I'm not familiar with how things work in Canada. Who provides Internet service? Is it a for profit company, gov't utility, ??? If costs are going up to provide the necessary bandwidth for increasing Internet usage who do you think should pay for this if not the consumer of that service?

It's ALL internet companys in Canada will be doing this. Doesn't matter who you go with, your monthly usage will drop dramatically, and then they will charge you per whatchamacallit if you go over that amount.

If Canadians don't sign this petition, our rates will go up drastically! I don't understand why one Canadian here hasn't reponded by saying they've signed this. Without signatures, we have nothing to fight this with.

Don't kid yourself. That happens in the US too but probably not for everyone. I do know people who get charged extra for going over a certain amount. I know that I would get charged if I went over a certain amount. I'm not sure what that amount is because there's only two of us here. I would imagine that if I had lots of gadgets and lots of people in my household, we would go over our usage.

And then when the usage goes WAY down because of the fees, the companies will increase the rates anyway to make their money. My mom's electric company did this recently (Wisconsin)--they hounded everyone to decrease their electric usage and to use curly bulbs and LED lights. When the electrical usage went down, the utility raised their base rates to make up the difference. Ugh.

debby_ab,

I am Canadian and have signed this petition and shared with my fb friends.

I agree..it's very important we take a stand.

I have satellite internet. That is my only option. When I go above my FAP (Fair access policy) amount, it practically comes to a standstill. Takes forever for it to drop down enough to start using it again. We watch our bandwidth usage pretty carefully.

I pay 4x more than most people with a high speed connection in a more urban area - and I get far less for my $. I could NEVER get movies from NetFlix, etc.

I hope that the policy doesnt' come to fruition in Canada - that sounds terrible!

Another Canadian here! I signed and shared on FB

I wonder how they would charge, by activity, or your computer being online even if you are not using it. I have cable and am always on line except when I shut it down at bedtime.

In reading the article below, it doesn't sound so bad and it could even lower bills for the users who would not need bigger packages.

From the link below:

For example, in Ontario, Rogers charges customers of its $59.99 a month Hi-Speed Extreme plan who go over their 80 GB a month limit $1.50 per GB for a maximum of $50.
so it sounds like 'extreme users' would be paying a max of $109.99 a month for unlimited use. As slow as my speed is (200-500 kbps) there is no way I could ever use 80 GB.

I guess it could be compared to the usage plans for cell phones...a lot of folks 'opt' for the unlimited plans, though they are more costly, because they are extremely heavy users.

Here is a link that might be useful: CRTC's internet billing decision appealed

I pay $60 a month and have a 5 GB limit, thru my cell phone carrier. After that, it's $1.00 for every 4 mg. So to get 80 GB for $60 sounds like a real deal, to me.

Since we live in the woods, it's either that or satellite.

I have cox cable slowest speed internet, it's plenty fast for me. I was paying $38, so almost half. I would never cancel my internet, that would be like withdrawing from the world for me. I would cancel my cable TV. I watch some of the NCIS type shows and that's all, no news, nothing else. I can buy those and watch them over and over. I wouldn't miss it at all until there was an event like the buried miners. I would have to see it on a reg network.

We have a good cable company and good phone company. They have talked about putting a charge on Internet use, but so far our politicians have voted this down. Some of you mentioned there are fees involved which does surprise me as it was my understanding there are no fees to be charged on Internet service. But if you have to go to a satellite, that may be different. We need to watch the Canadians because if they push it thru, we will be next, but could get charged if we go outside the US. I know when I order stamps from Canada I get a service charge from my credit card company.
Just contact your representatives to find out about any bills, either by themselves or tacked on to another bill.

Just in:

Our Prime Minister has called for a review of 'Internet Billing'.

Our petition has done some good it seems.

Stayed tuned.

Remember the old days, when all that went over phone lines were phone calls?

At maybe 10 min. per ... and occasionally possibly up to an hour.

Now, for those using phone lines, often people tie up the line for ... maybe 4 hours ... maybe 6 hours ... (half a day?) at a time.

Which means that the phone company has to provide lines for huge increases in traffic.

I've heard that they have machines that allow a dozen ... possibly dozens ... of phone calls to be using the same line at the same time.

And that's for voice usage ... if one is using the lines for graphics, huge increases in bandwidth are required.

Should the phone co. be required to offer those huge increases ... at the same rates as they charged when usage was so much less?

It is my understanding that folks who only make small use of the lines will be charged similar rates to earlier ones, and even folks who use quite a lot more than earlier on each line as they used in earlier times won't be paying more.

But if folks want to use 100, or 1,000 ... or 10,000 or 100,000 times that amount, shouldn't they expect to pay a graduated tariff, depending on usage?

And ...

... that's just for telephone lines.

It's my understanding that the fibre optic lines that bring the TV signal into city homes, apt. buildings, etc. ... and is used for internet for folks who choose to use that link ... are in most cases owned by the cable TV companies. It's my understanding that Rogers owns a large proportion (if not all) of the lines that they use.

Which should be another kettle of fish, shouldn't it?

And I didn't get into the discussion about cell phones and towers, at all.

Or satellite.

ole joyful ... who's used his phone for only voice for months (and not a lot of that ... and don't you blatherskites make noises about his loquacity, O.K.?) ...

... and when he used it for internet, it was almost always for text: downloading graphics took too darn long! And a movie?? Forget that!!! I don't even know if that were possible, several miles from the city, at the end of a copper line.

P.S. May be a good idea for some of you to buy some Rogers' shares?? Bell's? Telus? (Alberta and elsewhere)You could buy Manitoba, it's private ... but not Saskatchewan - it ain't.

o j

I too am on the internet 24/7 and can't imagine not being able to leave it on so I can hear any email's coming in. It was especially important when I ran my own design business from home. I used baby monitors around the house so I could hear the email come in any time day or night.

When you think about it though, if the Government was in charge of being the gatekeeper of the internet and charged, we'd probably be able to pay off the national debt in no time. :-)

Jodi-

They want to drop the amount we're allowed to use to next to nothing. Downloading your Windows updates could kill your monthly limit. As for lowering what we pay, not on your life.

Canadians use the internet more than any other country in the world. We download movies, music, software, you name it. I know some people who don't have cable. They watch all their tv online.

Watching a movie or two on Netflix can bring us over our monthly limit. Downloading music that I pay for on iTunes could kill my limit.

I'm sick and tired of the government taking my money. We pay way too much for taxes to begin with. We're taxed up the ying yang for everything. Enviro taxes on all drinking bottles (water, juice, milk, pop, etc.). Taxes on toilet paper. It's not considered a necessity???? I lose a good portion of my paycheque to taxes every 2 weeks. I get 'free' health care, but try to find something that the 'free' health care covers! I pay for eye exams. A friend has to pay to get her ingrown toenails removed.

We pay way more than Americans for cell phone use. Now they want us to pay more to use the internet????

The prime minister is now getting involved. I'm glad to hear he's doing something. I'm not a fan of Harper, but he could be on my good books if he helps.

I guess I take for granted that folks pay for what they use? My blackberry has unlimited access to internet, phone, emails and text but I pay dearly for that, nearly $150/month. My internet is bundled with our cable television and two phone lines that costs us over $200 a month. In addition we pay for our netflix and any movies that we rent.

So those that watch all their tv online without paying for cable or a satellite feed and those who choose to use their computers for phones are getting a free ride, that doesn't seem quite fair to me. Someone, somewhere had to pay to provide those services and it seems to me that someone, somewhere along the line (like me!) is paying for it.

Or am I missing something?

Someone, somewhere had to pay to provide those services

Then why doesn't the government force them to charge people to use that service, rather than cut my bandwidth time to next to nothing then charge me when I go over? That would include charging more for Netflix. Really, think about it. $8 a month for unlimited tv and movies? May as well be free. Youtube would have to charge. Download a form of a website. Pay for it. Download your windows updates: pay for it. You use a lot more than you think, every single day. Uploading pictures to photobucket/flickr or another photo storage site. Photobucket is free. Right? I pay $29US per year for Flickr.

If this goes through, I see a lot of people cancelling their internet. I would, but need it to update Adobe, windows and my iPhone.

Then why doesn't the government force them to charge people to use that service, rather than cut my bandwidth time to next to nothing then charge me when I go over?

What am I missing here? Isn't that exactly what they're doing? LOL They're charging to use the internet. They're charging by bandwidth and somehow volume based seems reasonably fair to me. Should not someone upgrading 10 computers pay more than someone with only one? I'm not following your argument. Are you suggesting they charge each person going to each website? That's the proposal from my understanding of what's being said here.

