Free, nationalised broadband

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people
User avatar
lpm
Junior Mod
Posts: 5944
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:05 pm

Re: Free, nationalised broadband

Post by lpm » Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:01 pm

To put it into context, one fibre construction worker can connect in the region of 100 homes a year on average. (Based on an estimate of Virgin using around 5,000 people to build out to 500,000 homes a year).

This means achieving 30 million homes in 5 years would require 60,000 people working on this one project.

This compares to 25,000 on building a nuke (Hinkley Point), 30,000 HS2, 15,000 channel tunnel.

Even if there were 60,000 construction workers sitting around, waiting for a bit of training to turn them into fibre installers, would you really use them for this? Why not train them into charging point builders, or insulation installers, or nuclear plant constructors?
⭐ Awarded gold star 4 November 2021

User avatar
dyqik
Princess POW
Posts: 7527
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: Free, nationalised broadband

Post by dyqik » Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:03 pm

Of course, several of those overlap and have synergies*.

E.g. insulation, power generation, quality housing.

Broadband has synergies with several of them, although maybe not transformative in any one case.

User avatar
Pucksoppet
Snowbonk
Posts: 599
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 8:13 pm
Location: Girdling the Earth

Re: Free, nationalised broadband

Post by Pucksoppet » Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:24 pm

lpm wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 11:45 am
Pucksoppet wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 9:45 am
As El Pollo Diablo pointed out, the state could own the infrastructure and invite bids from operators to actually run the service, much like the Network Rail model.

I agree with others, that the idea looks barking, but my 18-y-o self would have liked the idea. Are there any other services that the state provides free at the point of use, financed through general taxation? If there are any, are they efficient and/or effective?

Commercial realities are that the areas that don't generate a profit will be neglected. The state can ignore commercial realities and subsidise universal service in the interests of the general economic good (and fairness) so you don't have to live in a city to get good broadband. The madness of farmers needing good broadband connections to complete on-line forms to comply with agriculture and food regulations, and at the same time having no or extremely poor Internet access really should not be happening. Farmers need broadband too. If our ancestors could string a copper pair from the exchange to the farm, we can string an optical fibre.

If the infrastructure were owned by the state and service provided by operators chosen by competitive bidding, then there is not a substantial difference between people paying a flat rate service subscription or it being financed by general taxation. It becomes the state intervening in the market to ensure the availability of a minimum service to all. Which can go well, or badly. There are examples of both.

Universal delivery of a vital service, free at the point of use, paid for by general taxation is not so barking. It's a bit socialist, especially if the objective is fair access for all to a minimum, but good enough, standard of service. Perhaps that is mad, after all.
It's not allowed to look at a menu and pick everything. There's lots of lovely "universal delivery of a vital service" things we want - but there's not enough resources in the UK for all of them (particularly with the Tory fascists and Labour morons wanting to kick out foreigners).

So pick your choices. With limited resources, what do you want to prioritise?

- universal charging points for electric cars
- training of sufficient nurses and doctors for the NHS
- billions more bobbies on the beat giving clips round the ear
- universal fibre to the premise for the entire country
- construction of adequate housing to enable people to have their own home
- fully equipped modern military, with planes for the aircraft carriers and enough troops to intervene around the world
- proper social care for every elderly person in the setting their desire
- transformation of agriculture into sustainable model with tree planting, organic farming and innovative jam manufacture
- improve school buildings and training of sufficient teachers and teaching assistants to step-up education levels from nursery to university
- retro-fit every house and building to proper insulation standards
- rapid build of wind turbine, solar and several nuclear power plants to meet legal targets
- transformation of railway network, northern powerhouse etc

Whenever you find yourself seeing only benefits and not costs, or picking every nice thing you'd like from the menu, stop: there isn't a mass labour force sitting unemployed and it's not at all easy to switch our very limited resources around.
I wouldn't necessarily prioritise reducing taxes, or making relations with the UK's nearest trading partners more difficult. The latter really does seem barking.
But at least you seem to accept that national broadband, free at the point of use, is not such a silly idea - we can argue over whether it would be a net economic benefit to the UK or not, which is fine. As far as I am aware, most experts who look at Brexit regard it a definitely not beneficial in the short term, and likely to have an enduring negative effect on the UK's economy.
And if Labour's plans are barmy, they cannot compete with the Tory barminess. Recovering from 5 years of Labour misrule, but still being EU members is a far better position to be in than trying to recover from the vast economic damage inflicted by Brexit, while being outside the EU.

User avatar
lpm
Junior Mod
Posts: 5944
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:05 pm

Re: Free, nationalised broadband

Post by lpm » Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:41 pm

dyqik wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:03 pm
Of course, several of those overlap and have synergies*.

E.g. insulation, power generation, quality housing.

Broadband has synergies with several of them, although maybe not transformative in any one case.
I don't understand what you mean. Are you saying there's overlaps that will reduce the resources required to rollout projects if done together?

