Election 2019, Week 1
 

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

OK folks, the passage of the election bill looks like a formality now, so we might as well kick this off.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Do we need to add some more options - Other, Not Voting, Not Eligible To Vote?

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

It’ll be interesting if that hurts him in the end or if the way he publicly distanced himself from the extension request protects him.

It’ll also be interesting to see if Labour do collapse because if not the Tories are unlikely to get a majority, they’ll probably lose seats like Richmond to the Lib Dem’s and some seats in Scotland so they need big gains in Labour areas

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Given the volatility of the electorate l would say all bets are off as how many are going to vote tactically and how many will say one thing and do exactly the opposite when it comes to voting and that is just two of a whole lot of possible electoral variants.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Will Swinson lose her seat to the Nats?

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

It is always possible as its certainly not a safe seat as such.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Unless the Liberal Democrats have a shocking campaign probably not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_D...t_constituency)

She lost it by a few thousand votes in the worst election the Liberal Democrats have ever seen. A 30% increase for the SNP. Since then she regained it, has a more comfortable majority and on current polling the Liberal Democrats should expect more voters,

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Johnson has a majority of 5,034 in https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Uxbridge..._constituency) so this would make interesting watching esp. if Labour & the LD's get together :)

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

He will probably stand in a safe seat.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

I never tell the truth to anyone taking a doorstep or street poll on principle.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Indeed that is the rumour doing the rounds.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Meanwhile the Mp for neighbouring town Grimsby has received some disturbing e mails.


Ms Onn also received an email that called her a “vile, treacherous b**tard” and accused her of taking the decision so she could be “rewarded financially...or bought off with a seat in the Lords”.

“Maybe they just have dirt on you from some horrid sexual or other kind of secret,” the email continued.

“Doesn't really matter, does it? You are a vile, treacherous b**tard if you bote [sic] for this deal. You are nothing to do with the Labour party. Hopefully sudden incapacity or death, from some as yet undiscovered health problem, may yet prevent you voting with this far right minority government. If even that forlorn wish fails. May you be hated by many for ever.”


very disturbing :(

https://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/n...raitor-3478414

I think she will win the seat despite backing Boris.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Regardless of any MPs position on Brexit that is an absolute disgrace. No one should be subject to that abuse.

I would come back to the representative vs direct democracy discussion and argue that this highlights that the general public has a distinct lack of knowledge of how our political system works.

---------- Post added at 10:19 ---------- Previous post was at 10:12 ----------

Amber Rudd - Not standing at the GE

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

:Yes:

My father (when in his early 70's) took part in a street poll by the local newspaper. His picture was printed, along with the name he gave . . Alfred Hookem

I think it's hereditary ;)

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Amber Rudd, the former Conservative work and pensions secretary, who currently sits as an independent, has announced that she won’t stand as a candidate at the election.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a4274036.html

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

The link in denphones post above also has a link to a list of MP's not standing, that could be worth keeping an eye on :)

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Likely to vote for our standing MP who is now Independent. Good bloke who cares for the area and nation and will vote against the whip if he feels it's needed.

He is also a positive campaigner. He never mentions the opposition in elections or regular updates.

Just seen from article above that he will be standing as Tory.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

I think Steve Brine will lose his seat in Winchester. His track record, up until his recent overdue rebellion, has been a Tory party yes man. His previous voting track record does not do him many favours:

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Steve_Brine

A humorous critique of his Twitter record sums him up:

https://www.politics.co.uk/comment-a...ee-steve-brine

His "finest" hour was opening Winchester's second food back in 2017:

Winchester MP Steve Brine opens new Stanmore Basics Bank

You couldn't make it up ..

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Good for her... good for us... one less Tory to worry about.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

She's an Independant and hadn't had the whip restored, she gave up the whip.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Bill to trigger December 12 General Election clears the House of Lords and will go to the Queen to receive Royal Ascent

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...use-Lords.html

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Twitter banning political adverts. Good.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Its a pity Facebook ain't doing it as well though.

https://news.sky.com/story/sky-views...ebook-11849805

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Pity we can't ban them on TV.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Pity we can't ban both Twitter & Facebook ;)

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

I'd agree with him on many of those above and he does engage with his constituents. The big thing the LibDem candidate is pushing is stopping Brexit, even my wife who supports the LibDems may vote against her because of that.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Here we go then *yawn* Corbyn dives straight in with an impossible task . .

