-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 02:56:21PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Wednesday 12 August 2015 14:04:37 marti...@suddenlink.net wrote: > > Now think, for a second how much money it costs to outfit > > a van [...]
> They have a much simpler solution. They barely bother with the vans (they > exist, I believe, though I have never seen one). They see a house. They see > an electoral register. They assume a television. They check for a licence. > No licence? They assume criminality. And start bullying. Over here in Germany, they found a better solution: if you have a compuer and an Internet connection, you technically have a TV set. Since everyone has this, every household has to pay up (yes, they relaxed things to per-household, except for commercial entities, where it gets complicated). To me, it's just a thinly veiled way of moving things to a flat-tax scheme, for the benefit of the rich (yes, I know about the official rationale) - -- t -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlXLWS0ACgkQBcgs9XrR2kafkQCdGuoN26WCviuDOqFeoczFbbgv U3kAn1uhqE8w6z4K7gtHNoDEaatjeIkV =tJWP -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----