• We'd like to take this opportunity to wish you a Happy Holidays and a very Merry Christmas from all at Golf Monthly. Thank you for sharing your 2025 with us!

AND HERE WE GO - THE 2019 GENERAL ELECTION THREAD

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 18645
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ColchesterFC said:
All donations to the Tory party are in the public domain so if you're really that interested then it's easy to find out. I think that the presenter on 5 live this morning said that 11 Russian oligarchs had donated to the Tories.
Click to expand...

And, by law, all donations of over £500 are from UK residents or UK based companies. It won't stop someone creating a UK business to channel funding through but it will be pretty obvious, and a weapon that could be used by other parties.

The Electoral Commission scrutinises the accounts of every party and, although these allegations are made at each election, there's never been any proven. Lets wait and see...
 
ColchesterFC said:
So why spend £20-100 billion (depending on which figures you look at) to provide everyone with something that not everyone will use or needs? Why not target those areas that do actually need it or will use it? Are the benefits really that great to justify the cost? What can the average person get from super fast fibre broadband that they don't get from standard broadband?
Click to expand...

Pretty cheap, I'd say, compared to the cost of HS2...
 
Full page ad in the local paper this week reminding Boris's constituents on his promise he made, to them, on the night of his election victory in May 2015...

"I will lie down with you in front of those bulldozers and stop the construction of that third runway"
 
ColchesterFC said:
I don't think it's a bad idea but I do think that for many it's a waste of money. Not everyone wants or needs fibre broadband. My mum and stepdad use their internet to check emails and search for holidays. And I would guess that 90% of their village is the same. Giving them ultra fast broadband would be like giving a bicycle to a fish. A complete waste of time and money. It would cost millions just to connect their small village and there are thousands of similar villages around the country. Fair enough in towns and cities but for outlying villages the costs would far outweigh the benefits.
Click to expand...
Its future proofing.
 
not been on here for a bit, struggling for a connection.

That aside. i wonder how many people have actually made up there minds on how they are voting and if the next four weeks is just gonna be verbal diahorrea.
 
Tashyboy said:
not been on here for a bit, struggling for a connection.

That aside. i wonder how many people have actually made up there minds on how they are voting and if the next four weeks is just gonna be verbal diahorrea.
Click to expand...

You could always put up a poll...
 
ColchesterFC said:
No we shouldn't, but you're saying we should spend all this money based on guesswork of what might be needed in 10-20 years time. My question is, how is free fibre broadband (for everyone) going to "fire up the economy, give a massive boost to productivity and bring half a million people back into work" which is the claim. What are the benefits to the average person of this policy?
Click to expand...

Whilst you have to take all claims with a pinch of salt, there is an argument that access to decent broadband is becoming an essential service. And increasingly peoples ability to participate in society, work, access information, shop and access entertainment in the house and rant at people on social media or golf forums will rely on a fast broadband connections. And if you don't have it you will increasingly be marginalized. If you want an example of the benefits of fast broadband for me and many others in my company it means I can work from home easily, have virtual meetings using video with anyone in the world which means I have a much better work life balance, less stress, able to see the family more, don't pollute the environment when commuting to work, save god knows how much on fuel etc etc. Plus the porn streams quicker.

Other countries are way ahead of us with their broadband provision for the whole country, not just in big urban areas where the limited number of providers can make big profits for their shareholders. And whilst the exact details may have not been completely thought through as we are in election time, the principle to me is a good thing and I'd even go as far as saying that easily accessible and affordable fast broadband for all will have a much more positive impact on the vast majority of our lives than exiting the EU ever will will. But that's a different thread.
 
Last edited:
My problem with it re free internet is this. who is gonna pay the £20 Billion. The tax payer. So ok. Non tax payers,non workers etc etc. get it for nowt. So how is them thats not earning, working, contributing nothing to society gonna help stimulate the economy. its not. sure they can log onto Facebook and show me pictures of there dinner quicker, and talk rammel on golf forums, but suspect thats not Comrade Jezzas reason for free wifi. Is there a problem with coverage in this country, obviously. but i fail to see how me paying for it through my taxes should be the solution. How about insisting companies like BT, SKY, EE, VODAPHONE etc etc are made to provide that service out of the Billions they earn each year.
 
Tashyboy said:
My problem with it re free internet is this. who is gonna pay the £20 Billion. The tax payer. So ok. Non tax payers,non workers etc etc. get it for nowt. So how is them thats not earning, working, contributing nothing to society gonna help stimulate the economy. its not. sure they can log onto Facebook and show me pictures of there dinner quicker, and talk rammel on golf forums, but suspect thats not Comrade Jezzas reason for free wifi. Is there a problem with coverage in this country, obviously. but i fail to see how me paying for it through my taxes should be the solution. How about insisting companies like BT, SKY, EE, VODAPHONE etc etc are made to provide that service out of the Billions they earn each year.
Click to expand...

I think the idea of UK free UK wide BB is a great idea. Not sure it should be via a nationalised company.

1) Pay for nationalisation - wonder who pays for that.
2) Tax payer than pays the annual running costs etc.

