Think it still runs ok since it was re privatised too, you may disagree.
The labour Leader thread...
- Thread starter easyrider
- Start date
Think it still runs ok since it was re privatised too, you may disagree.
And who donate to the Tory party, pay themselves through shifty tax dodges and dont do PAYE
The key part was the without compensation, which would result in massive damage to pensions (due to the loss of assets and loss of confidence in the value of other assets) investment drying up (due to the loss of value and confidence in UK assets) and so on.
Rail is not a good argument against privatisation, as the process was flawed from start to finish as it resulted in the worst parts of privatisation and nationalisation being the end result. Still, I guess that was your point. As a counter, I offer BT as an example of the improvements being removed from government control brings.
http://www.cps.org.uk/publications/...isation-vol-iii-privatisation-and-efficiency/
It isn't the nationalisation that is the problem, but the methods that have been discussed, which do simply amount to theft and destruction of value.
Oh lol, I could write a book about BT's **** ups, having worked for them.
Our local council is in the process of trying to take legal action against them, since they came in and totally ****** up our IT (at the cost of tens of millions of pounds).
If BT are a shining light of privatisation... then we're all screwed
But I guess that's more of a problem with the deeply flawed public/private model, which succeeds only in re-directing tax funds to company shareholders.
Besides, aren't BT almost single-handedly responsible for holding back our country's infrastructure? Their insistence on only making the most lucrative upgrades, and only laying fiber when the government will contribute financially.
Again, it's a flawed model where profits go to shareholders whilst the government is still forced to bear some of the costs. Down here we gave millions of taxpayer and EU funding to BT so they'd get off their asses and lay some fiber. Otherwise it wouldn't have happened, as BT said the region didn't have an economic case for it.
So again I ask, BT is a success story for our country? Not just its own shareholders?
Our local council is in the process of trying to take legal action against them, since they came in and totally ****** up our IT (at the cost of tens of millions of pounds).
If BT are a shining light of privatisation... then we're all screwed
But I guess that's more of a problem with the deeply flawed public/private model, which succeeds only in re-directing tax funds to company shareholders.
Besides, aren't BT almost single-handedly responsible for holding back our country's infrastructure? Their insistence on only making the most lucrative upgrades, and only laying fiber when the government will contribute financially.
Again, it's a flawed model where profits go to shareholders whilst the government is still forced to bear some of the costs. Down here we gave millions of taxpayer and EU funding to BT so they'd get off their asses and lay some fiber. Otherwise it wouldn't have happened, as BT said the region didn't have an economic case for it.
So again I ask, BT is a success story for our country? Not just its own shareholders?
Oh lol, I could write a book about BT's **** ups, having worked for them.
Our local council is in the process of trying to take legal action against them, since they came in and totally ****** up our IT (at the cost of tens of millions of pounds).
If BT are a shining light of privatisation... then we're all screwed
But I guess that's more of a problem with the deeply flawed public/private model, which succeeds only in re-directing tax funds to company shareholders.
Besides, aren't BT almost single-handedly responsible for holding back our country's infrastructure? Their insistence on only making the most lucrative upgrades, and only laying fiber when the government will contribute financially.
Again, it's a flawed model where profits go to shareholders whilst the government is still forced to bear some of the costs. Down here we gave millions of taxpayer and EU funding to BT so they'd get off their asses and lay some fiber. Otherwise it wouldn't have happened, as BT said the region didn't have an economic case for it.
So again I ask, BT is a success story for our country? Not just its own shareholders?
you are kind of ignoring his main point about compensation though parent you?
pensions funds are heavily invested in these kinds of industry as they're famously stable (iirc theres a few airports that are practically owned by pension funds) what are you going to say top the thousands of people who suddenly have their pension destroyed by you taking billions out of their fund by nationalising an industry without paying back the shareholders?
"haha screw you for trying to save for your future"?
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,239
- Location
- Billericay, UK
Just read on twitter that Dennis Skinner is being touted as shadow chancellor.
Oh lol, I could write a book about BT's **** ups, having worked for them.
Our local council is in the process of trying to take legal action against them, since they came in and totally ****** up our IT (at the cost of tens of millions of pounds).
If BT are a shining light of privatisation... then we're all screwed
But I guess that's more of a problem with the deeply flawed public/private model, which succeeds only in re-directing tax funds to company shareholders.
Besides, aren't BT almost single-handedly responsible for holding back our country's infrastructure? Their insistence on only making the most lucrative upgrades, and only laying fiber when the government will contribute financially.
Again, it's a flawed model where profits go to shareholders whilst the government is still forced to bear some of the costs. Down here we gave millions of taxpayer and EU funding to BT so they'd get off their asses and lay some fiber. Otherwise it wouldn't have happened, as BT said the region didn't have an economic case for it.
So again I ask, BT is a success story for our country? Not just its own shareholders?
Compared to an ideal, no.
Compared to it when it was nationalised and getting a phone line took 6 months with no alternative options? Hell yes.
Half the shadow cabinet will only be shadows by the time of the GE at this rate.
Sounds are not encouraging so far, an obsession with bringing back the labour bench from the 70's seems to be the main concern.
I never even mentioned compensation, and wasn't discussing it. My sole argument is that privatised companies aren't the shining light they are often touted as. Neither are/would be modern nationalised companies an unmitigated disaster.
As in, if BT were not given large amounts of govt money on a /regular/ basis, only approx 60% of the country would have broadband, since the other 40% wouldn't be lucrative enough to bother with. Exactly like Virgin. They simply don't bother with parts of the country that wouldn't generate sufficient profits.
Is it such a great idea to have the countries infrastructure in the hands of private industry? You think they have our national interest at heart?
Yvette Cooper was tarnished...... well she had Ed Balls finger prints ALL over her!
Liz Kendall should join the Tories.
Andy Burnham should emigrate, he seems to have an infinity with people from the Middle East, perhaps he could go there?
Dennis Skinner for chief whip anyone?
Tory, Tory hallelujah!
Liz Kendall should join the Tories.
Andy Burnham should emigrate, he seems to have an infinity with people from the Middle East, perhaps he could go there?
Dennis Skinner for chief whip anyone?
Tory, Tory hallelujah!
The scariest one I've seen is Diane Abbott as Shadow Home Secretary.
With Blair, Labour was in power, the only place from which you can truly make a difference!
After Iraq/Afganistan and the 2007/2008 financial meltery, your right,they couldn't continue.
But, we need a strong opposition and a credible alternative govornment come election time, by lurching to Corbyn's far left, they will be neither.
Your preference for Labour to never win again but be a strong voice is daft imo, you need them to be in a position to win once more where they can actually act on their voice rather than shout from the side lines, which they will be doing for a long time to come I think.
Its almost like the Labour voting membership (at least those who were not Conservatives joining to get Corbyn in!) have decided the Lib-Dem's former position of being the unelectable party of protest is a preferable option to the official opposition.
Last edited:
I think 'Won't anyone think of the pensions' needs to be as much a meme as 'Won't anyone think of the children'
