• Welcome to DOSBODS

    Please consider creating a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

Sign in to follow this  
spygirl

What next to Nationalise?

Recommended Posts

Another day, another list of companies and whatnot that Jezza is going to nationalise.

All by putting 1p on the tax of 100 people.

There's ~ 3 weeks left til the election. He's going to run out of stuff to nationalise. He needs to start looking at essential companies - Wetherspoons,  Cury houses, Tescos, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate I grew up in an era where I have never known state owned companies other than the So-Called BBC, education, emergency services and the NHS.   Perhaps this should in itself be reason enough to oppose it,  but it seems to make sense that in areas where there are obvious monopolies anyway (power , rail, water etc) you might as well just nationalise them.  Especially if you have to resort to excessive regulation and earnings caps etc anyway..  what's the difference?

edit to add: did the forum just auto correct BBC to "the so called BBC !  Lol

Edited by Libspero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some things should be run by the state for the benefit of all. Other things should be private business. That is all. Except some people who run state stuff have an ego bigger than the moon, and it is a personal monstrous vehicle for their self aggrandisement.O.o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Libspero said:

I appreciate I grew up in an era where I have never known state owned companies other than the So-Called BBC, education, emergency services and the NHS.   Perhaps this should in itself be reason enough to oppose it,  but it seems to make sense that in areas where there are obvious monopolies anyway (power , rail, water etc) you might as well just nationalise them.  Especially if you have to resort to excessive regulation and earnings caps etc anyway..  what's the difference?

edit to add: did the forum just auto correct BBC to "the so called BBC !  Lol

Sort of.

A monopoly is a monopoly, whether its public or private.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Wahoo said:

If it means no more GOCOMPAAAAAARE...GOCOMPAAAAARE  adverts...it has to be a good thing. 

 

No.

Youll have to sing the song at work, t support the national web comparision site.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't believe anyone is taken in by it. The same bit of theatre and playbook as the Michael Foot era all over again. I suspect it will be the last term for the Tories before Labour are tag teamed back in. If I had to bet I would go for David Miliband taking over as leader. 

A vote for May over Corbyn is much more likely to be a vote for dead British soldiers in Syria and no more likely to ensure a genuine swift Brexit either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Libspero said:

I appreciate I grew up in an era where I have never known state owned companies other than the So-Called BBC, education, emergency services and the NHS.   Perhaps this should in itself be reason enough to oppose it,  but it seems to make sense that in areas where there are obvious monopolies anyway (power , rail, water etc) you might as well just nationalise them.  Especially if you have to resort to excessive regulation and earnings caps etc anyway..  what's the difference?

edit to add: did the forum just auto correct BBC to "the so called BBC !  Lol

While logical the reality is you end up with a management structure that's completely inefficient and wasteful because they have no need to make a profit or answer to anybody. 

In terms of caps etc the difference (if implemented correctly which has never been done) is that it forces the business to be innovative and progressing when it comes to making a profit. Without controls that profit comes directly from consumers, i.e. need more profit = charge more, where in reality it should be coming from savings and efficiencies in whatever domain being discussed. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, gilf said:

While logical the reality is you end up with a management structure that's completely inefficient and wasteful because they have no need to make a profit or answer to anybody. 

In terms of caps etc the difference (if implemented correctly which has never been done) is that it forces the business to be innovative and progressing when it comes to making a profit. Without controls that profit comes directly from consumers, i.e. need more profit = charge more, where in reality it should be coming from savings and efficiencies in whatever domain being discussed. 

 

So how does duplication of core functions lead to savings and efficiencies? Even a free market leads to monopoly structures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, eight said:

So how does duplication of core functions lead to savings and efficiencies? Even a free market leads to monopoly structures.

Sorry, I wasn't defending privatisation.

On the whole it's been a disaster, but what it replaced was equally a total mess. 

If you fund nationalised industries well enough then it's less of an issue, but where is the money coming from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, gilf said:

Sorry, I wasn't defending privatisation.

On the whole it's been a disaster, but what it replaced was equally a total mess. 

