BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

surrey_commuter

Stevo_666 said:

pinno said:

Stevo_666 said:

pinno said:

The idea is good,but the costs haven't been properly worked out.
If you pop into a local shop and your card doesn't work because the internet is not working, then it affects business. (This happens in the North) Just to illustrate a point. It's not 'manageable'. I get poor internet coverage, broken signals. I work from home and the connection can delay things no end.

Although where you live, you'd probably be in the 5% of the country not covered even if we do get up to Japanese/South Korean levels of coverage.

Some can't get access at all.
Page 5:

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/130736/Connected-Nations-2018-main-report.pdf

Full fibre: 6% of the UK.

There is ni doubt about it, the UK needs massive infrastructure investment. All these ideas from HS2 to Fibre broadband is indicative that we are essentially starting these projects from 0. Not improving, enhancing, adding...
Perhaps it wouldn't be so pricey if we were further down the line.

So what exactly are we meant to be investing in? The phrase 'infrastructure investment' is bandied around on here a fair but but mainly in vague terms.

As for starting from zero, well that would imply we have no railways or broadband...

Also let's remember that its normal on here to assume that the UK is 20p for the swearbox and everywhere else has invested loads/has no real problems. Often not the case - here's an example from Germany of all countries:
https://theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/20/trains-on-time-germans-deutsche-bahn-railway

You either believe in big or small Govt.
You either believe debt has no downside or don’t

Also some of us can remember how awful these privatised companies used to be.

rjsterry

You all seem to have missed that this was put out to divert attention from the difficulties they were having with their immigration/FOM policy. It's worked pretty well as everyone is talking about it whether for or against.

awavey

no the broadband idea is not a good idea, it completely misrepresents how broadband works as a service, its not just fecking bits of cable in the ground that means you get broadband, theres a gigantic network behind it that connects you with the internet world thats constantly being upgraded to support it. Openreach only own the cable from the exchange to your house, this is like saying you can travel anywhere in the world for free, because theyve got rid of any tolls on the M25.

ultimately what Corbyn is offering is in 15 years time (by which time that technology will be obsolete) quicker ways to download porn or play stupid games like Fortnight, because those frankly are still the biggest use of the internet, followed by ordering more plastic rubbish off ebay or amazon.

I keep seeing people claiming the internet or access to it is like gaining access to some modern version of the great library of alexandria, do you reckon they had cyber bullies in that library ? fake news ? extremisim ? scam artists ? Shallow, if not patently irrational, opinions based on bad reasoning and sometimes no reasoning at all appear to be more prevalent than ever...

https://youtu.be/LTJvdGcb7Fs

pinno

Stevo_666 said:

pinno said:

Stevo_666 said:

pinno said:

The idea is good,but the costs haven't been properly worked out.
If you pop into a local shop and your card doesn't work because the internet is not working, then it affects business. (This happens in the North) Just to illustrate a point. It's not 'manageable'. I get poor internet coverage, broken signals. I work from home and the connection can delay things no end.

Although where you live, you'd probably be in the 5% of the country not covered even if we do get up to Japanese/South Korean levels of coverage.

Some can't get access at all.
Page 5:

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/130736/Connected-Nations-2018-main-report.pdf

Full fibre: 6% of the UK.

There is ni doubt about it, the UK needs massive infrastructure investment. All these ideas from HS2 to Fibre broadband is indicative that we are essentially starting these projects from 0. Not improving, enhancing, adding...
Perhaps it wouldn't be so pricey if we were further down the line.

So what exactly are we meant to be investing in? The phrase 'infrastructure investment' is bandied around on here a fair but but mainly in vague terms.

As for starting from zero, well that would imply we have no railways or broadband...

Also let's remember that its normal on here to assume that the UK is 20p for the swearbox and everywhere else has invested loads/has no real problems. Often not the case - here's an example from Germany of all countries:
https://theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/20/trains-on-time-germans-deutsche-bahn-railway

Okay, we don't really have a high speed train network, certainly not on the Japan scale or like TGV in France.
In fact, the (Tory) idea of 'Beeching reversal' with £500m on here was met with derision but it is an infrastructure investment isn't it? Or is it a vote puller? You're slightly snookered with that one.
In the North, many local hospitals have been downgraded in preference for centralisation,
This in the backdrop of an ageing population and the NHS under increasing pressure in winter. Many people having to travel miles for scans, cancer treatment and other acute services.

Huge lack of social housing. Don't need to say more on that.

