The Labour Party. All discussion here please

[banjodeano]

6 minutes ago, lottiecass said:

There were some good in labours policies but folk aren't so stupid not to realise it would lead to massive debt. I would like the utilities back in public hands and was pleased to see that, but free wifi ?

what about a peoples bank that they wanted to implement,

  Also what about the publicly-owned company they wanted to create to make cheap versions of medicines the NHS needs but cannot afford, such as Orkambi, which is denied to thousands of children and young people with life-shortening cystic fibrosis.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/24/labour-pledges-to-break-patents-and-offer-latest-drugs-on-nhs

[the_bloke]

17 minutes ago, Albert the Cat said:

The free broadband idea was actually an attempt to close the social divide by giving the poorer in society access to tools that are very applicable to education nowadays. It is unsurprising to see that the uneducated don’t see the internet as a natural extension to education. 

It's clear you didn't read the technical aspects of it being mooted by Labour. One of which was that not just the hardware but the provision of the Internet in the UK was to all be nationalised, as private run ISP's were to be have punitive punishments that would put them out of business unless they opened up to the new, government run service provider. So basically BT, Virgin, Sky etc would be nationalised. Once state run, it would be easier for the state to then study your browsing behaviour, control your line speed, remove your ability to have things like static IP addresses and most importantly for them to push all your traffic through a new shiny socialist firewall to make sure you don't read anything they don't want you to. Like China.

17 minutes ago, banjodeano said:

what about a peoples bank that they wanted to implement,

  Also what about the publicly-owned company they wanted to create to make cheap versions of medicines the NHS needs but cannot afford, such as Orkambi, which is denied to thousands of children and young people with life-shortening cystic fibrosis.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/24/labour-pledges-to-break-patents-and-offer-latest-drugs-on-nhs

I missed that one. Was that really a pledge? To create a state run manufacturer of medicines of medicines that are still under patent by the originating pharma company? That's theft.

Edited December 16, 2019 by the_bloke

[Baron99]

Interesting point made by the Editor of the Guardian yesterday on the Andrew Marr programme.  She stated in the last 10 days of the election run up, Labour spent a small fortune & way more than the Tories, focusing their campaign on social media outlets.  For that read potential voters under 30.

 

Meanwhile while, the Tories were out in numbers in the Labour / Brexit leave area, physically knocking on doors, engaging with voters. 

 

Maybe another reason for a drop in Labour supporter?  To much emphasis on the first time voters & the student vote, while at the same time, taking their long time core votes for granted? 

[Albert the Cat]

1 hour ago, the_bloke said:

It's clear you didn't read the technical aspects of it being mooted by Labour. One of which was that not just the hardware but the provision of the Internet in the UK was to all be nationalised, as private run ISP's were to be have punitive punishments that would put them out of business unless they opened up to the new, government run service provider. So basically BT, Virgin, Sky etc would be nationalised. Once state run, it would be easier for the state to then study your browsing behaviour, control your line speed, remove your ability to have things like static IP addresses and most importantly for them to push all your traffic through a new shiny socialist firewall to make sure you don't read anything they don't want you to. Like China.

I missed that one. Was that really a pledge? To create a state run manufacturer of medicines of medicines that are still under patent by the originating pharma company? That's theft.

You are mis-reporting like crazy so ultimately your post becomes utter rubbish. Labour only implied the nationalisation of Openworld. No other network or provider was mentioned. 
 

Did you actually read your post before posting? You are now comparing us to China?

[apelike]

1 hour ago, Albert the Cat said:

The free broadband idea was actually an attempt to close the social divide by giving the poorer in society access to tools that are very applicable to education nowadays. It is unsurprising to see that the uneducated don’t see the internet as a natural extension to education. 

Hang on it seems it's the over educated that still believe the poorer in society (whatever that means) don't already have access to the internet when that only applies to a small percentage of people in the UK. Perhaps you could tell us how many schools, colleges or educational establishments don't already have that access? On the one hand we have the idea that the uneducated people on social media were influenced by russian propaganda, then we now have the idea from you that it was not possible because they are uneducated and didn't have access to the internet. 

Edited December 16, 2019 by apelike

[alchresearch]

15 hours ago, Albert the Cat said:

The free broadband idea was actually an attempt to close the social divide by giving the poorer in society access to tools that are very applicable to education nowadays. It is unsurprising to see that the uneducated don’t see the internet as a natural extension to education. 

I've no problem with giving those in need free broadband, if it helps them job search, get better deals on their utilities and so on.

 

But why not just give them a grant for a basic 16Mb subscription that costs £19 a month? 

There's no need to give it to every home or business for free.

[Ridgewalk]

17 hours ago, banjodeano said:

erm, but they didnt reject socialist policies, they kicked labour ass because of brexit, if it was a straight toss up between labours socialist policies and the Tory ones, i am not so sure we would be having a tory government in power, a lot of labours policies were quite popular, its just that all the media wanted to talk about was antisemitism and brexit

 

Not just Brexit. Any " objective" academic study about the Media's influence on voting patters would be very interesting.

 

Any Labour leader will be subject to the same treatment. Just how it works I'm afraid

16 hours ago, Baron99 said:

Interesting point made by the Editor of the Guardian yesterday on the Andrew Marr programme.  She stated in the last 10 days of the election run up, Labour spent a small fortune & way more than the Tories, focusing their campaign on social media outlets.  For that read potential voters under 30.

 

Meanwhile while, the Tories were out in numbers in the Labour / Brexit leave area, physically knocking on doors, engaging with voters. 

 

Maybe another reason for a drop in Labour supporter?  To much emphasis on the first time voters & the student vote, while at the same time, taking their long time core votes for granted? 

I did lots of leafleting and canvassing in a 72 % Leave area but didn't see or hear of à Tory doing the same.

[the_bloke]

16 hours ago, Albert the Cat said:

You are mis-reporting like crazy so ultimately your post becomes utter rubbish. Labour only implied the nationalisation of Openworld. No other network or provider was mentioned. 
 

Did you actually read your post before posting? You are now comparing us to China?

Did you miss snippets like this?

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50427369

 

`Mr McDonnell said that if other broadband providers did not want to give access to British Broadband, then they would also be taken into public ownership.` This was well publicized at the time. Shame you missed what it really meant because you don't research things properly.

[Anna B]

19 hours ago, lottiecass said:

There were some good in labours policies but folk aren't so stupid not to realise it would lead to massive debt. I would like the utilities back in public hands and was pleased to see that, but free wifi ?

The world runs on debt. If the financial banking crisis taught us nothing, it taught us that. 

We are the fifth richest country in the world and yet we can't afford services that are commonplace in Scandinavia?

It's amazing how politicians can always finance their own pet projects, expensive wars etc, but not srvices for the people.

Edited December 17, 2019 by Anna B

[apelike]

1 hour ago, Anna B said:

We are the fifth richest country in the world and yet we can't afford services that are commonplace in Scandinavia?

But we probably could if we were willing to pay the same taxation rates as the scandinavian countries do. Their income taxation is fairly high for all and not just the wealthy.

 

Tax revenue as a percentage of GDP:

 

Denmark 50.8%

Norway 54.8%

Sweden 49.8%

 

UK 34.4%