Its people like me Labour should be targeting if they want to gain in the forthcoming election. I’m firmly remain at heart, strongly resent both the direction of the Conservative party and Boris’s role in swinging the referendum result to leave. I’m a socially liberal, economically conservative, globalist, centre right voter. But I now have nobody to vote for, other than reluctantly voting Lib Dem.

I totally agree that Labour should be targeting people like you. However not by changing their policies to suit the centre, but by explaining how their policies can benefit people like you.

For example:

Saving £30 a month on my bills isn’t going to make a difference.

Aside from the fact that just because something doesn’t benefit you directly isn’t a great reason not to support it, getting free fast internet to the whole country helps children and adults with their learning. This can lead to an increase in skills and employment options.

£30 a month might not be much to you, but for many people it’s a luxury that would be dropped quickly. Internet use is so important now for communication, lack of it can lead to isolation.

Free fast internet opens up working from home for more people. Business’s who are struggling to find local talent have more options when internet access is universal.

For those companies running online shops and services, it opens up more customers.

The country would benefit as a whole from this policy, including you indirectly.

The money will be spent anyway. You are arguing that is better left for companies and individuals to pay their providers, and for them to pay OpenReach, who also get state subsidies, and who may or may not actually deliver to everyone else. That experiment has been ongoing for a long time now. It’s left the UK lagging behind. Time for bigger action. That might be “even more regulation” and “even more subsidies”, but I fully expect that would fail, based on what’s happened so far. Taking control and ownership, of this one particular state created infrastructure monopoly, needn’t be controversial at all.

I used to think I would know when the Tories would be ****. It would be when they ‘lost’ two groups. The police and ‘business’.

They have ‘lost’ both those groups with their cuts and then craven deference to people who, in effect, are spivs, speculators and insider traders. People who look no further than the next trade (bet) and will stop at nothing to get an inside track. People who don’t give a shit what the effect will be on anyone but themselves.

And yet still, they look like they will win a majority.

Apparently they used to say that Thatcher was lucky in her enemies, Johnson must be pissing himself laughing (when Cummings says he can, obviously).

Indeed. And the capital spend on infrastructure won’t just vanish… it’s not burning money… it’s investing… and employing…

And I, for one, am sick of state sponsored infrastructure aimed at core areas, rather than reaching all (or nearly all) of the UK. This is a policy that reminds the “left behind” (if you want to use that phrase) areas of the UK that they will not be forgotten under a Labour government in the way they are under a Tory one. There is some “causes of Brexit” thinking gone into this policy announcement I think.

Taking control and ownership, of this one particular state created infrastructure monopoly, needn’t be controversial at all.

I am not convinced about the free bit.
The utter failure of Openreach despite taking several billion in subsidies from the taxpayer does indicate it might be better investing directly.
A sensible and controlled pricing strategy might make more sense than entirely free. That said even within the “free” definition there would be options for that eg capped limits which you pay to go beyond.

You may want a nice friendly face to put some shine on the failed policies of neo-liberalism, but some of us want rid of it.

Is that why you are pro-Brexit?

That is half in jest actually. Seeing as dissonance and raybanwomble seem to be cosying up and are about to book a room, I thought I would cheekily try to pick a fight with you instead. Just for old time’s sake.

Is anyone going to actually bother going back on-topic, by the way? Looks like Joris Bohnson is going to walk it to a majority despite being a palpable fraud and an international laughing stock as well as a political lightweight in anything other than playground histrionics. Why is that?

My the Russians have got it sewn up from all sides haven’t they.

Indeed they have.

the Russians have got it sewn up from all sides

Something to agree on.

No. The language a raciust would use is, unsurprisingly, your sort of language. Talking about being able to recognise immigrants and being a fan of eugenics.
I note you failed to provide evidence of me being racist but doubled down on your stupidity.

You are the one mounting a defence of a blatantly racist idea. To say that you were just picking holes in an argument is obfuscation, stating that there are no immigrants clogging up CyB doesn’t make you racist does it? Defending the idea by attempting to legitimise the question that they might be, is much more likely to come from the mind of a racist yes?

It’s telling that early on in the argument I asked someone how they could tell the difference between tourists and immigrants – yet you choose to focus your nitpicking on the person trying to undermine the idea that immigrants are at fault for overcrowded trails.

Do you not think your language is distracting from whatever you think is the point you are making?

Corbynista discourse pre October 2019 “Centrist red Tory Blairite scum! **** off and join the Tories you ******* traitors to the true way of all flesh!”