Do we need to use other countries as a yardstick? German rail not doing so good but should we sit back and say 'ah well, we're doing better than the Germans and if that's the case, why bother?'
Surely we should be looking to improve communications in the UK. All forms. How many working hours are lost commuting?

https://www.cityam.com/long-commutes-cost-uk-businesses-20m-days-staff/

If we're going to do this Brexit thingy, we're going to have to fix some of the (ageing) foundations too to give us half a chance of riding the roller coaster that may follow.

pinno

awavey said:

no...ever...

...and internet forums. They're just a breeding ground for trolls and conspiracy theorists and bully's and tw@ts who just can't tweak a rear mech for love nor money no matter how much you try to help them and there's no telling them...

cont. p94

Stevo_666

awavey said:

no the broadband idea is not a good idea, it completely misrepresents how broadband works as a service, its not just fecking bits of cable in the ground that means you get broadband, theres a gigantic network behind it that connects you with the internet world thats constantly being upgraded to support it. Openreach only own the cable from the exchange to your house, this is like saying you can travel anywhere in the world for free, because theyve got rid of any tolls on the M25.

ultimately what Corbyn is offering is in 15 years time (by which time that technology will be obsolete) quicker ways to download porn or play stupid games like Fortnight, because those frankly are still the biggest use of the internet, followed by ordering more plastic rubbish off ebay or amazon.

I keep seeing people claiming the internet or access to it is like gaining access to some modern version of the great library of alexandria, do you reckon they had cyber bullies in that library ? fake news ? extremisim ? scam artists ? Shallow, if not patently irrational, opinions based on bad reasoning and sometimes no reasoning at all appear to be more prevalent than ever...

https://youtu.be/LTJvdGcb7Fs

Well said.

kingstongraham

It's not, it's like saying that you can travel on any road in the country because someone is going to build a road that actually goes somewhere near your house.

Stevo_666

pinno said:

Stevo_666 said:

pinno said:

Stevo_666 said:

pinno said:

The idea is good,but the costs haven't been properly worked out.
If you pop into a local shop and your card doesn't work because the internet is not working, then it affects business. (This happens in the North) Just to illustrate a point. It's not 'manageable'. I get poor internet coverage, broken signals. I work from home and the connection can delay things no end.

Although where you live, you'd probably be in the 5% of the country not covered even if we do get up to Japanese/South Korean levels of coverage.

Some can't get access at all.
Page 5:

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/130736/Connected-Nations-2018-main-report.pdf

Full fibre: 6% of the UK.

There is ni doubt about it, the UK needs massive infrastructure investment. All these ideas from HS2 to Fibre broadband is indicative that we are essentially starting these projects from 0. Not improving, enhancing, adding...
Perhaps it wouldn't be so pricey if we were further down the line.

So what exactly are we meant to be investing in? The phrase 'infrastructure investment' is bandied around on here a fair but but mainly in vague terms.

As for starting from zero, well that would imply we have no railways or broadband...

Also let's remember that its normal on here to assume that the UK is 20p for the swearbox and everywhere else has invested loads/has no real problems. Often not the case - here's an example from Germany of all countries:
https://theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/20/trains-on-time-germans-deutsche-bahn-railway

Okay, we don't really have a high speed train network, certainly not on the Japan scale or like TGV in France.
In fact, the (Tory) idea of 'Beeching reversal' with £500m on here was met with derision but it is an infrastructure investment isn't it? Or is it a vote puller? You're slightly snookered with that one.
In the North, many local hospitals have been downgraded in preference for centralisation,
This in the backdrop of an ageing population and the NHS under increasing pressure in winter. Many people having to travel miles for scans, cancer treatment and other acute services.

Huge lack of social housing. Don't need to say more on that.

Do we need to use other countries as a yardstick? German rail not doing so good but should we sit back and say 'ah well, we're doing better than the Germans and if that's the case, why bother?'
Surely we should be looking to improve communications in the UK. All forms. How many working hours are lost commuting?

https://www.cityam.com/long-commutes-cost-uk-businesses-20m-days-staff/

If we're going to do this Brexit thingy, we're going to have to fix some of the (ageing) foundations too to give us half a chance of riding the roller coaster that may follow.

- Trains: fast enough for me. I could get to my folks house on the train quicker than in The Panzer.

- Commuting: ever heard of these brilliant new inventions called home working? (yes my broadband is plenty fast enough) and living a reasonable distance from work or on a decent train line? (yes they exist given where some people in London commute from). Or doing a few emails on the train? (works for me).

