I don't believe in services being "companies" at all, maybe state ownedwould have been a better choice of words.
Don't you mean "nationalised" we don't wanna go there.
We will end up with either no oil or paying 10 times as much.
win fall
- Thread starter billyo
- Start date
Don't you mean "nationalised" we don't wanna go there.
We will end up with either no oil or paying 10 times as much.
Sponsored Links
the point is we the people used to own bp, if we still did then all the proffits would go to us ,the nhs is the third biggest employer in the world and it cost less to run. our money our oil our company all gone .
the point is we the people used to own bp, if we still did then all the proffits would go to us ,the nhs is the third biggest employer in the world and it cost less to run. our money our oil our company all gone .
Apples and Oranges Billy, do you honestly think that if BP was state owned that it would be profitable, no chance.
By the way BP are the biggest single contributor to the Chancellor in this country via taxes.
2
2scoops0406
I don't believe in services being "companies" at all, maybe state owned
Don't you mean "nationalised" we don't wanna go there.
We will end up with either no oil or paying 10 times as much.
We buy oil on the free market. Why no to nationalisation? BR was more efficient than National Rail + combined rail operators. In fact privatised rail operators around the world used to take lessons from BR management as to how they could be so efficient with such limited resources.
Sponsored Links
I don't believe in services being "companies" at all, maybe state owned
Don't you mean "nationalised" we don't wanna go there.
We will end up with either no oil or paying 10 times as much.
We buy oil on the free market. Why no to nationalisation? BR was more efficient than National Rail + combined rail operators. In fact privatised rail operators around the world used to take lessons from BR management as to how they could be so efficient with such limited resources.
In 1962 British rail lost £104 million, which I conservatively estimate to be in the region of £2 billion in todays figures.
I cannot think of one instance were a nationalized industry performed better than private enterprise. (Methinks I may regret this remark)
Even Joe Stalin could not make it work so what chance have we
i sometime's work for rail companys as we did when british rail was about , they had steam , now its electric, british rail took over from many companys who did not invest in there future, so they had 1000s of loco's ,bridges , tracks, stations, sidings, yards, signels, etc to up grade ,and replace , and there had been a war so the two dont compare,
2
2scoops0406
I don't believe in services being "companies" at all, maybe state owned
Don't you mean "nationalised" we don't wanna go there.
We will end up with either no oil or paying 10 times as much.
We buy oil on the free market. Why no to nationalisation? BR was more efficient than National Rail + combined rail operators. In fact privatised rail operators around the world used to take lessons from BR management as to how they could be so efficient with such limited resources.
In 1962 British rail lost £104 million, which I conservatively estimate to be in the region of £2 billion in todays figures.
I cannot think of one instance were a nationalized industry performed better than private enterprise. (Methinks I may regret this remark)
Even Joe Stalin could not make it work so what chance have we
Absolute rubbish, how much subsidy has National Rail had, more than your conservative 2 Bn.
2
2scoops0406
Would you care to back up this statement with facts and figures?
2
2scoops0406
No I can't be bothered, could you prove it the other way around, I'm way too lazy.
I can't be bothered, could you prove it the other way around, I'm way too lazy.
I can't agree about the railways. Although, interestingly, since Railtrack was renationalised (it went bankrupt because the govt refused to subsidise rail travel by the amount necessary) the govt has increased the subsidy and it is now more than Railtrack said they needed.
There isn't a successful railway in the world that isn't subsidised.
The glorious French and German railways are heavily subsidised, and the wonderful privately-owned Swiss railways are heavily subsidised.
Not everybody knows that the London Underground system was nationalised by Thatcher's government when they closed down London's democratically elected council and seized its assets.
There isn't a successful railway in the world that isn't subsidised.
The glorious French and German railways are heavily subsidised, and the wonderful privately-owned Swiss railways are heavily subsidised.
Not everybody knows that the London Underground system was nationalised by Thatcher's government when they closed down London's democratically elected council and seized its assets.
skytalkz ,i think you will find that they are just over subscribed, we got new every thing now, station, tracks, rolling stock ,signalling , and we dont need to ride at 150 mph plus, as in the euro zone ,so 110 + 125 is quick enough, for uk. the infurstructure is better than ever be proud, blame London roading pricing for the trains all being full.
the infurstructure is better than ever be proud, blame London roading pricing for the trains all being full. No
Likewise, should we agree to differ
2
2scoops0406
No
Likewise, should we agree to differ
Indeed we can
Sponsored Links
