Quantcast
  1. Welcome to Bantam Talk

    Why not register for an account?

    Not only can you then get fully involved in the community but you also get fewer ads

  2. Premium Membership now Available


    Please see this thread for more details

    Dismiss Notice

Election 2019 (with Prediction Poll)

Discussion in 'General Chat' started by Tony Wilkinson, Oct 31, 2019.

?

What is the outcome of the 2019 election going to be?

Poll closed Dec 13, 2019.
  1. Tory Majority outright

    15 vote(s)
    42.9%
  2. Labour Majority outright

    2 vote(s)
    5.7%
  3. Tory Minority Government

    10 vote(s)
    28.6%
  4. Labour Minority Government

    1 vote(s)
    2.9%
  5. Government of national unity

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  6. Anarchy in the UK

    7 vote(s)
    20.0%
  1. Dionysus

    Dionysus Fringe Player

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2018
    Messages:
    378
    Likes Received:
    292
    At the end of the day, most of us will come down on the side either in favour of private enterprise or state run provision. Those at either side will be unable to be persuaded that this is a good or a bad thing.

    There are unquestionably benefits and drawbacks of either approach.

    Personally, I think that there’s definitely a way that this could work and work really well. The UK public, especially those who have experienced public ownership first hand, are sceptical of allowing the state to run things (and with reason).

    State run corporations don’t have to be run this way though. The NHS is a prime example of an organisation that could use bottom up planning through big data and allocate resources significantly more efficiently (just like big corporations like Amazon already do). Top down central governance led to the ruin of state run enterprise before, but a new model is possible and doesn’t have to follow the same script.

    I recently read a really interesting book on this called People’s Republic of Walmart, which talks in detail about this, the inefficiencies of the current Hayek based capitalist model and the failures of previous planned economies. The innovation argument I think is a slight red herring. Private enterprise will always continue to exist, but if you look at an iPhone for instance, most of the components that make it work are a state led innovation. GPS, internet, touch screens, battery technology - all state led innovation and without which the private companies who utilise this technology would wither.
     
    Amber likes this.
  2. BradfordBanter

    BradfordBanter Squad Player

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2018
    Messages:
    1,988
    Likes Received:
    3,116
    Do you think service that would be offered by the government would outperform what is being offered by numerous companies in a hugely competitive market? I'd hazard a guess that it'd be very poor, but in this day and age is the sacrifice of terrible broadband which the modern world now relies on even worth the saving?
     
  3. Amber

    Amber Future Prospect

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2018
    Messages:
    106
    Likes Received:
    54
    The coverage in the UK currently isn't very good at all, though. Only 7% of households have full-fibre coverage, which is miles behind most developed countries. Especially not in rural areas, as there's no profit motive to supply those areas so as usual they get neglected by profit orientated companies. The Labour proposal actually aims to prioritise rural areas, which would be potentially completely transformative.
     
  4. BradfordBanter

    BradfordBanter Squad Player

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2018
    Messages:
    1,988
    Likes Received:
    3,116
    It's at 8% and growing every year, with full coverage by 2033. What could labour as a party do to accelerate that? Do you not think to provide every home and business free broadband is a ridiculous thought when you look at the costs and resources behind that? I genuinely can't get my head round how that could ever be provided.
     
    Idlebantam likes this.
  5. Dionysus

    Dionysus Fringe Player

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2018
    Messages:
    378
    Likes Received:
    292
    There’s an obvious cost on infrastructure, but merely by removing the market competition, you take away a large proportion of ongoing expense. Broadband providers throw huge sums of the money you give them every month effectively just trying to keep you and recruit other users from other providers.

    As for how they accelerate the development, it can hardly be argued that we’ve been especially expedient to date. Like the roads, there’s an argument to suggest that it’s a national good that relies on state funding anyway. Bringing it in house just provides an additional lever of control.
     
  6. trevor

    trevor Squad Player
    P.L.22/23 Entrant Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2018
    Messages:
    5,844
    Likes Received:
    7,655
    The 5g network ( Japan is on 7G ) will potentially be faster than full fibre, in some cases twice as fast, Why build a network that will be out of date before it is finished?
     
    #306 trevor, Nov 15, 2019
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2019
    Bronco likes this.
  7. trevor

    trevor Squad Player
    P.L.22/23 Entrant Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2018
    Messages:
    5,844
    Likes Received:
    7,655
    Most business users are already on full fibre or the lower normal fibre which is fast enough for most business users, Why spend up to £100 billion bringing it to normal households who do not need it and are happy with normal fibre,
     
  8. BradfordBanter

    BradfordBanter Squad Player

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2018
    Messages:
    1,988
    Likes Received:
    3,116
    Where do we pull the funds to take over the existing infrastructures that have been installed and maintained by providers? I just don't think monopoly is good in any industry, it lacks competition.

    Surely the huge sums thrown at retention isn't all bad, the money thrown at R&D and customer facing programs to make servicing a customers account easier is just as fundamental to the connections they install.

    What I would be interested in reading is any examples of a whole industry which is essentially what we are talking about here, that has been nationalised and has worked to a country's benefit and been sustainable?
     