- Having enough NHS facilities so everyone can just walk there: how much do you reckon that will cost? Although we don't do too badly overall:
- https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm

Stevo_666

surrey_commuter said:

Stevo_666 said:

pinno said:

Stevo_666 said:

pinno said:

The idea is good,but the costs haven't been properly worked out.
If you pop into a local shop and your card doesn't work because the internet is not working, then it affects business. (This happens in the North) Just to illustrate a point. It's not 'manageable'. I get poor internet coverage, broken signals. I work from home and the connection can delay things no end.

Although where you live, you'd probably be in the 5% of the country not covered even if we do get up to Japanese/South Korean levels of coverage.

Some can't get access at all.
Page 5:

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/130736/Connected-Nations-2018-main-report.pdf

Full fibre: 6% of the UK.

There is ni doubt about it, the UK needs massive infrastructure investment. All these ideas from HS2 to Fibre broadband is indicative that we are essentially starting these projects from 0. Not improving, enhancing, adding...
Perhaps it wouldn't be so pricey if we were further down the line.

So what exactly are we meant to be investing in? The phrase 'infrastructure investment' is bandied around on here a fair but but mainly in vague terms.

As for starting from zero, well that would imply we have no railways or broadband...

Also let's remember that its normal on here to assume that the UK is 20p for the swearbox and everywhere else has invested loads/has no real problems. Often not the case - here's an example from Germany of all countries:
https://theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/20/trains-on-time-germans-deutsche-bahn-railway

You either believe in big or small Govt.
You either believe debt has no downside or don’t

Also some of us can remember how awful these privatised companies used to be.

True.

Some are also under the illusion that the solution to most things is the state just chucking more cash at things. As we can see, that does not always work.

pinno

Stevo_666 said:

pinno said:

Stevo_666 said:

pinno said:

Stevo_666 said:

pinno said:

The idea is good,but the costs haven't been properly worked out.
If you pop into a local shop and your card doesn't work because the internet is not working, then it affects business. (This happens in the North) Just to illustrate a point. It's not 'manageable'. I get poor internet coverage, broken signals. I work from home and the connection can delay things no end.

Although where you live, you'd probably be in the 5% of the country not covered even if we do get up to Japanese/South Korean levels of coverage.

Some can't get access at all.
Page 5:

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/130736/Connected-Nations-2018-main-report.pdf

Full fibre: 6% of the UK.

There is ni doubt about it, the UK needs massive infrastructure investment. All these ideas from HS2 to Fibre broadband is indicative that we are essentially starting these projects from 0. Not improving, enhancing, adding...
Perhaps it wouldn't be so pricey if we were further down the line.

So what exactly are we meant to be investing in? The phrase 'infrastructure investment' is bandied around on here a fair but but mainly in vague terms.

As for starting from zero, well that would imply we have no railways or broadband...

Also let's remember that its normal on here to assume that the UK is 20p for the swearbox and everywhere else has invested loads/has no real problems. Often not the case - here's an example from Germany of all countries:
https://theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/20/trains-on-time-germans-deutsche-bahn-railway

Okay, we don't really have a high speed train network, certainly not on the Japan scale or like TGV in France.
In fact, the (Tory) idea of 'Beeching reversal' with £500m on here was met with derision but it is an infrastructure investment isn't it? Or is it a vote puller? You're slightly snookered with that one.
In the North, many local hospitals have been downgraded in preference for centralisation,
This in the backdrop of an ageing population and the NHS under increasing pressure in winter. Many people having to travel miles for scans, cancer treatment and other acute services.

Huge lack of social housing. Don't need to say more on that.

Do we need to use other countries as a yardstick? German rail not doing so good but should we sit back and say 'ah well, we're doing better than the Germans and if that's the case, why bother?'
Surely we should be looking to improve communications in the UK. All forms. How many working hours are lost commuting?

https://www.cityam.com/long-commutes-cost-uk-businesses-20m-days-staff/

If we're going to do this Brexit thingy, we're going to have to fix some of the (ageing) foundations too to give us half a chance of riding the roller coaster that may follow.

- Trains: fast enough for me. I could get to my folks house on the train quicker than in The Panzer.

- Commuting: ever heard of these brilliant new inventions called home working? (yes my broadband is plenty fast enough) and living a reasonable distance from work or on a decent train line? (yes they exist given where some people in London commute from). Or doing a few emails on the train? (works for me).

