Is Labour's new FREE broadband policy just a way for them to control the internet?

RyanEzio

I've seen McDonald has got the cheque book out again to bribe voters.


Is this "FREE" internet promise, just a distraction for a socialist Labour party to control the internet?


I've been taught nothing is ever free in life.


Always check the small print!

Herzlos

Broadband is almost becoming a necessity these days, so I'm all for some way of ensuring that the poorest still get access to it. It's needed to deal with benefits, pay bills and so on. It' also relatively cheap to provide.


I'm not sure about globally free, but having a government provided basic broadband only service at say, 2Mb, would allow those that need it to get it, whilst encouraging those who can afford it to get something faster. I think we get up to about 250Mb in the UK (whilst Korea has has 1Gb for years already).


I don't see how this would leave Labour to control the internet anymore than the Tories have already implemented? It's all being tracked and invaded anyway at the backbone level regardless of who provides the wiring to the house.


Going further, to environmental targets and productivity - you may find that providing better and universal broadband improves productivity - you don't need to have someone at a desk take a payment that could have been done online, people can work from home more efficiently. So it may actually pay for itself in improved efficiency, as well as providing an avenue towards reducing commuting mileage and therefore emissions.

The-Joker

It’s a great thing, along with everything else Labour are offering.

If Labour get the most votes and win this general election it will be a wonderful thing for the majority of the country

Free broadband, clean up the NHS, 4 day work week lots more free stuff.

Lower rents and house prices and many more great things

spadoosh

Herzlos wrote: »

Broadband is almost becoming a necessity these days, so I'm all for some way of ensuring that the poorest still get access to it. It's needed to deal with benefits, pay bills and so on. It' also relatively cheap to provide.


I'm not sure about globally free, but having a government provided basic broadband only service at say, 2Mb, would allow those that need it to get it, whilst encouraging those who can afford it to get something faster. I think we get up to about 250Mb in the UK (whilst Korea has has 1Gb for years already).


I don't see how this would leave Labour to control the internet anymore than the Tories have already implemented? It's all being tracked and invaded anyway at the backbone level regardless of who provides the wiring to the house.


Going further, to environmental targets and productivity - you may find that providing better and universal broadband improves productivity - you don't need to have someone at a desk take a payment that could have been done online, people can work from home more efficiently. So it may actually pay for itself in improved efficiency, as well as providing an avenue towards reducing commuting mileage and therefore emissions.

Ok theyve reduced commuting emissions. Massively increased home heating emissions. Its just not that clear cut.

The other arguments for the 4 day week will be more effective.

Tiexen

RyanEzio wrote: »

I've seen McDonald has got the cheque book out again to bribe voters.


Is this "FREE" internet promise, just a distraction for a socialist Labour party to control the internet?


I've been taught nothing is ever free in life.


Always check the small print!

I'm sure we'll all be delighted to put our hand in our pockets so people like Jacob Rees Mogg, Mike Ashley, Jim Ratcliffe, Rupert Murdoch etc can have free broadband.

Norman_Castle

Tiexen wrote: »

I'm sure we'll all be delighted to put our hand in our pockets so people like Jacob Rees Mogg, Mike Ashley, Jim Ratcliffe, Rupert Murdoch etc can have free broadband.

I suspect they'll be putting their hands far deeper into their pockets than you or me.

kangoora

The-Joker wrote: »

It’s a great thing, along with everything else Labour are offering.

If Labour get the most votes and win this general election it will be a wonderful thing for the majority of the country

Free broadband, clean up the NHS, 4 day work week lots more free stuff.

Lower rents and house prices and many more great things

Great user name for this post - Oh, you're being serious??????

You do realise nothing is free, right? Someone has to pay via higher taxes and multi-national tech companies are ALWAYS going to be 3 steps ahead of the government - or they'll just skip the country altogether.

Oh, and state run companies have always been sooo good, I remember 40 day waits to get phone service and bloated inefficient government run services dominated by trades unions. Finally, state run and controlled internet access is my idea of hell - working a treat in China and North Korea I'm sure

phillw

RyanEzio wrote: »

Is this "FREE" internet promise, just a distraction for a socialist Labour party to control the internet?

The government already controls the internet.

It's a bold move by Labour & quite interesting from an ideological point of view.

The only reason the internet has taken off is because of capitalism, what Labour are suggesting is that everyone should have the same access to buy things.

SpiderLegs

phillw wrote: »

The government already controls the internet.

Don’t forget they listen to your phone calls and go through all your rubbish as well Phil.

I mean literal rubbish, not the stuff you post on here.

GreatApe

Herzlos wrote: »

Broadband is almost becoming a necessity these days, so I'm all for some way of ensuring that the poorest still get access to it. It's needed to deal with benefits, pay bills and so on. It' also relatively cheap to provide.


I'm not sure about globally free, but having a government provided basic broadband only service at say, 2Mb, would allow those that need it to get it, whilst encouraging those who can afford it to get something faster. I think we get up to about 250Mb in the UK (whilst Korea has has 1Gb for years already).

I don't see how this would leave Labour to control the internet anymore than the Tories have already implemented? It's all being tracked and invaded anyway at the backbone level regardless of who provides the wiring to the house.

Going further, to environmental targets and productivity - you may find that providing better and universal broadband improves productivity - you don't need to have someone at a desk take a payment that could have been done online, people can work from home more efficiently. So it may actually pay for itself in improved efficiency, as well as providing an avenue towards reducing commuting mileage and therefore emissions.

It's a stupid idea because technology advances and gets cheaper over time

By 2030 5G/6G will be well under way which will mean you'll get extremely fast speeds for cheap prices probably £10/month which is what I pay for my mobile speeds I am happy with.

It shouldn't be total free because more important things aren't totally free
Like water you think water should be paid for but internet 'free'?
If there are people who can't afford internet give them benefits to pay for it

It's just a dumb idea to try and win the stupid vote

GreatApe

kangoora wrote: »

Great user name for this post - Oh, you're being serious??????

You do realise nothing is free, right? Someone has to pay via higher taxes and multi-national tech companies are ALWAYS going to be 3 steps ahead of the government - or they'll just skip the country altogether.

Oh, and state run companies have always been sooo good, I remember 40 day waits to get phone service and bloated inefficient government run services dominated by trades unions. Finally, state run and controlled internet access is my idea of hell - working a treat in China and North Korea I'm sure

I used to work in a steel plant which had 30,000 workers
When it was sold off some 26,000 of the workers were fired
Output not only stayed the same but expanded 3x

This means 26,000 workers were hired to do nothing
The old timers would even say people would come in, sleep through their shift then go to their second job.

The government shouldn't own industry because it's a perverse incentive
They think of votes rather than productivity and productivity is what makes a nation rich enough to afford to be generous and social

Of course a government can tax heavily which is already done and use that for spending
That seems to work direct ownership doesn't