If they made broadband free we would have to pay for it some other way as there is no such thing as a free lunch. Perhaps there are enough on this site who remember the Wilson, Callaghan governments with their free spending and borrowing and the effect it had on the working man. Tax the rich, with top tax at 19/6d in the £1, they all buggered off abroad and left the working man to make up all that was needed. It got so bad that they limited your spending to £50 if you went abroad, that was for the ones who could still afford it!!
"Will voters actually believe all these massive nationalisation plans?"
Lots of people will hear what's being said and take it all at face value - which is what Jeremy Corbyn wants them to do.
Lots of others will realise that you get nothing for nothing in this life, and that Jeremy is simply going for broke - he wants power at any cost, and will say anything to get it. Boris Johnson will do much the same thing, but he is already in power and he knows a red light when he sees it. He'll take a rather more cautious approach.
Large numbers of voters have had no experience of living with nationalised industries, and that's likely to be a factor in this election. Promises of free broadband for all sound wonderful, but somewhere along the line that word 'free' loses its meaning. All of us would end up paying for it, in the same way that we pay for everything. If the Railways are nationalised we'll all pay, even if we never travel on a train in our lives.
Nationalisation is the kiss of death.
Agreed, as Corbyn’s friend found in Venezuela.
He's not got a clue - vastly under estimated the cost.
Privatisation hasn't worked for the railways either.
Is there an argument for state owned industries in the fact we ought to control our utilities and transport system rather than have it in the hands of "Johnny Foreigner".
"Is there an argument for state owned industries in the fact we ought to control our utilities and transport system..."
Yes, there is but two conditions must be satisfied:-
The industries must be run efficiently, and they must run without bleeding the taxpayers dry.
The efficiency condition depends on management expertise, and the goodwill of the industries' employees. Historically Both of those essential ingredients have been in short supply - once you have a State monopoly you lose a good deal of the sense of urgency that permeates commercial operations. Unions look at the industry and see the promised land - jobs for all, and increased opportunities to hold the nation to ransom whenever they feel like it.
The really good management people look elsewhere for the salaries and the freedom to operate that their expertise can command. Big industries end up being managed by time-serving jobsworths with no bottom line to worry about - if it's not done today, there isn't much the customers can do about it.
Jeremy Corbyn and his Socialist idealogy colleagues think that it's OK to making sweeping Utopian promises today and worry about the problems later, when they have taken power. Unfortunately they, like many aspirational Socialist leaders before them completely fail to understand human nature. They think that everyone will willingly follow the altruistic doctrines upon which true Socialism is based.
It has not happened once in the entire history of the human race, and it will never happen. People simply will not be prepared to put up with a society which expects them all to share the rewards of their efforts with others. They will not stop trying to earn more than the person in the next road, or stop wanting to increase profits and minimise their tax liabilities. In short, they will carry on as they have always carried on, even if it means that some of their fellow citizens suffer as a result.
Jeremy Corbyn wants a world in which everyone is provided with free this or subsidised that, and it's an attractive thought. The problem is, it must all be paid for by those who pay taxes. If it was that easy, we would all be living in such a society right now.
Utopian dreaming is wonderful, but I prefer politicians who understand the world as it really is.
I take that the FE won’t be casting a Labour vote then...
A good point was made on Any Questions last night.
The science of the Internet has been changing so fast that by the time any Nationalised Company has finished installing Fibre, the World will have moved on to a different distribution method, and "we" will be stuck with a huge nationalised behemoth.
"I take that the FE won’t be casting a Labour vote then..."
Like a lot of people I can usually find some good things in the policies of more than one party, but I tend to vote for an ideology, rather than specific manifesto policies or for individuals.
I think that most people do much the same thing. Voting habits are often formed when you are a young adult and there are various influencing factors like parental guidance, your social environment, educational background, etc.
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.