- Having enough NHS facilities so everyone can just walk there: how much do you reckon that will cost? Although we don't do too badly overall:
- https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm

Walk?
Would you like to travel 150 mile round trip and having chemo in between?
We don't all live (or want to live) in the South East.

Your broadband is okay.
You have the opportunity to work from home. Some people can't.
There are people who commute miles and pay extortionate season tickets for trains.
That's a bit of an 'i'm alright Jack' post really.

...and what did you think about Boris' 'Beeching reversal' proposal?

Stevo_666

pinno said:

Stevo_666 said:

pinno said:

Stevo_666 said:

pinno said:

Stevo_666 said:

pinno said:

The idea is good,but the costs haven't been properly worked out.
If you pop into a local shop and your card doesn't work because the internet is not working, then it affects business. (This happens in the North) Just to illustrate a point. It's not 'manageable'. I get poor internet coverage, broken signals. I work from home and the connection can delay things no end.

Although where you live, you'd probably be in the 5% of the country not covered even if we do get up to Japanese/South Korean levels of coverage.

Some can't get access at all.
Page 5:

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/130736/Connected-Nations-2018-main-report.pdf

Full fibre: 6% of the UK.

There is ni doubt about it, the UK needs massive infrastructure investment. All these ideas from HS2 to Fibre broadband is indicative that we are essentially starting these projects from 0. Not improving, enhancing, adding...
Perhaps it wouldn't be so pricey if we were further down the line.

So what exactly are we meant to be investing in? The phrase 'infrastructure investment' is bandied around on here a fair but but mainly in vague terms.

As for starting from zero, well that would imply we have no railways or broadband...

Also let's remember that its normal on here to assume that the UK is 20p for the swearbox and everywhere else has invested loads/has no real problems. Often not the case - here's an example from Germany of all countries:
https://theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/20/trains-on-time-germans-deutsche-bahn-railway

Okay, we don't really have a high speed train network, certainly not on the Japan scale or like TGV in France.
In fact, the (Tory) idea of 'Beeching reversal' with £500m on here was met with derision but it is an infrastructure investment isn't it? Or is it a vote puller? You're slightly snookered with that one.
In the North, many local hospitals have been downgraded in preference for centralisation,
This in the backdrop of an ageing population and the NHS under increasing pressure in winter. Many people having to travel miles for scans, cancer treatment and other acute services.

Huge lack of social housing. Don't need to say more on that.

Do we need to use other countries as a yardstick? German rail not doing so good but should we sit back and say 'ah well, we're doing better than the Germans and if that's the case, why bother?'
Surely we should be looking to improve communications in the UK. All forms. How many working hours are lost commuting?

https://www.cityam.com/long-commutes-cost-uk-businesses-20m-days-staff/

If we're going to do this Brexit thingy, we're going to have to fix some of the (ageing) foundations too to give us half a chance of riding the roller coaster that may follow.

- Trains: fast enough for me. I could get to my folks house on the train quicker than in The Panzer.

- Commuting: ever heard of these brilliant new inventions called home working? (yes my broadband is plenty fast enough) and living a reasonable distance from work or on a decent train line? (yes they exist given where some people in London commute from). Or doing a few emails on the train? (works for me).

- Having enough NHS facilities so everyone can just walk there: how much do you reckon that will cost? Although we don't do too badly overall:
- https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm

Walk?
Would you like to travel 150 mile round trip and having chemo in between?
We don't all live (or want to live) in the South East.

Your broadband is okay.
You have the opportunity to work from home. Some people can't.
There are people who commute miles and pay extortionate season tickets for trains.
That's a bit of an 'i'm alright Jack' post really.

...and what did you think about Boris' 'Beeching reversal' proposal?

Just giving examples to show things aren't as bad as ypu make out. Although some people recognise that life isn't perfect or fair. I'm one of them.

And as asked above, how much would your grand plans cost?

Jeremy.89

surrey_commuter said:

Stevo_666 said:

pinno said:

Stevo_666 said:

pinno said:

The idea is good,but the costs haven't been properly worked out.
If you pop into a local shop and your card doesn't work because the internet is not working, then it affects business. (This happens in the North) Just to illustrate a point. It's not 'manageable'. I get poor internet coverage, broken signals. I work from home and the connection can delay things no end.

Although where you live, you'd probably be in the 5% of the country not covered even if we do get up to Japanese/South Korean levels of coverage.

