capitalism but refines it to make the taxpayer the owner of the broadband lines allowing for more competition with smaller firms.

This controls for greed more then forcing firms to create their infrastructure would, as you'd end up with an oligopoly and, much like the supermarkets, it'd end in price fixing.

Heinz

Did you miss the word 'another' in that extract you quoted?

brewerdave

shadowspy24 , I believe the levy requires a change in the law so it probably won't be applied until next year, if at all - there is a rapidly building opposition to it -can't see the Scotsman and his elected cohorts wanting another vote loser with an election looming!!Remember its being pushed by Mandelson who is definitely not elected!!!

paperclip4201

Heinz wrote: »

Did you miss the word 'another' in that extract you quoted?

Then that sentence is inane.
And how is this "fine except from greed" at all? It relies on each individual being greedy and competing so in the long run benefiting from the greed.

It is not fine except from greed, it is fine because of greed.

And if my reasoning isn't being likened to communism, then that sentence is as clever as "A tomato is red and is a fruit. A red pepper is also red, both are fine but one is a fruit."

EDIT: It's economic fact, not economic theory. Natural monopolies require government intervention, how is the government gonna interfere if you refuse the tax? The tories seem to be against regulation, why don't you just vote for them?

baldude

paperclip4201 wrote: »

High taxation is what we pay to live in a good state!
Where would you rather lose money? The NHS? Education? Maybe we should have an american style university system or force people to buy health insurance instead?

Have you ever lived in Australia? They tax you less and give you more benefits than here for free.

redux

I think those guys got the railway example a bit too simple

In the case of the improvements on the west coast line, this is built by the private sector, on a budget that more than quadrupled, and the state, even though it wasn't involved in any of the contracts, but got lumbered with Railtrack when it went broke, pays Virgin millions in compensation because the job is years late.

Another case of socialising investment or risk and privatising profits, which is rather what the broadband tax nonsense seems to be about.

Instead of the companies having £5 to £8 difference in tariffs depending on whether there is competition or not in an exchange, like between here and a couple of miles away, the government should compel companies to have more even prices and use this to subsidise rollout in the other areas.

DarkConvict

They made BT give up the landlines for anyone to use, although they have BT OpenReach as the only ones allowed to touch it.

Them had the idea to do a similar thing to cable didn't they? My dad worked for COMTEL as a manager planning the cable, then NTL that took them over. And eventually Virgin media by at which he had retried.

Le73Uq86Uv

Deleted post