It wouldn't make any sense to combine fibre build with insulating homes. But maybe a big upside from a simultaneous dig to install fibre and charging points along every road? Would be an incredibly challenging management task though.
⭐ Awarded gold star 4 November 2021

User avatar
lpm
Junior Mod
Posts: 5944
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:05 pm

Re: Free, nationalised broadband

Post by lpm » Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:45 pm

Pucksoppet wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:24 pm
I wouldn't necessarily prioritise reducing taxes, or making relations with the UK's nearest trading partners more difficult. The latter really does seem barking.
But at least you seem to accept that national broadband, free at the point of use, is not such a silly idea - we can argue over whether it would be a net economic benefit to the UK or not, which is fine. As far as I am aware, most experts who look at Brexit regard it a definitely not beneficial in the short term, and likely to have an enduring negative effect on the UK's economy.
And if Labour's plans are barmy, they cannot compete with the Tory barminess. Recovering from 5 years of Labour misrule, but still being EU members is a far better position to be in than trying to recover from the vast economic damage inflicted by Brexit, while being outside the EU.
You have merely gone round the point without getting to it. Yes, there's a huge Remain dividend that will give the UK the resources to do better stuff. But why assume the dividend is best used on this? Why not use it to build the greatest electric car manufacturing nation in the world, or a country that exports half the world's wind turbines?
⭐ Awarded gold star 4 November 2021

User avatar
dyqik
Princess POW
Posts: 7527
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: Free, nationalised broadband

Post by dyqik » Mon Nov 18, 2019 1:04 pm

lpm wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:41 pm
dyqik wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:03 pm
Of course, several of those overlap and have synergies*.

E.g. insulation, power generation, quality housing.

Broadband has synergies with several of them, although maybe not transformative in any one case.
I don't understand what you mean. Are you saying there's overlaps that will reduce the resources required to rollout projects if done together?
That, and overlaps that change the requirements for other projects. e.g. Insulating houses reduces the demands on power generation and energy supply. Not just rollout, but the endpoint changes as well.

Reliable nationwide broadband (however it's achieved) changes some of the requirements on transport, healthcare, education, etc. (e.g. working from home, accessing NHS via video calls, accessing school materials, etc.). Whether getting broadband to the difficult reach areas makes sufficient difference to justify this particular version of a policy to increase broadband access is unclear, but it's also not that easy to quantify or dismiss out of hand.

tom p
After Pie
Posts: 1876
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:14 pm
Location: the low countries

Re: Free, nationalised broadband

Post by tom p » Mon Nov 18, 2019 1:21 pm

lpm wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 11:26 am
tom p wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 8:51 am
lpm wrote:
Sat Nov 16, 2019 11:49 am

A couple of the ambitious start-ups in my list have exactly this strategy.
Ambitious start-ups have a great success rate, don't they?
Yes - if you get 400 of them, as in the UK, you are highly likely to get some great successes.

If you have 1 monolith, on the other hand...
And if your landlord signed a contract with one of the 399 that will fail (alright, it might be only 396), then you'll end up with no broadband as the contracts get tied up in litigation for years.

User avatar
lpm
Junior Mod
Posts: 5944
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:05 pm

Re: Free, nationalised broadband

Post by lpm » Mon Nov 18, 2019 1:27 pm

The fibre network would still be a valuable asset, which the liquidator of the failed company would be able to sell.

NTL and Telewest went bust, but carried on as going concerns once the debt was written off because their cable TV networks were still valuable.
⭐ Awarded gold star 4 November 2021

User avatar
Pucksoppet
Snowbonk
Posts: 599
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 8:13 pm
Location: Girdling the Earth

Re: Free, nationalised broadband

Post by Pucksoppet » Mon Nov 18, 2019 2:35 pm

lpm wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:45 pm
You have merely gone round the point without getting to it. Yes, there's a huge Remain dividend that will give the UK the resources to do better stuff. But why assume the dividend is best used on this? Why not use it to build the greatest electric car manufacturing nation in the world, or a country that exports half the world's wind turbines?
I'm sure that in the event that Labour gets into power, an evaluation of the priorities for spending /investment would take place.

noggins
Snowbonk
Posts: 572
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2019 1:30 pm

Re: Free, nationalised broadband

Post by noggins » Mon Nov 18, 2019 4:31 pm

Yes - for a start who will clean up the flying pig sh.t ?

User avatar
dyqik
Princess POW
Posts: 7527
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: Free, nationalised broadband

Post by dyqik » Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:05 pm

noggins wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 4:31 pm
Yes - for a start who will clean up the flying pig sh.t ?
I think Keynes had a solution for that.

Pay some people to dig a hole, then pay others to fill it in.

User avatar
username
Clardic Fug
Posts: 212
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 6:51 pm
Location: The Good Place

Re: Free, nationalised broadband

Post by username » Mon Nov 18, 2019 6:53 pm

noggins wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 4:31 pm
Yes - for a start who will clean up the flying pig sh.t ?
Free fertilizer for all!!!
The half-truths, repeated, authenticated themselves.

Post Reply