Some can't get access at all.
Page 5:

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/130736/Connected-Nations-2018-main-report.pdf

Full fibre: 6% of the UK.

There is ni doubt about it, the UK needs massive infrastructure investment. All these ideas from HS2 to Fibre broadband is indicative that we are essentially starting these projects from 0. Not improving, enhancing, adding...
Perhaps it wouldn't be so pricey if we were further down the line.

So what exactly are we meant to be investing in? The phrase 'infrastructure investment' is bandied around on here a fair but but mainly in vague terms.

As for starting from zero, well that would imply we have no railways or broadband...

Also let's remember that its normal on here to assume that the UK is 20p for the swearbox and everywhere else has invested loads/has no real problems. Often not the case - here's an example from Germany of all countries:
https://theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/20/trains-on-time-germans-deutsche-bahn-railway

You either believe in big or small Govt.
You either believe debt has no downside or don’t

Also some of us can remember how awful these privatised companies used to be.

Nah.

You can believe in medium government, and that debt is something to be managed, which does not necessarily mean cutting spending dramatically, nor expanding debt dramatically...

rick_chasey

rjsterry said:

You all seem to have missed that this was put out to divert attention from the difficulties they were having with their immigration/FOM policy. It's worked pretty well as everyone is talking about it whether for or against.

If I understand correctly, and I have to assume I haven’t since it’s abominable, but I think Matt Hancock has announced Tory policy which says all non-Brit residents will not be entitled to NHS “free at the point of service” treatment once Brexit is done.

pblakeney

rick_chasey said:

rjsterry said:

You all seem to have missed that this was put out to divert attention from the difficulties they were having with their immigration/FOM policy. It's worked pretty well as everyone is talking about it whether for or against.

If I understand correctly, and I have to assume I haven’t since it’s abominable, but I think Matt Hancock has announced Tory policy which says all non-Brit residents will not be entitled to NHS “free at the point of service” treatment once Brexit is done.

That is exactly what my Brexit voting friends have been demanding for nigh in 4 years.
Preaching to the converted for votes.

rick_chasey

They must mean people who don't live in the UK. Otherwise they've got full fash.

Anyway, that aside, the polling guru who they wheel out on newsnight gave his summary of what the election is about.

I will paraphrase, but basically there's a 2/3 chance it's a Tory majority, and basically zero chance of a Labour majority - but that's not really what this election is about. He says "all parties bar Tories and possibly the DUP have come out in favour of another Brexit referendum" so the main question is can the Tories get a big enough majority to put that to bed or not. He said that, in that sense, it was a very binary election.

rjsterry

Jeremy.89 said:

surrey_commuter said:

Stevo_666 said:

pinno said:

Stevo_666 said:

pinno said:

The idea is good,but the costs haven't been properly worked out.
If you pop into a local shop and your card doesn't work because the internet is not working, then it affects business. (This happens in the North) Just to illustrate a point. It's not 'manageable'. I get poor internet coverage, broken signals. I work from home and the connection can delay things no end.

Although where you live, you'd probably be in the 5% of the country not covered even if we do get up to Japanese/South Korean levels of coverage.

Some can't get access at all.
Page 5:

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/130736/Connected-Nations-2018-main-report.pdf

Full fibre: 6% of the UK.

There is ni doubt about it, the UK needs massive infrastructure investment. All these ideas from HS2 to Fibre broadband is indicative that we are essentially starting these projects from 0. Not improving, enhancing, adding...
Perhaps it wouldn't be so pricey if we were further down the line.

So what exactly are we meant to be investing in? The phrase 'infrastructure investment' is bandied around on here a fair but but mainly in vague terms.

As for starting from zero, well that would imply we have no railways or broadband...

Also let's remember that its normal on here to assume that the UK is 20p for the swearbox and everywhere else has invested loads/has no real problems. Often not the case - here's an example from Germany of all countries:
https://theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/20/trains-on-time-germans-deutsche-bahn-railway

You either believe in big or small Govt.
You either believe debt has no downside or don’t

Also some of us can remember how awful these privatised companies used to be.

Nah.

You can believe in medium government, and that debt is something to be managed, which does not necessarily mean cutting spending dramatically, nor expanding debt dramatically...

Quite. I can also only assume that awavey and Stevo have never been involved in setting up IT infrastructure for a business.

kingstongraham

rick_chasey said:

rjsterry said:

You all seem to have missed that this was put out to divert attention from the difficulties they were having with their immigration/FOM policy. It's worked pretty well as everyone is talking about it whether for or against.