I don't think you're getting your point across very clearly at least. Apparently I'm not the only one confused here. Perhaps if you gave some links to *credible* sources for info on it that would explain what the issues are it'd be more likely to elicit compassion rather than just saying "Google it". Which action would waste a lot more bandwidth, an compound things further now wouldn't it? ;)

I just upgraded my service because I watch some movies and things that they consider in excess of normal usage. Although I don't think my use was that excessive, I also don't see a big problem there, but I admit don't like it. I don't like paying more, but I'm pragmatic. And yes, I pay a lot of taxes too and I have to support others' kids, unemployed, roads on which I'll never drive, security for people I don't like, support people who are too stupid or lazy to leave when they're warned there's a storm-a-comin', build stadiums for millionbillionaires, and on and on.

But in any case, hope your petition works. I think it's a rarity if it does though.

Not the people using the internet, silly! Youtube should charge. Television sites should charge. Not you and me.

Your cell phone bill. Let's talk about that as an example. You have UNLIMITED use of the internet, emails and texting. Right? Now see how much you use your cell phone each month. I am allowed to use 500 mb. I have 3 days left in this cycle and I've used 365.1 mb. That's off my data plan when I am not near an open wifi area. With this new CRTC ruling, I would only be allowed 25mb! And would have to pay 'about' $1.75 per mb over my cell phone usage. What would your bill be then? Mine would be $595. Over and above my cell phone bill! And I really don't do much on my cell phone. I surf the net on my lunch break at work. I rarely use it for actual phone calls. If you think this ruling won't affect every single person you're wrong. you do a lot more on the internet than you think. Just typing one post here requires you to read the original page. Next page, type your post. Next page approve the post. Next page either read it in the tread or go to the main page. That's 4 clicks. Each click goes against you as bandwidth. Each email is bandwidth. You know all that spam you get and don't want? you'll be paying for it as it downloads. You didn't even ask for it. People who send you pictures and videos in emails? Yup, YOU will pay for that too. Lord help you if they don't shrink those pictures. May as well take out a loan.

You want links? Just google CRTC User Usage Billing and see it on the MANY news sites.

see all those fancy ads this website uses that use Flash? They use extra bandwidth. Guess who will pay for that? In this time people being out of work, trying to find jobs, having a hard time making ends meet, yet having to have the internet to do anything, adding this extra burden is wrong. Don't we get billed up the ying yang for everything enough?

In my home, we have 4 computers, the PS3, the Wii, Netflix, use youtube, upload to Flickr, download updates on all our computers, plus my Adobe program,
I'm curious as to what you have to pay for internet now, using all those things.

Did you read my post above at 12:01...where there would be a max ($50.00) that could be charged for Unlimited usage just as there is a higher price for unlimited cell phone plans?

debby_ab - I saw the news article on metering Internet usage in Canada (I live in Toronto). I finished reading one article and then went back to read it and it was gone. I know what you mean about being taxed to death - and since I live in Ontario we have the HST - so prices of so many things have gone up - natural gas, dog's grooming -you name it and not just due to HST, base prices as well. We do not have one single tax deduction that we can take either. My husband has to have very expensive eye tests every 3 months - OHIP won't pay for them and either will his office plan. Many people can't get family doctors - but still have to pay the taxes that fund OHIP. Canada apparently has the highest rates for Internet/Cable/Phone etc. in the world. Two months ago we were offered a 20% reduction in our monthly bill if we agreed to stay with Rogers for the next 12 months. I asked the fellow if a lot of people were giving up cable due to the high cost and aging population and he said "yes" - with the pension situation and the horrible economic environment people can't afford the increasing costs. I remember when there were 2 types of Internet billing - 15 hours a month and then you had to pay extra - or Hi-Speed - unlimited usage. We had Hi-Speed and still do but now we are second from the bottom on the "Hi-Speed list. We do not have Rogers phone service or cell phones. We have 2 TV's - one has just basic cable. The upstairs TV has a modem that we rent and of course our Internet. Our bill is about $150 per month just for the cable, modem and Internet. So then we have to add in our Bell phone bill which is around $55 a month before any LD charges - and the only extra we have is the answering machine function - no call waiting - zip. I remember when you just paid for the time used on a phone - but then I am 60. It doesn't help that most of the shows on TV are things that I refuse to watch. I have yet to watch a "reality" show of any form; I don't like sports; don't want to watch awards shows and I don't find today's sitcoms funny - guess I am too old and remember when sitcoms were funny. That leaves me with very little. I do like the British crime dramas. Basically I watch Chuck, House, NCIS, The Good Wife and a couple of other similar shows. We do not have Rogers On Demand or anything like that. I hate that we have so many so-called "speciality" channels shoved down our throats that contribute to our basic cable rates. Last week we received a letter advising of an increase in cable rates due to additional programming (that I don't want) and sorry to say it but I hate most Cdn. programming - but if we were "enjoying" a special rate that would be honoured. But of course, the monthly rate for our modem rental is going UP! A lot of people are now just either buying DVDs of shows they like or renting them as they become available or doing something fancy with gizmos that allow them to download. The DVDs available at the librairies near me are pretty old. In the U.S. you can get much better deals. I am laughing at how excited people are that Target is coming to Canada - the prices will be much higher and the merchandise probably not the same. You are right - Canadians don't make waves and I don't think it would matter if we did. Oh, and I don't use FaceBook - and I don't play music on my computer either.

"In my home, we have 4 computers, the PS3, the Wii, Netflix, use youtube, upload to Flickr, download updates on all our computers, plus my Adobe program,

I'm curious as to what you have to pay for internet now, using all those things."

Right now, my internet/phone/cable are bundled through Shaw for $190 a month. I often wonder why we have every single channel that's available because most nights, there's nothing good on tv.

Our two cell phones together come to $160 a month. I have phone/unlimited texting/500mb data/internet and I'm sure there more....

Quote from the link posted below:

"Beyond the provincial cap, the government is now forcing TPIA providers in to charge internet users a Usage Based premium for any usage beyond the 25GB cap. Beginning March 1st, TPIA customers who exceed their cap will be required to pay $2.00/GB to a maximum of $60.00/month for any additional usage up to 300 GB per month. Usage in excess of 300GB per month will be charged a further $1.10/GB. Usage plans where consumers can purchase blocks of additional date will be offered. The current rate will $5/month for an additional 40GB.

Here is a link that might be useful: CRTC ruling and how much they'll charge you extra

SIGN, SIGN, SIGN!
SHAME! The Internet Service in Canada is ages behind other countries - speed and accessibility, contracts etc.
DON'T WAIT! SIGN AND DEMAND BETTER SERVICE!

"They want to drop the amount we're allowed to use to next to nothing. Downloading your Windows updates could kill your monthly limit."

Are you serious on this? Or did you put it in just
for effect?

Widows updates! -- takes a couple of minutes at most,
usually only seconds -- for me. Sorry, I don't
get this, I guess.

Molly, download your emails. Check out a few videos on youtube. Check out your websites. Then Windows has an update. It could be enough to put you over your minimum allowed. It was not added for drama. Some updates take more than a few minutes too. I don't think a lot of people realize how much bandwidth they actually use every month. I know with Shaw internet, you can go to your online account and find out.

IMO, if they charge user fees for the internet, they should charge user fee's for tv. I watch maybe 20 hours of tv a month. I only like certain shows. But to watch those shows, I have to have the full kit and caboodle and I'm paying for channels and shows I don't want. Yet I pay them. Fair? No. Also, if they charge UBB for the internet it should be the same for telephones. (not cell phones, we already pretty much pay user fees for them) I don't talk on my house line at all. I'm really not sure why I have a house line to be honest. LOL Some people talk on their phones 24/7. I rarely if ever talk on mine. I pay the same as the next person for my phone. Why?

If you live in Canada and watch the news, I'm sure you've seen how people are up in arms over the CRTC decision. Even all of the political parties are saying it's a crock and should be over turned.

LOL and my cell bill is $8 to $10 a month and I have a back up of 2,500 minutes.

Every day I think about giving up cable TV. Even going to basic I would save $35 a month. TV is not worth watching. I went almost 2 years just watching maybe 6 hours a week for cable TV and I pay $49 a month for it. If Criminal Minds and NCIS went off the air, I wouldn't watch any TV. I have several TV series like Stargate, Reba and many others that I prefer to watch over and over than watching TV.

Debby are you confusing MB and GB?

I feel the pain, though. We in the US are taxed to bits. Taxes on paychecks (when you can get one), taxes on what you buy, taxes on what you use, taxes on what you have (property taxes). If its not taxed, it's fees, licenses, etc.
When DH lost his job we cut back cable to 2nd tier (considered basic, but cable no longer offers the prime channels only basic), which is abt 50 channels but no movies channels. It dropped the fee to 45.00; which cable company promptly passed a $5.00 increase - guess everyone else was dropping down also, plus taxes, franchise fees, etc.