Jeremy Corbyn in election pitch against 'corrupt system'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50242562

The Labour leader will promise to "rebuild" public services and hit out at "tax dodgers, dodgy landlords, bad bosses and big polluters". . . best of luck with that one :rolleyes:

and first chuckle of the day: :D

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

No doubt like Corbyn Bojo will come out with his own unadulterated bullshit later today as the main parties begin their campaigns with more of the same bullshit which they usually tell us.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

I think the number of people who would oppose equal gay rights are very much in the minority and dropping - see http://www.brin.ac.uk/figures/attitu...ds-gay-rights/ for an interesting analysis.

His voting record especially in the areas above are not vote winners for the significant majority, quite the opposite. I know the LD candidate personally and she offers far more that Brine does. The LD policies when allied with the current Tory trajectory bodes well for her chances of winning esp. if there is degree of tactical voting.

Winchester used to be a strong LD seat so the latent support is there .. should be interesting!

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

I don't use either so not that bothered;)

---------- Post added at 09:28 ---------- Previous post was at 09:27 ----------

Gulp he's coming after me;)

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

You scoundrel, cash in hand boat rides out to Spurn Point and back, diesel engine polluting the atmosphere, cutting up the regular traffic into Hull etc :D

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

You can mock, and you will repeatedly, but the Tories underestimate this message at their peril. So many of his points resonate with many voters. The Tories esp. Cummins may want the GE to be all about Brexit but it is so much more than that.

If Labour pound on about the failed tenure of this Government, the venal character of Johnson, the race to the bottom they want to embark on and the support of the wealthy at the expense of the majority then they will gain votes. I personally think the Corbyn factor will blunt their ability to gain a majority so we are heading for coalition territory I feel.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Mocking?? They're all as bad as each other, I don't (won't) discriminate between them, all will get the same treatment on 'undeliverable' promises and stupidity . . . do you really think Corbyn (or any PM) can eradicate corruption and tax evasion by the very same people who run the country? :D

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

No it isn’t, this election is all about Brexit. Corbyn will be desperate to not talk about Brexit as the Labour policy is stupid.

Labour will try to talk about anything other than Brexit.

If they succeed in changing the agenda they have a chance. If Brexit stays as the focus of this election they will find it challenging.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Did not Theresa May make the 2017 General Election all about Brexit as its a potentially a very dangerous road for a party to make that the fulcrum of their election campaign in my view.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

You mean like the Lib Dems?

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Thats another big mistake in my view for them to be campaigning in this forthcoming election on a big remain platform.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Corbyns telling lies to the gullible party members,i doubt the public will go for his con tricks and shallow promises .

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Westminster voting intention:

CON: 41% (+8)
LAB: 24% (-)
LDEM: 20% (-3)
BREX: 7% (-3)
GRN: 3% (-1)

via
@IpsosMORI
, 25 - 28 Oct

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Yes, mocking .. and yes, I do think a PM can "eradicate corruption and tax evasion by the very same people who run the country". We just need to elect the right person ..

---------- Post added at 13:02 ---------- Previous post was at 13:01 ----------

Just repeat and substitute the word Corbyn for Johnson and you have sumed up where we are perfectly.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Would you care to explain . . to a simple man like me . . just how the 'right person' could achieve this act of enormous magnitude without crippling the country and its economy?

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Where we are is corbyn giving the same speech he gave in 2017.......................

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

https://twitter.com/bbc5live/status/1189857638160293888

Labour MP nobody in the UK should be a billionaire.

We'd be screwed under these clowns.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Labour want everyone to be on benefits,it's how they secure the votes they need.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

She did, but the public were less bothered about Brexit then as they thought the issue had been decided and would be acted upon. JC was able to successfully turn the agenda onto other issues.

This is less the case this time around, Brexit has not been delivered.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

He didn't mention anything about not crippling the country and its economy. I have to give it to Corbyn, he would do that very well indeed.