If I understand correctly, and I have to assume I haven’t since it’s abominable, but I think Matt Hancock has announced Tory policy which says all non-Brit residents will not be entitled to NHS “free at the point of service” treatment once Brexit is done.

What I heard was that people coming to the UK on work, travel and study visas would have to pay £625 per year for the NHS (in addition to their taxes), up from £400 (and was £200 until January). This will be extended to EU citizens after Brexit.

I don't think non UK residents are entitled to free NHS care now, are they?

Longshot

Openreach are a joke. Whether that's down to their own failings or just have far too big a job to handle, I don't know. They are the single biggest obstacle to businesses being able to relocate quickly to new premises. There are alternatives coming through but mainly in London and the other major cities.

I am anti-nationalisation but there are a few exceptions for me - Openreach would be one, Water another and possibly Network Rail (rather than the TOCs).

On a separate note for those that understand this better than me, isn't 5G supposed to make wired broadband obsolete?

rick_chasey

BoJo got two scandals incoming, the arcuri one is not going away and the Russian exKGB meeting.

Pross

awavey said:

no the broadband idea is not a good idea, it completely misrepresents how broadband works as a service, its not just fecking bits of cable in the ground that means you get broadband, theres a gigantic network behind it that connects you with the internet world thats constantly being upgraded to support it. Openreach only own the cable from the exchange to your house, this is like saying you can travel anywhere in the world for free, because theyve got rid of any tolls on the M25.

ultimately what Corbyn is offering is in 15 years time (by which time that technology will be obsolete) quicker ways to download porn or play stupid games like Fortnight, because those frankly are still the biggest use of the internet, followed by ordering more plastic rubbish off ebay or amazon.

I keep seeing people claiming the internet or access to it is like gaining access to some modern version of the great library of alexandria, do you reckon they had cyber bullies in that library ? fake news ? extremisim ? scam artists ? Shallow, if not patently irrational, opinions based on bad reasoning and sometimes no reasoning at all appear to be more prevalent than ever...

https://youtu.be/LTJvdGcb7Fs

Ah, fantastic show Avenue Q. Never laughed so much in my life, especially for that song.

Pross

rick_chasey said:

BoJo got two scandals incoming, the arcuri one is not going away and the Russian exKGB meeting.

He really is becoming our very own Trump.

surrey_commuter

awavey said:

I keep seeing people claiming the internet or access to it is like gaining access to some modern version of the great library of alexandria, do you reckon they had cyber bullies in that library ? fake news ? extremisim ? scam artists ? Shallow, if not patently irrational, opinions based on bad reasoning and sometimes no reasoning at all appear to be more prevalent than ever...

In my opinion the internet is as transformative as the first industrial revolution, if you were around for that I imagine you would be moaning that it was a waste of time as people were playing silly tunes on their steam whistles

kingstongraham

rick_chasey said:

BoJo got two scandals incoming, the arcuri one is not going away and the Russian exKGB meeting.

Apparently after a previous affair, he was advised to “bear in mind the definition of close associate for the future”.

Pross

Stevo, are you really happy if Infrastructure in this country 'isn't as bad as people make out'? Unfortunately the numbers being quoted are probably not even enough to get us back on level terms with many of those that will be our rivals in business let alone become the leaders. When it comes to more traditional infrastructure like rail I don't think we'll be able to get back to the level of the best as it has been left without sufficient investment for half a century and HS2 shows the costs of linking just a handful of cities with a 21st century rail line so we'd be looking at probably 10 times that to get a truly modern nationwide network (by which time HS1 and 2 would probably be behind the times). I travel by train 2 or 3 days a week and whilst long delays and cancellations are probably 'only' once a month or so it's very rare that my journey is on time. The trains are packed to the extent that I've seen people left on the platform for my journey into Bristol and in the past 18 months doing the journey regularly I've probably only had a seat on two or three occasions. I do get a seat on my other regular journey but the service is prone to cancellation and often reduced to a single carriage which is then crowded a few stops after I get on.

Hopefully we can invest sufficiently in getting our digital infrastructure upgraded before we fall too far behind in that area as that is going to be key if we want to keep our position as a major economy (we have worse broadband connectivity in the UK than many developing nations and I believe we are even worse on mobile connectivity although that is possibly partially due to issues overcoming objections to new masts etc.). Also, like it or not, we do need to think about climate change and making our infrastructure more conducive to reducing emissions both by cleaner generation and by reducing impacts from transport whether by making home working a better option or making vehicles cleaner.

