On 11-3-2010 19:19, Warp wrote:
> Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> PS. In theory if you don't own a TV you don't have to pay for a TV 
>> license. In reality, *everybody* has to pay. If you so much as own a 
>> toaster which contains a CPU with is hypothetically powerful enough to 
>> run a TCP/IP stack, they will argue that you could mod your toaster to 
>> watch TV, so you need a TV license.
> 
>   That's nothing. In Finland they are passing a law that every single
> household has to pay for TV. Yes, even people who don't own any kind of
> TV nor computer and are blind and deaf at the same time.

We used to have a license system here too.
At some point in time they realized that the number of people that did 
not watch TV or listen to radio was getting very small. Keeping the 
whole system with separate TV and radio licenses and a special 'police' 
force that could track down violators was not very cost effective. A 
cheaper, but perhaps not as fair, system was just let everybody pay. 
That would result in the Finnish system.
But... Effectively this becomes a sort of tax in this way. Hence some 
bright politicians made sure the system was indeed converted to a system 
paid from tax money in stead of from licences (while slightly increasing 
tax).

>   And yes, every household pays a fixed sum. That means that if you live
> alone you will be, effectively paying double than your neighbor who is
> living with his/her spouse (at least if both of them have a job).
> 
>   Also if we proportionate the fixed sum to your yearly income, it means
> that the poorer you are, the more you have to pay relative to your income.
> For some people this can be a rather large sum of money.

Tax also solves that.

Which leaves the me wondering if the Finnish politicians are not 
thinking the problem through or if there are other reasons for them to 
support the obviously wrong solution?

Post a reply to this message