Post October 2019 – “Oh hi, love you. We’ve got free stuff. Aren’t we cuddly and nice? Please vote for Jewwammy! “

Post October 2019 – “Oh hi, love you. We’ve got free stuff. Aren’t we cuddly and nice? Please vote for Jewwammy! “

They love the Jews now as well! It was all a misunderstanding – Corbynistas aren’t racist nationalists at all.

Gowrie

Its not the spending on social care etc,etc that prevents me from voting Labour. Its the unnecessary re nationalisation

Well unnecessary is a question of ideology. However I think it’s bananas that the private sector runs monopolies, especially with state subsidies. Why should bosses of and investors in rail companies pocket loads of money that should be invested back into the network for our benefit? It’s wrong.

the 10% appropriation of firms

That’s a scare story from the right wing. No-one has said from Labour that the government will be appropriating anything. Labour have simply said ‘firms will be required to transfer shares to employees gradually’. The government aren’t ‘taking’ anything. Nowhere does it say current shareholders will be dispossessed. This idea is purely right-wing insinuation. Please do not fall victim to it, you do yourself a disservice. Personally I don’t think it’s a great policy, I don’t think it will have much of an effect, but it’s not theft.

What will happen is that tax revenues will fall as companies fail to invest and move their operations overseas. Trust in the UK government will fall in the international financial community

That has already happened because of the insane and incompetent actions of the Tory party in the last 4 years. You don’t have to believe in everything that Labour want to do (although you do apparently believe in social provision) but you cannot for a second imagine that Johnson will be a credible alternative. We’ve already seen how reckless, careless and incompetent he and his party are. They DO NOT CARE about you, your elderly relatives, or anyone, and they DO NOT know how to run a country. You mean nothing to them.

Labour may or may not turn out to be incompetent too, but they are people who have spent their lives and careers trying to make things better for ordinary people. That is the reason the Labour party exists.

Labour may or may not turn out to be incompetent too, but they are people who have spent their lives and careers trying to make things better for ordinary people.

Exactly. Better to have a party that is at least trying to improve matters and has the right intentions rather than a party that is blatantly trying to do the opposite. The spin and lies and bias can all be ignored, it is getting down to who you think is actually trying to fix things.

John Curtis on Radio4… it’s not just the one poll. The options are a Johnson majority or not now… do whatever needs doing to stop your local MP being another Conservative Brexit Party candidate, even if you would have voted Tory in the past. Johnson must be stopped, and your vote will not result in a Corbyn majority now, whoever you vote for.

Do you not think your language is distracting from whatever you think is the point you are making?

I was accused of being a racist simply because I questioned raybans casual comment that he could recognise immigrants. As such I think it is warranted.

Johnson must be stopped, and your vote will not result in a Corbyn majority now, whoever you vote for.

This thread is already feeling like we’ve skipped forward a few weeks and are getting stuck into the post-mortem meltdown (spoiler alert – five more years of Tory rule are all Binners’ fault 🙂 ).

I’d use words and reason rather than abuse to make my point; that’s all. And I agree, I must be more tolerant. I’ve been called all sorts that has just run off my rhino hide.

Anyway…

Labour’s masterplan for Broadband is flawed anyway. What’s the chance of getting everyone connected so everyone in the house can watch cat videos at once in 10 years? Zero. Openreach has been trying for years and not made a dent in it. And it won’t be the outlier cases who get done first, it’ll be the easy cable runs.

It would make more sense to nationalise Virgin media, and everyone has true fibre BB and a choice of supply.

Or roll out 5G and send everyone a hotspot in the post. Much simpler.

That’s the problem with old people and technology, they just don’t get it. Poor Jezza

I’d use words and reason rather than abuse to make my point; that’s all.

I did start with that but the torrent of abuse made me respond in kind. Probably a bad thing and I will give up on the muppet.

Or roll out 5G and send everyone a hotspot in the post. Much simpler.

Aside from the fact it doesnt work that way. The advantage of 5G is that it can handle higher load but the compromise made is with range. You need a lot higher density of masts to support it.
6G is supposed to deal with that but that is a few years off.
A hybrid approach probably does make sense though. Fibre and then high speed wireless would support a lot of places at lower cost and pretty much the same capability.
Given the flexibility of the industry though in phrases such as “fibre” and “up to” Labour have some room to play.

This thread is already feeling like we’ve skipped forward a few weeks and are getting stuck into the post-mortem meltdown (spoiler alert – five more years of Tory rule are all Binners’ fault 🙂 ).

What?! Again?!! Curses! Every time the country fails to become a socialist utopia, its always down to me, isn’t it? 😉

The people on here still defending failed market driven policies…

Good god.

Have another five years. It will be medieval by then.

Enjoy the top of the neoliberal pyramid until you get knocked off.