I'm not an advocate of tax and spend in general but infrastructure is one area where investment really has to be continuous just to stay still.

kingstongraham

When I've worked on projects at a steel plant/quarry/factory/brewery/retailer, I saw there were quite a lot of people who would struggle to do their job from home.

There are some (like me) who could do some of their work from home, but only because I have decent broadband.

pinno

Stevo_666 said:

Just giving examples to show things aren't as bad as ypu make out. Although some people recognise that life isn't perfect or fair. I'm one of them.

It's far from perfect and it's far from fair.

Stevo_666 said:

And as asked above, how much would your grand plans cost?

[Why not throw in another suggestion that you're alright Jack?]

Apart from avoiding the question for the second time regarding BoJo's £500m Beeching reversal plan, we reap the long term benefits of that investment. Or at least, we'll reduce the long term costs.

The housing problem is the biggest crises this country faces. It needs heavy investment and much more incentive to build on say, brownfield. Family's kicked from pillar to post - from one school to anther because landlords can oust them on a whim and will charge extortionate rents. It's not a good situation. No rent authority; removed by Thatcher.
You may take the view that these are the benefit scroungers and don't deserve proper, affordable housing but with the prohibitive costs of buying, I wonder how many fit the bracket of the 'benefit scroungers'?

The Tory solution: cap housing benefits, not rent. The wrong way around IMO.

Rail: almost £10k for a season ticket?? From your very own Torygraph:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/15/dawn-10k-commute-rail-fares-see-highest-rise-five-years/

As far as this life ain't perfect bollox, take a look at this with regards to acute services:

From: Tim Farron, on the subject of travelling for treatment in Cumbria:

"They include stories of the pain they went through in travelling hours every day to get the treatment that they desperately needed; stories of families who suffered watching relatives deteriorate as the long days of arduous travel visibly took their toll; and stories of choosing not to proceed with treatment because of the unbearable rigours of travelling huge distances.
"

Withdrawing from treatment because of the unbearable distances?!

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2018-01-10/debates/54F60FF6-0384-4DB0-87F4-93E4F0BC8698/CancerTreatmentPatientTravelTimes

But if you want to keep muddling through (which we are very good at) and you want to adopt short termism, then carry on and enjoy the bliss of myopia.

So, for the third time, what do you think of BoJo's £500m 'Beeching reversal' proposal?

johnsmith314

longshot said:

Openreach are a joke. Whether that's down to their own failings or just have far too big a job to handle, I don't know. They are the single biggest obstacle to businesses being able to relocate quickly to new premises. There are alternatives coming through but mainly in London and the other major cities.

I am anti-nationalisation but there are a few exceptions for me - Openreach would be one, Water another and possibly Network Rail (rather than the TOCs).

On a separate note for those that understand this better than me, isn't 5G supposed to make wired broadband obsolete?

5G has extremely short range and would require an extraordinary infrastructure for a decent coverage. Elon Musk's satellite internet will, probably, get there before

kingstongraham

johnsmith314 said:

longshot said:

Openreach are a joke. Whether that's down to their own failings or just have far too big a job to handle, I don't know. They are the single biggest obstacle to businesses being able to relocate quickly to new premises. There are alternatives coming through but mainly in London and the other major cities.

I am anti-nationalisation but there are a few exceptions for me - Openreach would be one, Water another and possibly Network Rail (rather than the TOCs).

On a separate note for those that understand this better than me, isn't 5G supposed to make wired broadband obsolete?

5G has extremely short range and would require an extraordinary infrastructure for a decent coverage. Elon Musk's satellite internet will, probably, get there before

Those who have concerns over the state running broadband would (I assume) have concerns over a company launching 12,000 satellites to provide broadband across the whole world. I assume some states may have concerns also.

Stevo_666

pinno said:

Stevo_666 said:

Just giving examples to show things aren't as bad as ypu make out. Although some people recognise that life isn't perfect or fair. I'm one of them.

It's far from perfect and it's far from fair.

Stevo_666 said:

And as asked above, how much would your grand plans cost?

[Why not throw in another suggestion that you're alright Jack?]

Apart from avoiding the question for the second time regarding BoJo's £500m Beeching reversal plan, we reap the long term benefits of that investment. Or at least, we'll reduce the long term costs.