Our landline would be $9 if it weren't for government and state taxes and fees, and other various expenses which takes it up to $27. We don't have caller ID or any other service. we also use a different LD service.

We have unlimited usage on the computer, through our landline service. It is $30 a month plus taxes and fees.

cali

It's going to happen here as well. Verizon is talking about throttling down speeds for the top 5% of the bandwidth "hogs".

This is all being triggered by streaming, particularily movies and music, and it will only get worse as more and more people download instead of rent films. The carrier argues that people who do heavy downloading pull the network performance down for everyone...if they were to keep high levels of service for every user they can either slow down the bandwidth hogs or install more infrastructure (which costs money and who do you think will pay for that?)

"Verizon announced on Thursday, the first day for which it is accepting pre-orders for the iPhone 4, that it will begin throttling the wireless bandwidth of its most active users in order to preserve decent data speeds for everyone else -- the same way AT&T had to do when data-hungry iPhone users clogged its pipes.

Verizon's announcement warns heavy data users that they'll see big slowdowns for the remainder of any month, and the following month, in which if they use their iPhones or other smartphones too much:

"Verizon Wireless strives to provide customers the best experience when using our network, a shared resource among tens of millions of customers. To help achieve this, if you use an extraordinary amount of data and fall within the top five percent of Verizon Wireless data users we may reduce your data throughput speeds periodically for the remainder of your then current and immediately following billing cycle to ensure high quality network performance for other users at locations and times of peak demand....

Regardless, iPhone users install more apps than other smartphone users, as a Neilsen study showed, if only because so many more of them are available, and many of those apps -- especially the music ones -- use lots of wireless data."

I'm not all that surprised. There is no reason to think that users are entitled to unlimited everything that someone else should pay for.

Here is a link that might be useful: Throttling Bandwidth

Not the people using the internet, silly! Youtube should charge. Television sites should charge.

And then what? How are those websites going to apportion the revenue they collect back to the carriers that provided the bandwidth to get you there?

The cost is in the transportation, not the destination.

How are those websites going to apportion the revenue they collect back to the carriers that provided the bandwidth to get you there?

H*ll if I know. LOL I just know I'm one of close to half a million Canadians who signed one of the petitions that was sent to the CRTC. Shaw cable (my ISP) has put off UBB until people can give their 2 cents worth right to them.

The cap will be 25GB. I use more than that per month. Small business owners use more than that. Students use more than that. Funny how this only became an idea to Shaw, Rogers and Telus when Netflix came to Canada.....

Here in the US, most of us pay a fixed fee for internet access. The fee varies depending on the ISP (internet Service Provider) and the type of service one purchases. Everyone is seeking faster service than dial-up (and affordable). Fees range from $10 to $50 US per month or more.

Of late, there have been rumblings that the US custoner may see a change in the rate structure. Aa of now, the fee is fixed, but as more customers go on-line and more people begin downloading music files and movies, and the graphic content of web pages are increasing, the internet traffic has started to swamp the servers. Providers are saying, "Why should the average user be handicapped by a bandwidth hog? And why should we bear the brunt of proving extra gear to handle the load? Let's charge an extra fee to the high bit-traffic user, or limit the quantity of bits per user." Some day soon, the ISPs may get their way. Their argument is stong.

I signed too.

How do I know what my bandwidth use actually is?

Mush, when I questioned my IT guys they told me that I would need to download a meter to track it. They can be found online for free. They recommended CNET as one.

Here is a link that might be useful: CNET Widget

We don't like the CRTC in this house. Not at all.

25 GB is equal to 25600 MB

How do I know what my bandwidth use actually is?
I'm not positive, but I 'think' the link lynn_d provided will just monitor the speed and not the actual bandwidth usage.

Because I have been contemplating 'maybe' switching to another (faster) ISP, I'm needing to know just what my actual usage is, so have asked about it at Computer Help.

For anyone who might be interested in a program that will let you know how much bandwidth you are actually using, here is a link to my thread there.

Good, safe, free internet usage monitor?
I really should have specified Bandwidth usage as opposed to internet usage, which would just be time spent on the net.

Actually that is not correct, chemocurl, tho there is a widget that will do that if that is all you wish.

Actually that is not correct, chemocurl, tho there is a widget that will do that if that is all you wish.
I'm sorry, but what isn't correct? What does that cnet widget monitor?

Might you have the widget handy that will measure bandwidth usage?

