|
Sanya12364 Posts
On October 16 2009 03:43 Zavior wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2009 03:30 Too_MuchZerg wrote:
NETIKKA DSL 512/512 27,90 €/month ($41.52)
NETIKKA DSL 1M/512 31,90 €/month ($47.65)
NETIKKA DSL 2M/512 39,90 €/month ($59.59)
NETIKKA DSL 4M/832 43,00 €/month ($64.22)
So its not free those who wonder how much costs 1M connection, where I live.
Of course other companies has different monthly fees. Yeah, it differs quite a bit between ISP's. For example, our 10/10mb connection has a monthly fee of 38€. I'd say Netikka is the most expensive ISP I've heard of 
That's more in line. 38€ for 10/10 is more like it. It could be an expensive (read: sparsely populated area) The inaccessibility and the small client base of such areas could force such prices to get a justification of infrastructure.
|
On October 16 2009 03:43 TanGeng wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2009 03:30 Too_MuchZerg wrote:
NETIKKA DSL 512/512 27,90 €/month ($41.52)
NETIKKA DSL 1M/512 31,90 €/month ($47.65)
NETIKKA DSL 2M/512 39,90 €/month ($59.59)
NETIKKA DSL 4M/832 43,00 €/month ($64.22)
So its not free those who wonder how much costs 1M connection, where I live.
Of course other companies has different monthly fees. How is it so expensive in Finland?? What are the over-subscription ratios of these companies? That's ridiculous even if they declare broadband to be some kind of "right." I can get 30/6 for $60. So do you mind if I just ask? If you still have to pay for broadband, but broadband is some kind of "right," then it's basically the government telling ISPs that they have to service everyone no matter where they live even if they live 50 km away from any other living souls. Is that right? It just sounds like they are setting up a mandate where all the rural areas have to be serviced. My guess is that everyone living in the denser city/suburbs will get to subsidize the really sparsely populated northern half of the country. Gotta be happy about that.
Yes, that is exactly the point of the law.
|
It sounds like the government isn't even spending any money on this
|
Norway28727 Posts
On October 16 2009 03:33 TanGeng wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2009 01:48 Liquid`Drone wrote:On October 16 2009 01:31 Manit0u wrote:On October 16 2009 00:56 Liquid`Drone wrote:
rich people are not troubled by paying 40% instead of 30% of their income in taxes. that is absolute bullshit.
and taxes in scandinavia will _never_ amount to more than your total earnings. Rich people are quite often troubled with this. After all it can make a difference if you earn 600 or 700k after the taxes. No? With higher numbers the disparity is even worse, that's why so many rich people hide their income or try to generate it in "tax heavens". if you make 600k instead of 700k because of taxes you are not troubled by the increase of tax. this notion is what I consider bullshit. I think if you make 40k instead of 50k because of taxes, this is way more troublesome. The rich (read: productive) are quite untroubled by higher taxes. Largely they make the decision to work less. So someone that would have grossed 300k would choose to put in 250k or maybe 200k. Not too much point in working hard if the government just takes most of it away. The highly productive can't hide their work related income in a tax haven. Instead it's the wealthy that seek tax havens. They're investing money and look for good returns - which taxes take a huge chunk out of. This isn't a huge problem that the highly productive work a lot less, is it? All that does is create less employment opportunities and reduce the earning potential of less productive people. That outcome doesn't bother your unemployed at all never mind your 40k per year earner. You might even see all your productive people leave the country! Now there's progress.
this has not happened in scandinavia.. in fact if you look at the numbers you will see that norway sweden and denmark all enjoy some of the lowest unemployment rates in the world, lower than in usa for example (even prior to the financial crisis).
rich people "flagging out"? it has happened, but probably with less than 50 rich norwegians over the past 20 years. it's not a significant problem - and when a rich norwegian merchant a couple months ago threatened with moving to another country to avoid the unbearable norwegian taxes, he even received criticism from other norwegian rich people, whom stated that while they would obviously prefer paying less taxes, they believed in the norwegian model and that it secured wealth, education and stability for the nation and its inhabitants.. even the two right-wing parties in norway, both favouring tax reduction, are strong believers in a mixed economy and do want to maintain the norwegian / scandinavian model.. read as : it works so great that there is no large scale dissent against it - people argue about whether it should be 35 or 33%, but not about whether we should have significant tax-income..
it's not like becoming incredibly wealthy is impossible in norway or sweden or denmark anyway, we have lots of very wealthy people.. and while it is true that people work less hours in scandinavia than in usa, I think this is an incredibly great thing..
|
On October 15 2009 20:34 ShroomyD wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2009 20:30 29 fps wrote:
is it gonna be free? or will you have to pay some broadband tax? nothing provided by the government is ever really free ^^;;
No it's a gift from the rich people, cuz they want to help out!!!
|
The fact that so many people feel triumph at this and joke about moving to Finland brings much sadness to my heart. I wish I could think that all of you guys are trolling, but no. I have to accept the harsh reality that the global economy is getting progressively more socialized, and that this is gaining more and more acceptance in society. Acceptance, perhaps, is an understatement, seeing the feelings of glee and triumph present in this thread.
