- Joined
- 22 Aug 2006
- Messages
- 5,789
- Reaction score
- 707
- Country
I heard comment that fire and hire was mentioned in the house. I think earlier than this particular event.
Much like other things that should not have been sold. Of late I have watched AlJ news. Yesterday it was followed by a program on drinking water and went through finances on Thames Water. Bought up by an Australian company that has a nickname of the Millionaire's Club. It seems outfits like this like water for instance as there is always growth due to population increase. True but exaggerated IMHO. Anyway they make their money by paying high dividends and increasing debt.
You in particular are well aware of the famous lady that sold all. The problem with this is that in terms of utilities it doesn't make much sense as it leaves things open for situations like Thames Water and now our docks in another respect. All utilities really. Now why sell? A side effect is reducing gov expenditure. That in part comes about because when the gov own things increasing prices or making people redundant is not a good way of getting votes. Things finish up being subsidised. Even council houses.
Once sold the gov also gets corporation tax if they make a profit so we pay that plus dividends. Things get split up to supposedly to cause competition in some of the utilities. It needs more god like high salary twerps to run them. On gas and electricity due to nationwide networks it doesn't work out so well. A group looks after that the others are just retailers. BT is another example with odd side effects.
Debt figures too - it's not on the gov's books anymore. It's still there though and we are paying it.
However the great British public are convinced that privatisation is the only way. Odd that a number of countries manage some areas without it.
So labour sell the docks. Money has probably been spent on it as a result. If kept were would that have come from? Debt. They gain some money. That really figures at times and it often seems to save them paying for upgrades,
NI tax take and where it's spent is an interesting area. You may find out how interesting if pure NHS funding is looked into. Privatising that would mean a company would have to set the taxation rate or be paid directly. Health systems in some countries fall behind where they should be because correcting it will need an increase in taxation.
I can agree with some of that, but I see as is often the case, vaguely accusative, unexplained, disjointed assumptions and assertions which don't follow....