Those who are even thinking of voting for that dangerous Marxist should bear that in mind. Don't say you weren't warned.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Seems fair to me. There is no moral justification for such extreme wealth. What is more practical is a wealth tax over a certain number of millions to redistribute this wealth to the citizens of the country that actually deserve it.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

The politics of envy. Talk about killing the goose that lays golden eggs.

When are these people going to work out where all the money comes from to support the failing NHS?

---------- Post added at 15:28 ---------- Previous post was at 15:27 ----------

I can tell that you are Corbyn's kind of fella. Why not take a holiday in Venezuala to get a taste of his medicine? I really don't think you'd like it much.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Bless ..

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

It's true. They want everyone to get paid for doing nothing.

I think that might have an impact on our competitiveness....

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Any more tired cliches to wheel out? This one dimensional cartoon world you live in is fast becoming comical: "Marxist Corbyn, Politics of Envy, Goose that lays golden eggs, Holidays in Venezuela, etc." More please! .. buys more popcorn ...

The world is far more complicated that you seem to be able to grasp.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Bless.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

It’s more accurate to say that one of the key strategies of the New Labour project was to create a client state in which large numbers of middle class voters were also direct recipients of handouts. The tax credit system, for example, was designed to deposit a small amount of money in the bank accounts of even reasonably well off families. It acted like a mini party political broadcast that appeared on millions of bank statements every month. It has proven extraordinarily difficult to unpick as well, because Gordon Brown located the tax credit system in HMRC, not the benefits agency, which is part of the reason Universal Credit has been such a pig to roll out. Add to that non means tested winter fuel payments and free TV licences and you find Labour really did have almost everybody on one benefit or another by the time it was booted out in 2010.

It remains to be seen what Labour plans to do with UC - it’s hard to see how they can be true to the many criticisms levelled at it, and things like the two child policy in the tax credit and child benefit systems, unless they’re planning to just halt and reverse the reforms. If they do that, then we will indeed end up with a situation where very large numbers of people are receiving benefits of one kind or another.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Define “Deserve”

Provide examples of those “Deserving”

Give me details of how much money you will award them, and reasons for attributing those amounts.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

People who sit on their arses do not deserve distributed wealth, which is what this Labour clown MP was advocating.

Labour's stance would be, doesn't matter if you hold a degree or have high skills, because the person who does not or who cannot be arsed, will get the same as the person who has worked hard to achieve his profession.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Shouldn't Labour be cheering that somebody, eg Sir Jim Ratcliffe of INEOS, can go from a council house to being a self-made billionaire. Although he did benefit from going to a grammar school.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

The whole idea of people making billions is a failure of capitalism. If there's that level of income and profits in an industry competition should arise and drive prices down.

Of course we sold nationalised industry on the cheap to allow these profits to arise in markets where no genuine competition exists. Yay!

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

How dare they make profits and generate taxes.:rolleyes: Even Cuba has had to relent and allow some capitalism, iirc mainly tourism related.

Competition can't work in all arenas. If something requires a large investment to build, there has to be enough spare demand for it not to be just sitting there as an expensive white elephant. Even if the plant was built, the costs still have to be recovered, so there is little scope for price reduction. You can't easily have, eg 10 plants, all working at an average 10% capacity.

Just look at the high street and energy supply companies going bust, to see what happens when you add extra business costs and squeeze prices.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Nobody says that you can’t generate profits, as you say it creates tax revenues. My point, which you seem to have missed, is that economic theory is that suppliers enter the market and drive down prices in the consumer interest. You know, the interest of the 99% of us that don’t own significant shares in previously nationalised industry and are isolated from genuine competition - like EU workers competing for our jobs but for companies.

The theory has failed.

---------- Post added at 18:59 ---------- Previous post was at 18:29 ----------

Lays golden eggs... in Monaco it would appear.

https://www.theguardian.com/business...ax-monaco-move

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

You’re obviously very knowledgeable in “economic theory”.......................

Supply, demand etc but most importantly choice, desire. Products that beat the market, and accelerate before competing suppliers can catch up and when they do their response is inferior.

iPod v zune

Windows v Top view, visi on, Gem

iPhone v no-one (it took years for anyone to get near it)

So these examples of apple v Microsoft ( and both made duds along the way) but they were both so ahead of everyone else they made their founders billions. Do say that is wrong? That they should have had their wealth stripped from them?

