Re: Government’s role is to provide the opportunity for massive advances in technology [..]
@Ledswinger - yep, I remember all that. I also remember how much easier it was to deal with anything relating to electricity (or gas) supply, none of this supply company blaming the metering company blaming the meter-reading company malarkey. I also remember when BT was privatised and the cost of a phone call doubling overnight. If I got on a train to a given destination, I didn't have to worry who owned the train, and if there was a problem with the service I complained to national Railways, rather than operator blaming the people that own the tracks or the stations etc.
I remember how exciting the future for computing looked, and wondered if one day I'd be able to carry a pocket computer around with me, and maybe have a radiophone. Well, nowadays, I COULD have both in one device, but modern "smartphones" are so lumbered down with crap and so completely under the control of mobile phone companies that I don;t want one. I also remember a Health Service that worked tolerably well, and certainly better than the current one does, despite right-wingers chipping away at it and privatisng it bit by little bit for decades.
I also remember a strongly Conservative government thumping on about nationalism (which I didn't and don't have a problem with) whilst simultaneously selling off every national asset they could, for no discernible benefit to the average UK citizen, and apparently failing to see the irony therein.
I'm now fairly firmly in the 'the trouble with politics is that no matter whom you vote for, the damned politicians get in' camp. I was contemplating voting purely on the quality of the indiviuals presented us locally at the next election, rather than on party lines, or even not voting at all (for the first time in my life) because the choice appeared to be between the tories, the tories light, the other tories light, the Greens, and UKIP. If nothing else, Corbyns lot (and I don;t as yet know what to make of 'em) will present us with something different to consider, and arguing between them and Camerons lot should at least create some interesting debate rather than lots of 'dont; vote for them vite for us, 'cause we're different, honest!' between parties which weren't substantially different at all.
Whether it be triumph, tragedy or farce, politics as theatre might just make it more interesting to more voters than the insomnia-curing politics of the last decade or two. And that wouldn't be a bad thing.
Right, off me soapbox and back to the lab for me! 8-}