What a bad policy. Can not possibly have the poor having internet now can we.
Exactly. Boris is responsible for such cluster****ery, yet he’ll still win and the Corbynistas will stick their head in the sand and fail to recognise that their messiah is actually seen as a terrible option as leader.Because Boris wouldn't waste pubic money on stupid things? Like a garden bridge, or American skirt
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7693553/Boris-Johnson-surges-ahead-Jeremy-Corbyn-polls.html
15 point lead!
Ordinary decent working people don't like privately educated millionaire metropolitan elitist Bollinger Bolsheviks like Jeremy Steptoe Corbyn who despises this country, loves our enemies and hates us. Labour isn't Labour any more and most of us have realised this.
Nobody has suggested the poor being given internet access ….. for free …. is a bad thing. But this Labour policy is to give EVERYONE ( regardless of means - both individuals and rich businesses ) free internet access. It's an off the cuff policy with no understanding of either the telecoms industry nor the technical challenges to achieve it. As an example I managed a project to install a leased line internet connection to a remote Scottish hotel. It took Openreach over two years to deliver the cable because the hotel was 30 miles from the exchange ( as the crow flies ). Openreach had to get permission from two councils for them to do the dig including the use of road restrictions. They also had to cross three plots of land that were privately owned meaning legal agreements with three landowners. One of which was the Church of England ( not sure why they own land in Scotland though ! ). The Church were not happy and it took nearly a year and thousands of pounds in legal fees to sort it.
The point being, Labour have made a promise and don't understand the true scale and costs of doing it. £20bn is a drop in the ocean to the real cost.
As for this part of your second post "Will you now ban me from this thread?" - pathetic !!!!!!
I am not familiar with any Indyrefs; however, I do agree that compromise and middle ground have, as you say, become so quaint.
I said in another post that the older I get, the more I believe that some kind of PR arrangement may be the way forward.
I am no keen student of politics and I know that system is not perfect either, but it may be better than the horrific bollocks we seem to go through these days.
Free dental check ups today, Labour are going to spend us into a massive debt if this carries on
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ok-group-advises-party-Holocaust-deniers.html
SHOCKING-You thought we’d reached the bottom of the swamp? You thought there was nothing left that could shock us? You thought that the worst had already been revealed?
Think again.....
(Huge respect, thanks and admiration to GnasherJew and Labour Against Antisemitism for their remarkable work on this)
“Labour Election candidate ran secret Facebook group which advises party 'Holocaust deniers' how to beat charges of antisemitism”
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ok-group-advises-party-Holocaust-deniers.html
Indeed, another example .... some bloke on twitter has apparently discovered a glaring error in Labours 230million a year operating cost figures. They are out by a factor of three a more accurate yearly cost being 690 million.
https://twitter.com/staylorish/status/1195406354065821700?s=20
Indeed, another example .... some bloke on twitter has apparently discovered a glaring error in Labours 230million a year operating cost figures. They are out by a factor of three a more accurate yearly cost being 690 million.
https://twitter.com/staylorish/status/1195406354065821700?s=20
No problems at least you don't just mainly post twitter drivel on here
Almost as good as twitter ....
Ah, yet another twitter link I can see why you're so well informed.
Indyref1 = The 2014 Scottish independence referendum. It was toxic, divisive, with no middle ground, everyone had an opinion on it, things could be just dismissed as #projectfear (a fact ignored when repeated in 2016) heart ruled over head, people arguing the cost to independence became shocked at their own impotence as the persuasiveness of hard economics went nowhere, friendships were stretched, families divided, societal demarcation occurred, celebrity endorsement (which like it or not will be a key factor in the 21st century) became a part of it, 'winners' and 'losers' and the rise of absoluteism with no consensus and compromise occurred, threats and abuse became commonplace, old wounds, in the form of the sectarian divide, reopened.................
Having observed all that though, that old Etonian David William Donald 'won' his game of Russian roulette and fancied another in 2016 against his chum from school Alexander Boris de Pfeffel, and here we all are in 2019 as a result..............
You really need to stop taking Twitter as gospel truth. I'll stick to the figures on the Parliament website thank you that are audited ..... rather than some random post on Twitter.
Over simplistic to say the least. Perfect for a Twitter post
With a wild stab in the dark I'd suggest Twitter. She seems to think it's the bringer of truth and fact
Having observed all that though, that old Marxist Jeremy Bernard Corbyn will most likely need to jump into bed with the SNP to get a majority promising them another Scottish Independence referendum as the price and promises we will have another EU referendum in 2020 ......
I thought one of the reasons why no-one will ever buy BT is the massive pension deficit so therefore if Jezza wins and part-privatises it the UK Government will no doubt pick up that pension deficit tab as well
You're a very sad lonely man clearly. Now go and look at the OR accounts and you'll see that particular post is true - many aren't. Always back up a Twitter post with hard evidence - then you can believe it.
Sorry for the delay in responding, I had a busy day yesterday because of the lack of football
In your reply to [MENTION=1200]Harry Wilson's tackle[/MENTION] you talked of him being somewhat sheltered from the financial lunacy of the left, being a Uni lecturer with a secure pension, and yourself being rather more exposed, so I assumed that you don't see yourself in such a sheltered or advantageous position.
All economic predictions for Brexit have the UK economy taking an almighty hit, from a customs union through to the full 'no deal'. The predicted impact on the economy really makes the spending plans of all parties pale into insignificance (which are pure guesswork as nobody has released a manifesto yet ). The simple fact is that every party of whatever colour needs a healthy economy to implement their political aims.
There is no doubt that a conservative majority will mean that Johnson will go for the harder end of the Brexit scale and this (together with tax cuts for high earners and businesses) means that that vast majority at the lower end economically will suffer badly, exactly the same way as in the last 10 years of Austerity. (Even when we were 'all in it together' !).
Now, even with the smallest of majorities and the softest of Brexits, the numbers who will gain, will be a very small as a proportion of the country. Certainly not a big enough proportion to ensure a University lecturer with a secure pension would gain from Johnson in power.
Therefor, Johnson, JRM and Cummings are completely dependant on people who are not so well off voting to make themselves poorer, something they have been very successful with up to now.
(And a Jaguar XJ is much nicer when it's raining )
If they do this alongside an economy tanking Brexit, we’ll all be ****ed. A lot of these spending promises (including the billions that the Tories want to splash) will have to be put on the back burner when we leave.