Both have massive charitable foundations by the way.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

His businesses will still pay tax, and the article says "planning", not "has".


If you drive down profits by imposing additional costs, there reaches a point where they go bust. In the meantime, the tax revenue goes down, investment goes down, ability to expand goes down, etc.


Where exactly has Communism/Socialism actually succeeded? Russia? China? Cuba?

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

It’s a failure of capitalism, yes. Those billions aren’t coming from thin air, they’re coming from the pockets of consumers because competition doesn’t exist. That’s literally the economic definition of market failure.

The example you cite are innovative yes, but many are not in the previously nationalised industries. They’re benefiting from taxpayer investment previously made and being sold off cheap.

The fact they have charitable foundations is an irrelevance to the matter.

---------- Post added at 19:15 ---------- Previous post was at 19:09 ----------

I think it’s safe to say people planning to save £4bn in tax don’t wake up one morning with a dose of altruism and decide to pay it.

It’s okay though, they made £1bn of investment for some good news stories so the net loss of £3bn.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

I think there are two questions that then come from this:

1) How much of that profit should be channelled into one person's hands?

2) What happens when a product dominates the market to such an extent even superior products can't get a look in? This is especially true of products where critical mass is important - think Uber - so first mover advantage becomes the only thing that matters.

The danger we face now is more and more processes will become automated which will cut more people out of the jobs in creating that wealth giving more of it to a narrower group of people at the top. The people who generally can afford to implement these systems of automation will be those with the money to do so. More and more money will go to fewer and fewer people and it won't matter how hard you work - robots can work harder - or how much education you have.

It's not a simple question but an interesting one.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

The alleged £4bn has already been subjected to UK tax.

Which nationalised industries has the likes of Apple and Microsoft benefited from?

Prices have been driven down by lower production costs in India and China.

Where do you think all the available money for giving out mortgages, business loans, and personal loans comes from?

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

He can’t save £4bn in tax if he’s already paid tax on it. You are muddying they waters between corporate tax and personal tax.

I don’t get to say if prefer to opt out of PAYE but I’ll still pay national insurance but not income tax. Why should billionaires get to choose?

Absolutely mystifying logic.

Where did I describe Apple or Microsoft as benefiting from nationalised industry? You’ve just threw up a straw man because of your flawed logic.

You’ll actually find banks invent money out of fresh air to provide mortgages as a multiple of cash deposits held.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Because competitors don’t exist because they can’t come up with a product as good, for the price. That’s not market failure, everyone else had the same opportunity, one of Microsofts competitors for a windows type OS was IBM. Much bigger and better funded.

There are always winners and losers, new entrants into a market by their presence do not guarantee competition, they have to have a desirable product.

As long as they are given the chance to market and sell their product fairly, that is all that is required. The consumer decides.

You also didn’t answer whether Gates and Job’s family, should be stripped of their wealth.

BT was sold off 35 years ago, before Optical Fibre was even a thing. Deregulation of telecommunications in the U.K. was , and is, a resounding success.

If telecoms was still a state run utility, Jesus! you think it’s bad now? We’d probably still on dial-up.

The water and energy sectors were privatised over 30 years ago. Who are the billionaires makes billions after investing billions in Victorian infrastructure?

Also people forget that the utilities also had their own operational arms. I.E. the guys that dug up the roads, designing, maintaining and installing. That is all now contracted to 3rd parties providing real competition and value in the sector, with cross sector savings and expertise passed back to the consumer. I bet they don’t re-nationalise those bits.


As someone well versed in “economic theory”, you don’t show it. Especially in the area of once nationalised utilities.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

The £4bn comes from post-tax profits of the businesses. They are entitled to live anywhere in the world, or the profits could go to another parent company that could be based anywhere in the world. Still no UK tax liable.



You said.

The examples given were Apple and MS.


Banks can't "provide mortgages as a multiple of cash deposits held". There are liquidity rules. The nearest they can do is essentially recycle the money by selling on the mortgages, as Northern Rock did. Somebody still has to "buy" those mortgages with money from somewhere real.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

All this talk about profits . . is this profit before the reinvestment to maintain and improve the infrastructure required to keep their competitive edge?

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

I didn’t see the value of responding to your point. You are describing market failure. Over and over you are describing market failure.


