plan for collapse of Thames Water

Doobedoo said:
How hard is it it’s not like millions haven’t done it already. You act like you are a part of this country and I have my doubts given your post history.
Click to expand...
yes, Millions have done it, but they have taken a few years to do it. It is not, pick up an go, like you are going on a holiday.
It takes a lot of planning etc..

I can see why people end up in a mess with their lives in the UK.
I can see why the UK is in the mess it is, I can also see is going to cost a lot just to service this mess, to fix it well I don't think the UK can afford to.
 
Last edited:
delta0 said:
The scarier thing is the UK is on the lower end of debt to gdp for the G7 and is mid table in the world.
Click to expand...

UK borrowed 13% more than last year.

chartimage
 
Last edited:
SupraWez said:
Its crazy isn't it, so much money siphoned away into pockets using these services, if a company has debt it cannot cover it should not be able to pay divs or bonuses, get the house in order first, absolutely bonkers.

Everyone knows where this is going, water bills for those affected will be going up, then those not affected will slowly increase bills to level it out.
Click to expand...

"Serco lifts profit guidance as demand for immigration services rises." This was published 3 HOURS AGO.​


Where do you think the money comes from? There are too many companies that depend on tax payers money, making certain people rich.​

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SPG
delta0 said:
Despite that they still sit 5/7 in the G7 and the middle of the world ranking, and also it seems near the average for the EU27
Click to expand...
Average, is not a good indicator, or a good representation, it is use to confuse people.
Average measurement is bull poo.
When you use average to fill in null values in data sets, is give outs untrue patterns and really should be never used.
 
mid_gen said:
It's dead easy, I've done it several times. Get a job with a relocation package and then move, can be gone in a matter of weeks, all taken care of.
Click to expand...
Did you take into account selling up, buying a smaller place, and buying in destination country?
What about capital requirements, visa rules etc....
 
Last edited:
Pho said:
www.dailymail.co.uk

Trans 'struggling mum' used in ITV's Thames Water crisis coverage

EXCLUSIVE: During Wednesday night's News At Ten programme the network, Mika Minio Paluello was seen washing up and doing some laundry while she spoke about water costs.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk

On a lighter note, The Daily Mail and its readers are absoluetely insane. An editor must be friends with someone within Thames to try and discredit it this hard lol.

Transgender baiting: check
Labour: check
Corbyn: check
Leftie: check
Unions: check
Click to expand...
they are all in the same circle.
 
ttaskmaster said:
Try re-reading the post.
Customers are creating the primary issues that result in river overflows.

Labour created the situations that led to privatisation. They also maintained trade effluent discharge into waterways, until that was countermanded in 1973 under Tory leadership.
The Tories did well enough during the 90s to make the privatisation a success, because they facilitated the revenue to fund it. However, they lost their place once control of the industry went to foreign powers and neither party has done anything helpful since.

Since no other party is ever likely to gain power, of the remaining two options Tories are theoretically the lesser evil, but neither party now has what it takes to resolve the issues.
I also doubt you'll find a single MP with the sense, the spine and the stones to take the helm and steer this industry to where it should be - Publicly owned and controlled, privately funded and operated, with regulators that actually do their ******* jobs.
Click to expand...
UK regulators are pretty crap.
 
FoxEye said:
We haven't had state ownership for decades. On the other hands, we've had decades of failure from the private sector, right up to the present day. Not from one company, but from all of them. One company is closer to going bust than the others, but none have been a success story.

I'm not sure how anyone can be so confident that taking core infrastructure into public ownership must be worse than what we've had.
Click to expand...

Lol it was privatised then nationalised then privatised possibly nationalise 2023.

I really hope they do

Tax payers are funding foreign pensions.
Stateownership can work, it is not state-owned that is the problem. The problem is the people civil service and their own expectations.

State-owned can be run pretty efficiently if given the chance.
 
Last edited:
ttaskmaster said:
Because what happened when it previously was in public hands is what led to privatisation.
It's swapping one bunch of corrupt, incompetent money-centric dickheads for another.


So another example of Public-Private Partnership, which seems to work relatively well?


It happens in many industries.
A lot of ex-CAA peeps get jobs in aviation companies, often precidely because they have such a good understanding of the legislation and regulations.
Click to expand...
Its because of contacts, it is not about legislation.
I rub your back and later you rub mine.
 
Last edited:
They are about to allow shareholders pump billions into Thames water with money based on agreement to massively increase to your water bills.
 
Last edited:
Dialup said:
As for the politics of it, I find some irony in the idea that we've taken back control yet we're apparently so feckless as a country we trust the French, Chinese and Germans to run our infrastructure despite us having either invented or contributed in a big way to mostly all of it.

It is honestly pathetic, let's run these services properly on a long term basis. There's no reason we cannot do it.
Click to expand...

It just crazy to allow that unless there were brown envelopes.
Funny but the German state controls their own water while we subsidise it.

When the Paris water supply was private their bills were rising and leaks were not fixed. Suddenly, when it was taken over by the state bill eventually dropped and leaks were fixed.
 
Last edited:
Dialup said:
There is a failure of regulation and ownership. We could resolve a lot of the issues by having proper regulation with massive fines. But we don’t because we pretend there’s a market.

We need to accept some things work properly privatised/unregulated whilst others don’t.

British Airways, well run, very strict regulations. Very safe and actual competition. Good privatisation.

Energy suppliers - maybe.

Water. Waste of time. Trains. Not worked.

Let’s just be rational
Click to expand...

I agree, something's are but others are not.
I can choose not to fly, I have no choice but to select a company for electricity.
 
FoxEye said:
Let's face it, no matter the pros and cons, the Tories will not renationalise water (or anything else). They can't, because of dogmatically sticking to their established ideology. Private sector must always do everything better than state ownership. It's written on several stone tablets.

Starmer won't do it either, as he's hell bent on being the Tory leader the Tories don't want. In fact, New Tory Labour have said they won't renationalise anything.

e: In fact, all parties except the Greens have stated they will not renationalise water (or anything else). Many of those statements made very recently.

Although it's a popular idea among the electorate, with some articles suggesting 70% popular support, no party wants to touch this. It just isn't happening.

And if it isn't happening after decades of pollution and wracking up billions of debt to pay dividends... well, it isn't happening, ever. The UK loves to work against its own best interest, politicians included.
Click to expand...
Funny isn't it, they push out measures to tackle pollution if it involves punishing the public, yet sewage waste goes unchecked.
Really says a lot about this country.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom