• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

I think the risk is that they take over these companies using some bizarre formula that undervalues them which will cause peoples pensions to suffer along with general business confidences and investment (which is already pretty low). I'm guessing by the word nationalisation they'll bring in some laws that won't make it optional either - as in the board won't be able to turn down the offer like they can a normal takeover.
 
P.D. said:
I think the risk is that they take over these companies using some bizarre formula that undervalues them which will cause peoples pensions to suffer along with general business confidences and investment (which is already pretty low). I'm guessing by the word nationalisation they'll bring in some laws that won't make it optional either - as in the board won't be able to turn down the offer like they can a normal takeover.
Click to expand...

That’s probably the best reaction to this match. Ignore it completely.
 
The last time I checked British Labour they had half a million members. Out of that number there have been just over 600 complaints against members for anti Semitic remarks. Somehow this is interpreted as a crisis. I would lay my house that there are more overtly antisemitic Tories, yet there is no problem there, move on now, there is nothing to see. Manufactured news? The economic elites are so scared of a real Labour manifesto, that there is no lie too big to tell, no smear too ugly to make, no exaggeration too illogical to sell in order to discredit them. As I said in an earlier post, the fact that they are bricking their pants and wetting their beds is in fact, a good thing. Long may it continue. Labour want to talk about policy, such as the NHS, public education, transport policy, climate change etc and what to the Tory boosters have? Just more pathetic smears.
 
scaramanga said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1199398042086133761

Time to stop questioning whether he's fit to be a PM or a party leader and start questioning whether he's even fit to be a human being.
Click to expand...

You know that chief rabbi is best chums with Boris?

Edit: you should probably read the comments before posting too.

Edit again: and check the fudging person who posted it and where they work [emoji23] Jesus....


Sitting on my porcelain throne using Fapatalk
 
AuroRaman said:
You know that chief rabbi is best chums with Boris?

Edit: you should probably read the comments before posting too.

Edit again: and check the fudging person who posted it and where they work [emoji23] Jesus....


Sitting on my porcelain throne using Fapatalk
Click to expand...
He's the one those cover up texts were leaked to. If they'd ended up in the hands (phone) of another reporter I'd have happily quoted them.
 
StephenH said:
Don't be so silly.
I don't rate him for PM but don't let's go all hysterical.
Click to expand...
He shared the stage with 3 people caught up in accusations of anti-semitism at the launch of his own ‘race and faith manifesto’.

Do you really think those actions are those of someone who cares whether his party is anti-semitic? It's gone beyond him being too naive, stupid or feeble to have noticed what's going on - there's no way he lets those three anywhere near that event unless he chooses to make clear he doesn't give a fudge.
 
carole-blain.png


Yep, that's the problem......
 
SpurMeUp said:
Can't be bothered to splice and dice. A few missives:
  • What happens now if a CEO retirers or leaves? The Board go about appointing a new one.
Click to expand...
If they're any good then the same will happen. Anyone good will end up in the private sector because remuneration is better and they can own large chunks of what they're controlling.

SpurMeUp said:
The notion that a foreign state-owned company, that uses our infrastructure, is generating profits for its taxpayers from us rubs salt into the wound. We could be paying that money back into the UK Exchequer, instead, it goes to France.
Click to expand...
Actually it goes to whoever the customer chooses, because it's a competitive market and EDF are clearly doing better than some of their competitors. If the public didn't want to send money to France they wouldn't choose a French-owned electricity company.

SpurMeUp said:
Are company to company buy-outs illegal? Are takeover bids illegal? Of course not. Why would it become illegal if it is the government buying rather than another company?
Click to expand...
The government can't afford to buy out companies at their actual value (which is what happens in a private buyout), so they create laws forcing those companies to sell at the rate chosen by the government. That's how nationalisation works (at least that's how it works in all the tinpot countries that actually practise such ridiculous politics).

SpurMeUp said:
I know you are just defending the Tory vote, and you are scared people will see this as attractive. Listen I don't particularly want a Corbyn government as they would probably not implement it as outlined here: that these Utilities remain private companies, but with shareholders changing to the UK Exchequer. As others have outlined, if they were nationalised, under the control of government, you would get pressure to pay people more, to be ethical etc etc. Therefore it would be vital that these companies simply remain as private entities that have a regulator as they have today. The more profit they make, the more the people benefit.

Add up all these UK Utility company profits and we're talking billions of pounds a year. Billions that could go towards lower taxes.
Click to expand...
Without the threat of survival, there is no impediment to improve. When your shareholders sit on an endless pot of money, and when the trot controlling that pot know he'll get voted out if your service levels drop, the answer is always to throw more money at the problem.
 
AuroRaman said:
The question we have to ask is would Jews be able to use the NHS under a Corbyn government?

I think we all know the answer to that, the rascal!


Sitting on my porcelain throne using Fapatalk
Click to expand...
Only if they can stop counting their money and hatching secret, zionist plots to rule the world for long enough.
 
scaramanga said:
If they're any good then the same will happen. Anyone good will end up in the private sector because remuneration is better and they can own large chunks of what they're controlling.


Actually it goes to whoever the customer chooses, because it's a competitive market and EDF are clearly doing better than some of their competitors. If the public didn't want to send money to France they wouldn't choose a French-owned electricity company.


The government can't afford to buy out companies at their actual value (which is what happens in a private buyout), so they create laws forcing those companies to sell at the rate chosen by the government. That's how nationalisation works (at least that's how it works in all the tinpot countries that actually practise such ridiculous politics).


Without the threat of survival, there is no impediment to improve. When your shareholders sit on an endless pot of money, and when the trot controlling that pot know he'll get voted out if your service levels drop, the answer is always to throw more money at the problem.
Click to expand...

Top points are just repeating stuff. In short, the state-owned companies must stay private exactly as they are now - apart from the profits going to us. In such a setup the points you raise would be void.

Regarding a threat to survival, where is the threat to Thames Water? They are a monopoly. There is literally no one else you can get your water from. Things like electricity and gas are also a weird unnatural setup. It is not a true free market, because there is only one electricity cable, one gas pipe. The only thing that changes is the call center. However, there is one consistent thing, all these companies are making money out of UK taxpayers. much of which leaves the country. Money that could be used to lower your taxes.
 
SpurMeUp said:
Top points are just repeating stuff. In short, the state-owned companies must stay private exactly as they are now - apart from the profits going to us. In such a setup the points you raise would be void.

Regarding a threat to survival, where is the threat to Thames Water? They are a monopoly. There is literally no one else you can get your water from. Things like electricity and gas are also a weird unnatural setup. It is not a true free market, because there is only one electricity cable, one gas pipe. The only thing that changes is the call center. However, there is one consistent thing, all these companies are making money out of UK taxpayers. much of which leaves the country. Money that could be used to lower your taxes.
Click to expand...
My argument is that nationalisation doesn't reduce taxes. It invariably costs a fortune in purchase costs, reduces inward investment (massively) and causes inefficiency that lands in the lap of the taxpayer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back