And BT continue to benefit from the customers and infrastructure carried over from the nationalised company. The network isn’t just the fibre, it’s the poles, ducts, property and network they benefit from.

A competitor can’t just dig up Britain and deploy an identical network and give us competition which is why regulation is required.

From their own pockets or from the revenues. If it’s the latter, which we know it is, ultimately that comes from the customer.

If there’s genuine competition and innovation why would they?

Far from it.

---------- Post added at 20:12 ---------- Previous post was at 20:07 ----------

That’s fine. Old Boy’s golden eggs go to Monaco. That’s exactly my point.

It’s have benefitted from a hyphen between “not” and “in” to make the distinction.

They don’t. They need reserves as a percentage of the loans. The rest doesn’t exist except on a spreadsheet.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Define “superior” ?

Betamax was supposedly technologically superior to VHS. But VHS was superior on price, availability, manufacture.............


And that is different from the Luddites and saboteurs of a few hundred years ago how?

---------- Post added at 20:46 ---------- Previous post was at 20:36 ----------

Because you can’t. Well not with an intelligent argument anyway

Ha, that is what is happening all over the nation as we speak. As It did in the early 90’s

Please don’t comment on sectors you clearly know nothing about.

I asked who the billionaires were, clearly you don’t know, maybe there aren’t any, maybe there are.......but you don’t know either way.

so you agree privatisation works in principle?

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

It’s a straw man argument unworthy of reply. My point is that billionaires arise from supernormal profits, which occurs in market failure. Your leap that they should be “stripped of wealth” isn’t related to my point.

Also I didn’t say this wasn’t happening, I said BT benefit from the existing state funded infrastructure. That’s a statement of fact, regardless of what investment may (or may not) be taking place. Equally, a small number of providers in a market doesn’t necessarily benefit the consumer as it trends to oligopoly pricing not perfect competition (as I’m sure you “no”).

Irrelevant to my point. There’s so many straw men here you could have a rugby team.

No. Perfect competition works in principle. Where a large number of suppliers offer directly comparable products in a market where there are low barriers to entry. It fails where there are high barriers to entry, or products aren’t directly comparable or easily substituted for each other. Like an Eastern European migrant taking an unskilled job in the industrial heartlands of England - easily substituted.

If the barrier to entry is building a £30bn fibre network, I don’t think my mates and I can just go down to the bank in the morning and set up our own broadband company.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

I am not advocating stopping the rise of automation but pointing out that the current system will likely cause the benefits of that automation to be largely won by the people who get their first by having the wealth to do so.

The industrial revolution was eventually met with a response in the form of the labor movement and more rights for workers. There is nothing wrong with a governmental and/or societal response to changes in work and wealth creation. The latest challenge we face is the march of automation and how that will radically change our society. I think this particular revolution is different as well because of the speed at which it'll happen.

How do we handle it? Where will the good new jobs come from? Even the jobs made by deliveroo - with low wages and few employment rights - are fleeting until that can be automated. Universal Income, 4 day weeks are at least examples of people thinking about these things rather than dismissing them as if nothing ever changes or the market is a uncontrollable force that never needed to be challenged by government.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

A&A is a broadband company and doesn't own a fibre network as are Spectrum, Zen etc.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

And presumably wholesale Openreach products. That’s not genuine competition when the underlying price is a single product and supplier.

It is a way regulators intervene in a market that doesn’t naturally trend to competition though.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

City Fibre

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Not necessarily, re, my points regarding tech giants ( which were just an example, other examples o/s tech apply equally)

You don’t believe in wealth distribution then? You’re perfectly fine with Gates and Jobs and their Estates keeping all that wealth?

did they benefit from not starting from zero - yes I will give you that, but they inherited an aged out of date lemon, that they have sweated that they cannot sweat anymore.

Conversely, the Virgin Media Network was built, and is still built, totally on private finance. What should we do with “ billionaire” John malone? The telecoms market isn’t failed. It’s thriving. Is he allowed to keep his billions? He hasn’t raped any state assets. In the.com bubble many millionaires and billionaires lost millions and billions ..... no bail out for them. When you risk all and can lose all, why not take all when you win?

So we’re clear, all these “billionaires” profiting off the back of previous nationalised sectors...and you can come up with zero.