I ended up downloading AnalogX Netstat Live and it seems to be able to do what I want. It gives incoming and outgoing totals since reboot, and for the month, and for last month....once I have run it long enough.

This is like the usage of a highway, more or less.

They don't need a superhighway with a dozen lanes out in the boondocks like they do in (and near) New York, Toronto, Chicago or L A.

It costs many dollars to build a superhighway. Let alone the maintenance.

Shouldn't the people who live in and near the cities pay more to build and maintain those superhighways than the residents of the boonies?

When you consider the amount of line that was needed for talking on the phone, for a short while, years ago, and the huge amounts that's needed to carry all of the voices and data plus, majorly, graphics (and a whole lot more when the graphics are continuous, like in movies) there have been huge amounts of increases in capacity required to handle all of that traffic.

Those who require large amounts of bandwidth have been complaining because the carriers slowed them down, i.e., allowed folks using smaller amounts of bandwidth a measure of priority, with the large users' messages being crammed into empty spaces ... which appeared less frequently, as usage increased.

The providers oof the bandwidth, i.e., owners of the wirelines and fibre-optic cables, began charging their direct customers a surcharge when they used huge amounts of bandwwidth.

Many of the Internet Sevice Providers rent usage of the lines from the owners, at wholesale rates.

Many of those ISPs offered unlimited usage to their clients, at fairly low fees - I'm not sure whether there were graduated fees depending on usage.

Now the owners of the lines are saying that if the independent ISPs are using their lines, they should be paying more for that usage than the low rates that they have been, up till now.

Also ... the extra fees are not to go to the government, but to the owners of the lines, as I understand it.

If you used to rent a car from me, but now want to haul a lot more stuff and come back to tell me that I should let you use a huge truck for the same fee ...

... what answer should I give you?

The regulator said that the independent ISPs should charge more to their users who used large quantities of bandwidth ... and the huge howl went up.

It would be simpler for them to allow the owners of the lines to increase the rates that they can charge the independent ISPs for their usage of their lines ...

... then, if the independent ISPs wanted to continue to allow their users unlimited usage for a low rate ...

... they'd go broke.

I doubt whether many of them would allow that to happen ... so what would they do?

Charge their customers graduated amounts, dependent on the usage which they chose to use.

Seems to me that it's more or less a case of ... you want the large usage - you pay the freight.

ole joyful

Your cell phone bill. Let's talk about that as an example. You have UNLIMITED use of the internet, emails and texting. Right?
Wrong. I pay per minute! LOL The more I use, the more I pay. And FWIW, my cell bill runs $2-$10/month. I have prepaid and currently have 240 minutes available and need to add time next month.

And there you go again... "google it"! LOL This thread is the one getting "silly"! Sheesh.

Joyful, I certainly agree with your basic premise on the highway analogy but that brings up another issue: Should not the "boonies" pay for their highways, phone lines, electric lines and maintenance and not the city folk? Higher populated areas subsidize the boonies. Go back to Rural Electrification project where the rural areas were first brought electricity. The cost was borne by the "richer" city dwellers since the cost per person in the rural areas were prohibitive to the people there if they were required to pay their own way. Not unlike hurricane Katrina, Rita and the like. Those costs were borne by the country as a whole rather than making the people pay their way there. That's not right. Local Government Aid (LGA) distributes state monies to different areas, smaller areas get a benefit at the cost of the bigger areas. Does a city person get a benefit from the boonies having electricity, telephone, cable TV or the like? Seldom.

There's no doubt that there's inequities in billings. I get charged basically the same for garbage/recycling/refuse as the Octowench would. I don't put my garbage can out every week. Is that fair? No, but practicality dictates that there's not going to be a fair way. They average it out to save money in other ways. People without kids in school should not have to pay school taxes if you want to be fair, but the ones with the families have controlled politics to give themselves that benefit. Most people have a certain level they reach on usage of many things, whether phone, internet, garbage, sewer or the like so to make things easier, appease the masses and the like, they average it out and the unrecognized minorities wind up paying more.

At the farm, I have to pay ditch tax. My property does not benefit from the ditch. Why should I have to pay it? Because the ones who benefit cry and rationalize it that everyone should pay... and then say "google it!" ;)

Should I pay the same vehicle license fees as someone who drives 10 times what I do? Is that fair? Again, practicality ease come into play.

I get no benefit from a sports stadium. Should I have to pay for it? I could go on and on but won't. I'm just amused to see that the power of prayer is taking second place (or further down) to the power of petition now! :D

E pluribus taxem, eh?