If you fund nationalised industries well enough then it's less of an issue, but where is the money coming from.

Define total mess though. In a way (I wasn't around at the time) you could look upon an overstaffed public sector as the citizens' wage of it's day, in which you have a well renumerated - deserving or not is a different question - consumer core driving the rest of the economy. Now we just pay people to sit around all day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, eight said:

Define total mess though. In a way (I wasn't around at the time) you could look upon an overstaffed public sector as the citizens' wage of it's day, in which you have a well renumerated - deserving or not is a different question - consumer core driving the rest of the economy. Now we just pay people to sit around all day.

I was alive (just about) 

Total mess as in the constant power cuts, train service was shockingly bad etc. It's funny when people complain about the train service these days, it was horrific under British Rail at times. Don't get me wrong plenty can be done. 

Similarly, often hear people complain because they have to wait 2 weeks to get broadband installed. With BT you would be lucky to get the phone line installed and up and running 3 months. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, gilf said:

I was alive (just about) 

Total mess as in the constant power cuts, train service was shockingly bad etc. It's funny when people complain about the train service these days, it was horrific under British Rail at times. Don't get me wrong plenty can be done. 

Similarly, often hear people complain because they have to wait 2 weeks to get broadband installed. With BT you would be lucky to get the phone line installed and up and running 3 months

 

 

Party members did!:o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't one of the railways recently re-privatised after a period of nationalisation. I read the railway did well, turned a profit and ran on time etc while nationalised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MrPin said:

Party members did!:o

My uncle worked for BT so we had everything done under the radar. 

Back in the BT days you couldn't touch any of the phone cabling in your house, if you wanted a phone in the bedroom or whatever then you needed BT to come round and do it, which cost a small fortune and said delay. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SNACR said:

Can't believe anyone is taken in by it. The same bit of theatre and playbook as the Michael Foot era all over again. I suspect it will be the last term for the Tories before Labour are tag teamed back in. If I had to bet I would go for David Miliband taking over as leader. 

A vote for May over Corbyn is much more likely to be a vote for dead British soldiers in Syria and no more likely to ensure a genuine swift Brexit either.

To be hoenst, its not hard to work out what Britian will be like under Presedint for Life Corbyn, and his sons, heirs to the eternal socialist empire - sort of mix between Venezuela, Cuba and bit of 1970 USSR mixed in. Without the oil. Or the Sun, Cigars and mulatto women.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Reebo said:

Wasn't one of the railways recently re-privatised after a period of nationalisation. I read the railway did well, turned a profit and ran on time etc while nationalised.

Any newly nationalised org will perform well.

Then staff go off sick, then the one brought in to replace them go off sick. The nthey run out of money.

Its less the nationalisation or privatisation. Basically, you need the threat of the org losing access to whatever.

The UK has fucked with some private orgs which are terrible. There needs to be 5 year reviews etc and competition to actually run and operate the org. The state can retian ownership of whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm unlikely to vote for Dustbyn but nationalisation of the railways has worked well for Germany, France etc.

Saying that, if you look at E.ON that was privatised in the 90s I believe, prior to that it was a mess and now it's the biggest mail company in the world. Although I've just realised the German government still own 20% or so.

 

1 hour ago, gilf said:

Similarly, often hear people complain because they have to wait 2 weeks to get broadband installed. With BT you would be lucky to get the phone line installed and up and running 3 months. 

 

 

And imagine how quick it'd be now if OFCOM had any balls and came down on Openreach like they should have 10 years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the exception of a couple of railways in the US carrying freight, I don't think there is a railway anywhere in the world that operates without some sort of government subsidy or is nationalised. They simply aren't economical.

I believe the number of passenger miles on UK railways has soared since privatisation. That is success of sorts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Panther said:

Local councils are a good example of a nationalised monopoly. We are just sooo reaping those bumper profits...

Council tax goes down each year because they are so efficient.
Services improve year after year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, sarahbell said:

Council tax goes down each year because they are so efficient.
Services improve year after year.

That's true. The tractor production at my local council is off the charts. xD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.