The housing problem is the biggest crises this country faces. It needs heavy investment and much more incentive to build on say, brownfield. Family's kicked from pillar to post - from one school to anther because landlords can oust them on a whim and will charge extortionate rents. It's not a good situation. No rent authority; removed by Thatcher.
You may take the view that these are the benefit scroungers and don't deserve proper, affordable housing but with the prohibitive costs of buying, I wonder how many fit the bracket of the 'benefit scroungers'?

The Tory solution: cap housing benefits, not rent. The wrong way around IMO.

Rail: almost £10k for a season ticket?? From your very own Torygraph:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/15/dawn-10k-commute-rail-fares-see-highest-rise-five-years/

As far as this life ain't perfect bollox, take a look at this with regards to acute services:

From: Tim Farron, on the subject of travelling for treatment in Cumbria:

"They include stories of the pain they went through in travelling hours every day to get the treatment that they desperately needed; stories of families who suffered watching relatives deteriorate as the long days of arduous travel visibly took their toll; and stories of choosing not to proceed with treatment because of the unbearable rigours of travelling huge distances.
"

Withdrawing from treatment because of the unbearable distances?!

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2018-01-10/debates/54F60FF6-0384-4DB0-87F4-93E4F0BC8698/CancerTreatmentPatientTravelTimes

But if you want to keep muddling through (which we are very good at) and you want to adopt short termism, then carry on and enjoy the bliss of myopia.

So, for the third time, what do you think of BoJo's £500m 'Beeching reversal' proposal?

'I'm alright Jack' when it comes to enjoying public services? That's a new one

I see you've reverted to throwing out multiple issues and hoping I don't have time to answer them all. I know your tactics too well. Let's do a quick reply:
- Rent caps will tend to drive landlords out of the market and reduce rental property supply. Law of unintended consequences etc.
- I'm not property development/social housing export but I'm sure there's more to it than just chucking money at the problem. Planning issues, space in cities. Fyi Sadiq has failed to get anywhere near his house building targets as London Mayor.
- Don't know enough about the Beeching proposal to comment at this stage. Just seen it mentioned.
- £10k for a season ticket; if you 're going to commute from somewhere like Yorkshire to London then yes it gets expensive. Shock horror. See my comment above about living somewhere sensible in relation to where you work. That's what I did...

Also you haven't answered my question about how much this will cost - so third time of asking (and I'll make it easier for you by giving you some pretend discretion): how much would you spend on all of this?

Stevo_666

Pross said:

Stevo, are you really happy if Infrastructure in this country 'isn't as bad as people make out'? Unfortunately the numbers being quoted are probably not even enough to get us back on level terms with many of those that will be our rivals in business let alone become the leaders. When it comes to more traditional infrastructure like rail I don't think we'll be able to get back to the level of the best as it has been left without sufficient investment for half a century and HS2 shows the costs of linking just a handful of cities with a 21st century rail line so we'd be looking at probably 10 times that to get a truly modern nationwide network (by which time HS1 and 2 would probably be behind the times). I travel by train 2 or 3 days a week and whilst long delays and cancellations are probably 'only' once a month or so it's very rare that my journey is on time. The trains are packed to the extent that I've seen people left on the platform for my journey into Bristol and in the past 18 months doing the journey regularly I've probably only had a seat on two or three occasions. I do get a seat on my other regular journey but the service is prone to cancellation and often reduced to a single carriage which is then crowded a few stops after I get on.

Hopefully we can invest sufficiently in getting our digital infrastructure upgraded before we fall too far behind in that area as that is going to be key if we want to keep our position as a major economy (we have worse broadband connectivity in the UK than many developing nations and I believe we are even worse on mobile connectivity although that is possibly partially due to issues overcoming objections to new masts etc.). Also, like it or not, we do need to think about climate change and making our infrastructure more conducive to reducing emissions both by cleaner generation and by reducing impacts from transport whether by making home working a better option or making vehicles cleaner.

I'm not an advocate of tax and spend in general but infrastructure is one area where investment really has to be continuous just to stay still.

I'm not averse to some sensible targeted investment but when people make out that we spend nothing on this sort of thing it is just a bit ridiculous. Let's also put this into perspective with the near £2 trillion national debt pile that is the cumulative effect of us living beyond our annual income as a nation. In the end we need to balance investment against 'cutting our cloth' to suit the realities.

I commute into London by train approx 3 times a week in rush hour and generally it's pretty good. I.e timely and I get a seat pretty much every time.

Same question to you as Pinno - what would your budget be if you were in charge?