Oh look, its no longer free.
 
Hacker Khan said:
Whilst you have to take all claims with a pinch of salt, there is an argument that access to decent broadband is becoming an essential service. And increasingly peoples ability to participate in society, work, access information, shop and access entertainment in the house and rant at people on social media or golf forums will rely on a fast broadband connections. And if you don't have it you will increasingly be marginalized. If you want an example of the benefits of fast broadband for me and many others in my company it means I can work from home easily, have virtual meetings using video with anyone in the world which means I have a much better work life balance, less stress, able to see the family more, don't pollute the environment when commuting to work, save god knows how much on fuel etc etc. Plus the porn streams quicker.

Other countries are way ahead of us with their broadband provision for the whole country, not just in big urban areas where the limited number of providers can make big profits for their shareholders. And whilst the exact details may have not been completely thought through as we are in election time, the principle to me is a good thing and I'd even go as far as saying that easily accessible and affordable fast broadband for all will have a much more positive impact on the vast majority of our lives than exiting the EU ever will will. But that's a different thread.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree. The benefits of access to homes by medical videos links, police and security, gas/electric repair planning etc. etc are huge, and as you say the possible reduction in daily commuter traffic could be very significant. Carefully thought through (there's the rub) its a good idea.
 
Hobbit said:
I think the idea of UK free UK wide BB is a great idea. Not sure it should be via a nationalised company.

1) Pay for nationalisation - wonder who pays for that.
2) Tax payer than pays the annual running costs etc.

Oh look, its no longer free.
Click to expand...

Heard 7bn annual costs to factor in.

Great but if all the other schemes come in too the infrastructure will be on a 4 day week and probably on strike for the most part of them ;)
 
Ref the broadband. First off, I think the promise is embarrassingly bad. Secondly, isn't 5g supposed to take over from wired broadband? If that network does as is promised, big if, then wires underground becomes old tech.
 
Hobbit said:
I think the idea of UK free UK wide BB is a great idea. Not sure it should be via a nationalised company.

1) Pay for nationalisation - wonder who pays for that.
2) Tax payer than pays the annual running costs etc.

Oh look, its no longer free.
Click to expand...

A bit like free school dinners, someone pays for them along the line.
 
Doon frae Troon said:
A bit like free school dinners, someone pays for them along the line.
Click to expand...

...the someone else is those nasty rich folk over there ! Trouble is, their definition of "rich folk" is anyone earning over £25k pa!

We all know we are going to get pre-election bull-pooh promises from all of them. But I wish they stood up to basic scrutiny. (eg free fibre BB, that will almost certainly be obsolete by 2030, £15 ph for jobs that will disappear if you have to pay £15ph for them. )

In this, Labour are less good at lying than the Tories! :-)
 
Hacker Khan said:
Whilst you have to take all claims with a pinch of salt, there is an argument that access to decent broadband is becoming an essential service. And increasingly peoples ability to participate in society, work, access information, shop and access entertainment in the house and rant at people on social media or golf forums will rely on a fast broadband connections. And if you don't have it you will increasingly be marginalized. If you want an example of the benefits of fast broadband for me and many others in my company it means I can work from home easily, have virtual meetings using video with anyone in the world which means I have a much better work life balance, less stress, able to see the family more, don't pollute the environment when commuting to work, save god knows how much on fuel etc etc. Plus the porn streams quicker.

Other countries are way ahead of us with their broadband provision for the whole country, not just in big urban areas where the limited number of providers can make big profits for their shareholders. And whilst the exact details may have not been completely thought through as we are in election time, the principle to me is a good thing and I'd even go as far as saying that easily accessible and affordable fast broadband for all will have a much more positive impact on the vast majority of our lives than exiting the EU ever will will. But that's a different thread.
Click to expand...

RE: the first bit in bold - how many of those are essential and worth spending what could end up being over £100 billion on?

RE: both bits in bold - is there anything in the things you've listed that can't be done with regular/standard broadband and actually requires fibre broadband? Why will people "rely on a fast broadband connection" when all of what you've listed can be done on standard broadband?

I occasionally have to transfer data to one of the offices that I've been working for. On a big job this could be 300+GB in total. I'm on standard broadband at home and can transfer the data in an hour or two. If they need anything iquicker than that I'll separate that bit out and send it first for them to look at and then send the rest. I can also use my current broadband provision for video calls/Skype etc without issues. These things don't need fibre broadband and I would guess that for over 95% of the population this will be true. Why not focus on getting decent standard broadband to everyone rather than spending however many extra billions it will cost to go full fibre? Whenever I speak to someone that has fibre broadband they normally tell me how great it is because they can download a film in X seconds. Well great, but do we as a country need to spend £100 billion (+/-) so that 95% of the population can save 90 seconds downloading a film?
 
Free BB is a great sound bite. Given that BB is now a utility; would JC please offer free Water and Gas too..

On a different note.. once 5G roll out start, you wont have to worry about digging up roads to deliver free BB, you can (in theory) roll out mobile BB very quickly.
 
As Bercow would have said...the eyes have it, the eyes have it...

XVBLzuih.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top