I feel so helpless, seeing this thread happen. I can only imagine what a young Muslim should think when everybody in the community he is growing up in is crying to commit nonsensical acts of violence. He probably would feel helpless, knowing he can do nothing to stop the tidal wave of evil nonsense that everybody around him is not only accepting but spreading and encouraging.
My objection against glorifying this is threefold. Moral corruption, economic corruption, political corruption.
Moral corruption
3. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
4. No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.
5. Everyone shall have access to 1 mbit of broadband
Doesn't this article five look a little bit odd there? As if, somehow, it seems rather insignificant in comparison to the other rights. Listing it there almost seems a bad joke. It degrades the significance of article three and four. Nobody would take it seriously. The real article five is:
5. No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Fits quite a bit better, wouldn't you say? To call access to broadband a human right is like blasphemy; offensive and insulting because you are making a mockery out of true human rights.
Nevertheless, many a politician has found support for his valiant efforts at socializing his nation's economy in article 25 of the universal declaration of human rights.
25.1. Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
How one would mistake article 25. of the universal declaration of human rights with some kind of entitlement is beyond me, but it is apparently easy. Perhaps evidence of the moral corruption that is spreading through society like a plague.
Because that's what this is really about. Some sense of entitlement. Some misplaced sense of justice. Everyone is entitled to 1 mbit of broadband. And if you don't have it, that is an unjust situation and you have the right to force someone to rectify it. We go from suing for theft to suing for broadband.
How very different is this concept of entitlement from the concept of a right where nobody should interfere with you in your pursuit of happiness. How different from, as in article 25, the right to have nobody interfere with your pursuit of a decent standard of living, food, clothing, medical care, etc.
This is about rectifying some perceived injustice in society by transferring, by force (theft if you will), wealth from hard-working people to those that are without. This is about ideas of long dead revolutionists that everyone is entitled to be at least of average wealth, and that we should use any means necessary to bring this "justice" about.
Whether this goal has your sympathy or not, dare not to confuse enforcing your idealist, socialist society on the population, which is an immense political controversy, with universal human rights that no sensible person could disagree about. Don't ever confuse political efforts with human rights.
|
The reason why Scandinavians work less than USA is because the working force mostly consists of knowledge workers as in we create information and then sell it while USA is more focused on manual working and production labour.
EDIT:
@Phrujbaz wtf are you talking about?
|
Norway28727 Posts
erm, isn't it a very good thing that our society has advanced to the point where we actually take 3, 4 and 5 as so natural and obvious rights that they no longer needs to be in print to be in effect? I mean, lets look at this historically
4000 years ago people essentially had no rights unless they were god-kings or family of such in which case they had whatever right they wanted
then 2700 years ago some people decided that more people should get rights and some laws were codified and stuff, in certain areas of the world you would, if you were a free and armed man, be excepted from slavery. then roughly 150 years ago the western world decided that slavery as a whole was barbaric and inhumane.
ever since then more and more rights have been included advancing our society further and further..
at least in norway, rights now include
right not to have to work more than 37.5 hours a week without being paid overtime
right to pursue higher degree education without having wealthy parents capable of securing you with this
right to marry regardless of your sexual preference
considering internet is integral to being a functioning member of today's society, having access to reasonably high-speed internet is a logical step to make.. there's no point in trying to mock this through pointing out how ridiculous it sounds compared to some of the rights instated 243 years ago - we take hundreds of things today's society guarantee us with for granted, very many of which would have been unthinkable when those rights were formulated on a document..
|
Sanya12364 Posts
Yeah, the US did that with telephone utilities way back in the day - mandating telephone lines in the rural farm areas. Since it was such a loser to service the rural areas, the US federal government gave the company (AT&T) monopoly rights over the rest of the country, so it could regain all the losses in the rural areas by overcharging in the cities. Over time, innovation in telephones stagnated because of the monopoly and lack of competition in long distance carriers. I suppose Finland would like to avoid that model, but I don't see how it's possible.
I guess people living in the cities of Finland should expect to pay more and expect a lot less infrastructure investment since the government has prioritized infrastructure investment to service the rural areas. It's a value judgment.
|
too bad you cant compare US policy to Finnish policy.
|
Sanya12364 Posts
On October 16 2009 04:16 Liquid`Drone wrote:
erm, isn't it a very good thing that our society has advanced to the point where we actually take 3, 4 and 5 as so natural and obvious rights that they no longer needs to be in print to be in effect? I mean, lets look at this historically
4000 years ago people essentially had no rights unless they were god-kings or family of such in which case they had whatever right they wanted
then 2700 years ago some people decided that more people should get rights and some laws were codified and stuff, in certain areas of the world you would, if you were a free and armed man, be excepted from slavery. then roughly 150 years ago the western world decided that slavery as a whole was barbaric and inhumane.
ever since then more and more rights have been included advancing our society further and further..
at least in norway, rights now include
right not to have to work more than 37.5 hours a week without being paid overtime
right to pursue higher degree education without having wealthy parents capable of securing you with this
right to marry regardless of your sexual preference
considering internet is integral to being a functioning member of today's society, having access to reasonably high-speed internet is a logical step to make.. there's no point in trying to mock this through pointing out how ridiculous it sounds compared to some of the rights instated 243 years ago - we take hundreds of things today's society guarantee us with for granted, very many of which would have been unthinkable when those rights were formulated on a document..
I'm pretty sure we're still working on life, liberty, and due process. I'm also quite sure we're trying to stamp out human slavery, and still not even close to ending torture, cruel, inhuman punishment.
As for slavery, that was one of the lasting Greek and Roman contributions to western society. It was largely abolished during the Middle Ages and largely not present in tribal France, Germany, and Great Britain. Life was more dangerous and nasty than it is now, but those "barbarian" tribes were far more civilized than Rome ever was after the late Republic. The fall of Rome was the best thing that ever happened to the people of Europe. Slavery was unfortunately rediscovered in Africa.
I also don't get this comparison with the US. I guess US is suppose to be a beacon of free markets but it's not. It's hardly true. The US is a terrible place for free marketeers and its leaders are obsessed with their military tradition - US is better characterized by War Socialism. The place to look to for free markets are all in Asia - Singapore and Hong Kong.
|
isnt signapore and hong kong just financial hubs of the east? completly attached to how markets around the world are doing? free or not free. and wasnt the fall of rome the beginning of the dark ages? good times? wtf are u talking about : /
|
Norway28727 Posts
oh I think worldwide those rights are not even remotely close to being fulfilled.. but in scandinavia I think they are all established, and to such a degree where it is not ridiculous for finland to name broadband internet as a right.
as for the reference to the bill of rights I made, that was a temporary brainfart and you may ignore it. I wasn't trying to imply anything about usa anyway. and while europe had largely abolished slavery and serfdom during the middle ages, slave-trade wasn't abolished until the 1800s. to me that sounds like they realized that slaves weren't beneficial to a society as a whole but they saw few moral qualms in trading with them. 
edit: while I agree that USA is a mixed economy just like the scandinavian countries, just to a different degree, and that usa should thus not be used as an arguement either for nor against libertarianism, and while I absolutely agree that usa has focused far too much on war ever since she became powerful enough to be an international voice, american politics cannot ever be defined as socialism.
|
Securing cheap internet for the whole population is a must for sparsely populated countries, such as the Scandinavian ones. It allows for development and cost reduction in many other fields, and also enables people to live in more sparsely populated areas.
Anyhow, shouldnt 100 mbit wireless internet throughout the whole country be standard in the year 2015? I mean, its the future.
|
i could think of a lot more useful things to make a legal right than internet. this sounds like something you do when you have too much time on your hands. get a job finland.
|
I'm really shocked that there are people wo think this is a bad thing... REALLY shocked...
|
Sanya12364 Posts
On October 16 2009 05:02 uiCk wrote:
isnt signapore and hong kong just financial hubs of the east? completly attached to how markets around the world are doing? free or not free. and wasnt the fall of rome the beginning of the dark ages? good times? wtf are u talking about : /
Off topic, but Dark Ages for who? For slave owners, monks, and scholars who could afford to live off the labour of others or for the average individual whose position on average was equivalent to a slave or had a short lifespan serving as a conscript in the Roman army.
While the Darks Ages were dark times for the educated and saw the disappearance of a the idle and elitist upper class, for the median individual and the lot of the lower class peasant, times were good. If you compared the lot of the slaves or the army conscripts (slaves to the army), the serfs of the Dark Ages were far better off. The Roman Empire was built on oppression. So the more egalitarian spirit of the Dark Ages should be welcomed as one of the great advancement in human rights and humanity.
|
On October 15 2009 20:24 Integra wrote:
Granted, Finland's population is more like a very large city than a country as big as the U.S. There are 5.3 million people residing in Finland, mostly in the south. This would place the country about 30th in the ranking of world cities by population, but it still makes it bigger than any U.S. city save New York. Which begs the question - if Finland can do this, why can't more major U.S. cities?
I believe it is because of the national debt of $130 trillion? Come on that HAS to have some kind of effect on the US's biggest cities!
|
On October 16 2009 05:28 mahnini wrote:
i could think of a lot more useful things to make a legal right than internet. this sounds like something you do when you have too much time on your hands. get a job finland.
Finland is well placed in many international comparisons of national performance such as the share of high-technology manufacturing and health care.[8] The country is ranked 3rd in the 2008 Legatum Prosperity rating, which is based on economical performance and quality of life.[9] - wiki finland
|
Rights beget obligations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