I know you’re an expert in “economic theory”

But let’s look at directly comparable products. Let’s look at apples.

Apples are apples. But I breed apple trees that produce more apples, and bigger apples than my competitors. I also devise a way to harvest the apples quicker and cheaper.

Now I can sell my apples cheaper than my competitors, for the same profit, perhaps more. I make so much money I buy my competitors orchards but they’re not as efficient as mine so I shut them down. Now i’m The biggest, if not the only , apple producer in the region. Now I can set my price etc etc etc.

It’s all about innovation, doing it quicker, larger and cheaper than your competitor.

You lack vision. There are at least a dozen or more regional alt-nets that have secured government and private finance and are building FTTP networks right now. Real speculators and entrepreneurs, the wealth creators socialists hate.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

What do you think about companies using large venture capital to squeeze out the market, running at a loss, to achieve dominance?

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

The fact you can name a single supplier (on a small scale) doesn’t mean the telecoms market trends to perfect competition.

---------- Post added at 22:03 ---------- Previous post was at 21:54 ----------

Putting more words in my mouth. It’s possible to think the system can be fairer without “stripping billionaires of wealth” as you put it.

I’m not sure the cable network is the best example of it being viable when NTL entered Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the process.


[QUOTE]So we’re clear, all these “billionaires” profiting off the back of previous nationalised sectors...and you can come up with zero.

I know you’re an expert in “economic theory”

A laughable proposition.


Government finance! Long live the private sector.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

LLU and the subsquent VULA with FTTC has created the most competitive Telecoms market in Europe. Granted it is now reliant on dated technology, but most of that was achieved through solid regulation and private finance.

In most areas there is a choice, be they Openreach delivered propositions or private network like Virgin Media or Cityfibre. The market has worked incredibly well in this country, although price doesn't always reflect quality.

Its very rare for innovation to come from publically owned industries, those run as a state enterprise are an exception to that rule. But nationalised assets have a nasty habit of needing subsidy from the taxpayer, which is why the mines, steel works, shipbuilding died out in many areas.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

This is a list of companies building FTTH networks right now.

To be clear these are building their own networks and not using BT ( although I have included Openreach as they too are building)

It is not exhaustive, just the ones I know about.

You can try and test me on the telecoms sector but I have been in the industry for 25 years so knock yourself out.




---------- Post added at 22:19 ---------- Previous post was at 22:06 ----------

What do you suggest?

Glad you brought that up. Yes as part of the .com bubble. Many millionaires and billionaires financed the buildings of global fibre networks and lost the lot.

Massive infrastructure was built with private money, it didn’t stack up, it cost billions. But it got done and it’s legacy remains today. In a govt managed scenario two things would have happened:

1. It wouldn’t have been built to begin with
2. Tax payer would have payed for it.

Only laughable thing about that proposition is your inability to a.understand it, or b. Provide an intelligent answer to it.

Your ignorance is amazing, well done. Public financing with private professionalism and delivery - a perfect partnership.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

The third on your list City Fibre - 70 000 homes passed.

You are having an absolute laugh if you think BT and Virgin price their products to millions of customers in order to compete with this. Given the high cost of deployment prices will remain high anyway in the first instance.

The pricing trend isn’t downward.

I’m not here to challenge you on your exhaustive knowledge of tiny broadband companies that have a negligible effect on the UK market of 27 million premises. I’ll concede that you could google them.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

The product and the market will see it out in the end.

If it’s no good it’s no good, no matter how much money you throw at it. The consumer is not an idiot.

I don’t disagree that some people will be bullied or pushed aside along the way and nothing makes that right. But ultimately the consumer decides.

Unless they don’t get to decide.

Like if the government decides for you.

---------- Post added at 22:33 ---------- Previous post was at 22:24 ----------

You would have to combine all the other altnets numbers against VM & BT for a true reflection.

Also what do you think is driving VM to offer 1G, services? It’s not BT.

It is all the other companies listed. Are driving down prices? No you’re right they probably aren’t. Are they driving up service and innovation - absolutely. Again nothing a state monopoly would be inclined to do

Good, because you can’t


i didn’t need to.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Companies can already have dominated the market by then. Uber is a classic example who rolled out aggressively and made huge losses. As have Amazon until only recently. The plan is to run at a loss - backed by investors - to see out local competitors and once they've cornered the market then they can raise prices and make a profit.

But they always have on some issues. We have anti-monopoly laws, we can block mergers if it makes one company too big and we try to stop cartels too. The market is not an all-powerful force and can only work to consumers advantage if it's a level-playing field. That's where Government has to step in. Equally, they need to step in if their citizens are being exploited by corruption (i.e the aforementioned cartels) or as workers.

My argument (and haven't followed the other one) is not that capitalism is bad - it's done quite well - but that it needs intervention too and one area that we need to examine is people leveraging their wealth to dominate new areas of wealth production (such as automation) before 'the market' can challenge that and at the expensive of workforce.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

I take your point, but Uber is very London centric. Up here in gods own country at least and other northern outposts, Uber are not very popular.

That’s fine. Usually due to one company buying another and making a monopoly rather than a company that grows organically into a market dominant position, but I take your point.

Again a valid point and workers rights, wages, etc ....no argument from me.

But if you are employing slave Labour, in poor conditions and paying then 20p an hour. But still manufacturing a product no one wants..........you’re still going out of business.

It’s a fair , balanced and rational point. That won’t be challenged by me.

I agree.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

I’ve tried the Uber app a few times. Regardless of time or location it always says “swarm pricing” is in operation and the price is bumped right up. I’ve long suspected that it only works effectively in London.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Except they don't use a single product or supplier.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Actually...

And the corporate shareholders (none of the billionaires used their own funds) would have been able to write off any losses against tax liabilities.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Just have a look at your VM bills over the last few years to see capitalism at work ! ;)

As for the railways and utilities, its worked wonders I admit. :rolleyes:

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

I worked for ntl at the time, and had shares which just before the bubble burst we’re valued at something like $130 per share, within weeks they were worth less than $1.

Yes of course, they had liability of 11billion and in return were given a company worth substantially less than that at the time, and had to be recapitalised with new investments in order to operate.

Many telcos went into Ch11, and their assets once worth 10s of billions sold off for substantially less than their worth.

Worldcom, Global Crossing, 360 networks I could go on and on.

Believe me people lost money.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Don't remind me of that my bum still hurts.

my friend who was a company director lost just over £1,000,000.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

You sure about that? According to Hugh everybody sailed off into the sunset and didn’t lose a dime.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

I was on the inside mate not spouting rubbish from the sidelines with the help of google.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Indeed

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

It does need critical mass to really work.

Uber's plan is self-driving cars by which time they hope they'll have captured the majority of the market by simply being the app people have installed on their phones. So Uber's investors were happy to see them lose money on every ride simply to feed that aggressive expansion.

It's not working as well because self-driving cars are taking longer than they thought. They keep hitting problems with regulators in Europe and in some American cities over their safety checks and the way they treat drivers e.t.c.

All that said I do really like Uber because it is cheap and the app is good so :D

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Uber have to be get focussed on profitability and quickly, They're performance since they IPO'd has not been great at all. They have no clear route to profitability as yet. And their engineering is something of a shambles. (happens to all companies in the bay area as they transition out of startup. The same can also be said of Lyft....

Markets are wising up to over hyped IPO's look at what has happened to WeWork.(They didnt even IPO, they pulled their filing)

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

If you cannot come up with any of these examples yourself then there is no point debating the point with you ..

I sense your immediate stance is to equate "Deserving" with "Unemployed". There is a whole spectrum of situations between the destitute and the wealthy. What is up for discussion is the shape of this distribution.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

How much will i get ?

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Yeah WeWork was pretty funny really. About time these companies had a reality check.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Why would a party that aims to improve wealth & opportunity equality celebrate such an individual? He represents all that is morally bankrupt the current system: UK's richest man moves to Monaco to 'save £4bn in tax'

---------- Post added at 10:39 ---------- Previous post was at 10:35 ----------

You mean like the wealthy who inherit millions/billions so they can just "sit on their arses" and do nothing.

---------- Post added at 10:42 ---------- Previous post was at 10:39 ----------

People making billions is a not a failure of capitalism, rather it is the natural apex in evolutionary terms. With a fully deregulated economy with low taxation, market forces will allow these individuals to appear & prosper.