  9. trevor

    trevor Squad Player
    P.L.22/23 Entrant Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2018
    Messages:
    5,844
    Likes Received:
    7,655
    No country has a nationalised ( Not state controlled ) Broadband service, Some have tried and failed at a cost of Billions,
    The last Labour government nearly bankrupt the country causing huge Austerity, This lot are going to finish the job,
     
  10. BradfordBanter

    BradfordBanter Squad Player

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2018
    Messages:
    1,988
    Likes Received:
    3,116
    I just really don't understand the logic of it trevor, people on the remain side say we will scare big business away with our ''nationalism'' yet labour, a remain party want to scare big businesses away from what is one of the biggest growing markets in the world by nationalising an industry. I really can't get my head round it?
     
    trevor likes this.
  11. Bronco

    Bronco Star Player
    P.L.22/23 Entrant P.L.23/24 Entrant Supporter Euro 2020 P.L. 20/21 Top 30

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2018
    Messages:
    37,924
    Likes Received:
    40,931
    To get the gullible voters to vote Labour by any chance, owt for nowt, nah they wouldn't do that would they ?.
     
    trevor likes this.
  12. Tony Wilkinson

    Tony Wilkinson Squad Player
    P.L.22/23 Entrant P.L.23/24 Entrant Supporter P.L. 20/21 Top 10

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2018
    Messages:
    6,692
    Likes Received:
    8,879
    Shame, but I don't think the gullible can be saved now..........
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  13. Dennis

    Dennis Captain
    Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2018
    Messages:
    5,926
    Likes Received:
    14,683
    In truth, there isn't much competition in the fibre and copper network itself for residential and SME customers. The network is largely ownedand maintained by Openreach and the likes of TalkTalk, Sky, BT itself and Plusnet all pay Openreach to use the network. The only major internet provider with its own independent network is Virgin and that's for historical reasons when it chose its own future-proof technology - cable. The competition is really between the IP providers with their many offers, choice of speed, TV access, telephony bundles, etc and customer service of course, but all largely using the same physical network, Virgin excepted.

    I can just about understand why a Govt might want to nationalise the fibre network (it has already paid and continues to pay billions to Openreach to extend and improve the fibre network without much control) and treat it as national infrastructure in the same way as it does with the road and rail networks. But I can't get my head around why any Govt would then want to provide unlimted access to a finite resource without charging for it. It doesn't make sense to me.
     
  14. Offcomedun

    Offcomedun Important Player
    Qatar 2022 Entrant P.L.22/23 Entrant P.L.23/24 Entrant Supporter Euro2020 Winner Euro 2020 P.L. 20/21 3rd Place

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2018
    Messages:
    7,035
    Likes Received:
    10,879
    Still peddling this tired myth?
    Labour did not almost bankrupt the country. Labour paid back record amounts of government debt.
    The global banking crash caused the last recession.
    Austerity was a calculated political decision taken by Osborne and Cameron (under cover of the lie about Labour nearly bankrupting the country) in order to smash the public sector as hard and as long as possible.
    Every other developed country abandoned austerity very quickly, which is why they all recovered from the global recession years before we did.
     
    Jayteebee, Amber, Bronco and 3 others like this.
  15. Dennis

    Dennis Captain
    Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2018
    Messages:
    5,926
    Likes Received:
    14,683
    Indeed. The global financial crisis which emanated from the US banking and mortgage sectors, spread to the UK because of London being such an important global banking centre. It wasn't caused by the Labour Govt's spending.

    The Tory govt from 2010 wanted to shrink the state for ideological reasons whilst blaming the previous Labour govt for the size of the national debt. And they got away with it. The Tories were entitled to shrink the state (via its austerity programmes) since they were in power but with hindsight (and indeed foresight) it was the wrong thing to do from a macroeconomic perspective. As a consequence the national debt continued to increase from the £800bn which the Tories inherited in 2010 to its current £1800bn. Or if you like, the Tory govts have increased national debt in the last 9 years by more than the sum total of every Govt of every hue (by Whigs, Tories, Liberals, Labour and two world wars and countless others) since the national debt was first introduced by William III in the 17th century. A sobering thought for a Tory govt which prides itself on sound finances.
     
    Offcomedun and Jayteebee like this.
  16. trevor

    trevor Squad Player
    P.L.22/23 Entrant Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2018
    Messages:
    5,844
    Likes Received:
    7,655
    The buck stops at those in charge and that was the disastrous Brown and a calamitous Labour Government. They could have stopped it with better regulation of the banks but failed to do so for greed
     
  17. trevor

    trevor Squad Player
    P.L.22/23 Entrant Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2018
    Messages:
    5,844
    Likes Received:
    7,655
    Government debt doubled despite a austerity programme that meant it would have trebled or even quadrupled without those savings, The banking crisis mainly affected the two major financial centres, The USA and the UK, The USA took a different path and tried to invest its way out of debt ( Labours proposed policy to deal with it )
    The result was the same as you cannot spend your way out of debt, The USA debt is at an horrendous level of around $24 TRILLION !! an increase of around $14 Trillion due to a policy of trying to spend their way out of debt, so while the UK debt doubled the USA debt did the same
     
    #317 trevor, Nov 15, 2019
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2019
  18. Dennis

    Dennis Captain
    Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2018
    Messages:
    5,926
    Likes Received:
    14,683
    I suggest before you start quoting bogus 'facts', you go back and check your numbers on a like-for-like basis for the period 2010 to 2018
     
  19. trevor

    trevor Squad Player
    P.L.22/23 Entrant Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2018
    Messages:
    5,844
    Likes Received:
    7,655
    Corrected, you are correct sir, Miss read the chart, Here are the treasury figures for historic debt, Noting that the start of the crash in the USA was 2008 with the fall of Lehmans
    https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm
     
    #319 trevor, Nov 15, 2019
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2019
  20. Dennis

    Dennis Captain
    Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2018
    Messages:
    5,926
    Likes Received:
    14,683
    I know I am!

    Under the Tory party's policy of austerity, from 2010 to 2018, UK national debt increased by about 120%. Over that same period, the US national debt using policies based on 'spending their way out' as you referred to it, increased by 58%.

    Using the correct facts rather than your bogus facts, now who do you think got it right?
     
    Craven Cottager likes this.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice