You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Jeremy Corbyn
May 4 2024 11.10am

Jeremy Corbyn

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 103 of 464 < 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 >

 

View We are goin up!'s Profile We are goin up! Flag Coulsdon 02 Oct 15 6.55am Send a Private Message to We are goin up! Add We are goin up! as a friend

Why does everyone keep talking about nationalising things assuming that it will provide a better service than the private sector when all evidence suggests the contrary?

Edited by We are goin up! (02 Oct 2015 9.49am)

 


The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
leggedstruggle Flag Croydon 02 Oct 15 7.04am

Quote We are goin up! at 02 Oct 2015 6.55am

Why does everyone keep talking about nationalising things assuming that it will provide a better service than the public sector when all evidence suggests the contrary?

Should we privatise everything then? The army, navy and airforce? The police? The fire service? The NHS? Parrliament and local government - why elect people, couldn't we give the jobs to the highest bidder?

 


mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View matt_himself's Profile matt_himself Flag Matataland 02 Oct 15 7.10am Send a Private Message to matt_himself Add matt_himself as a friend

Quote We are goin up! at 02 Oct 2015 6.55am

Why does everyone keep talking about nationalising things assuming that it will provide a better service than the public sector when all evidence suggests the contrary?


Is the correct answer.

You will get plenty of comments about imaginary 'fat cats' creaming profits from ex nationalised industries but the reality is very different.

I would suggest that instead of reading emotive blogs which are solely designed to incite class war, the renationationalisation crowd take a trip to a British steel mill and discuss with the management of the operation there what the effects of nationalisation had on their industry.

They will find that 40 years of underinvestment has meant that the works are losing money hand over fist. The management have received no payback for their investment and they are considering mothballing parts of the operation because it is simply to expensive to operate them.

Nationalising industry has never worked in this country. Calls for renationalising are largely driven by ideology over practicality.

 


"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Kermit8's Profile Kermit8 Flag Hevon 02 Oct 15 7.22am Send a Private Message to Kermit8 Add Kermit8 as a friend

Quote We are goin up! at 02 Oct 2015 6.55am

Why does everyone keep talking about nationalising things assuming that it will provide a better service than the public sector when all evidence suggests the contrary?


All I expect is the same sometimes crap service but not at exhorbitant profit driven rates. Especially for water and rail travel.

 


Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]


Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
leggedstruggle Flag Croydon 02 Oct 15 7.25am

Quote matt_himself at 02 Oct 2015 7.10am

Quote We are goin up! at 02 Oct 2015 6.55am

Why does everyone keep talking about nationalising things assuming that it will provide a better service than the public sector when all evidence suggests the contrary?


Is the correct answer.

You will get plenty of comments about imaginary 'fat cats' creaming profits from ex nationalised industries but the reality is very different.

I would suggest that instead of reading emotive blogs which are solely designed to incite class war, the renationationalisation crowd take a trip to a British steel mill and discuss with the management of the operation there what the effects of nationalisation had on their industry.

They will find that 40 years of underinvestment has meant that the works are losing money hand over fist. The management have received no payback for their investment and they are considering mothballing parts of the operation because it is simply to expensive to operate them.

Nationalising industry has never worked in this country. Calls for renationalising are largely driven by ideology over practicality.

I agree that the steel industry should not be nationalised, but essential services such as power and transport should. Blaming the failure of the current British steel industry on its previous nationalised incarnation is a bit strong given that steel was de-nationalised 27 years ago - how long does capitalism need to work its magic? Anyway, the owners have blamed falling steel prices, not 'underinvestment'. I worked for the nationalised gas industry in the 1970s and they certainly did not underinvest and they ran a pretty tight ship (far better than some private companies I have worked for). They were somewhat overstaffed admittedly, but for a real shambles of over-staffing, inefficiency and 'right-on' unionism, Lewisham Council where I worked for a year takes the biscuit.

 


mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View matt_himself's Profile matt_himself Flag Matataland 02 Oct 15 7.48am Send a Private Message to matt_himself Add matt_himself as a friend

Quote leggedstruggle at 02 Oct 2015 7.25am

Quote matt_himself at 02 Oct 2015 7.10am

Quote We are goin up! at 02 Oct 2015 6.55am

Why does everyone keep talking about nationalising things assuming that it will provide a better service than the public sector when all evidence suggests the contrary?


Is the correct answer.

You will get plenty of comments about imaginary 'fat cats' creaming profits from ex nationalised industries but the reality is very different.

I would suggest that instead of reading emotive blogs which are solely designed to incite class war, the renationationalisation crowd take a trip to a British steel mill and discuss with the management of the operation there what the effects of nationalisation had on their industry.

They will find that 40 years of underinvestment has meant that the works are losing money hand over fist. The management have received no payback for their investment and they are considering mothballing parts of the operation because it is simply to expensive to operate them.

Nationalising industry has never worked in this country. Calls for renationalising are largely driven by ideology over practicality.

I agree that the steel industry should not be nationalised, but essential services such as power and transport should. Blaming the failure of the current British steel industry on its previous nationalised incarnation is a bit strong given that steel was de-nationalised 27 years ago - how long does capitalism need to work its magic? Anyway, the owners have blamed falling steel prices, not 'underinvestment'. I worked for the nationalised gas industry in the 1970s and they certainly did not underinvest and they ran a pretty tight ship (far better than some private companies I have worked for). They were somewhat overstaffed admittedly, but for a real shambles of over-staffing, inefficiency and 'right-on' unionism, Lewisham Council where I worked for a year takes the biscuit.


This is a typically, ignorant General Talk answer. The fact is that when Tony Benn nationalised the steel industry in the 1960's all investment ceased in infrastructure and R&D. In that time different methods of manufacturing steel became standard and modern plants elsewhere in the World introduced new and improved manufacturing processes.

Britain was left behind and as such, the privatisation of British Steel and the merger that created Corus, did not increase investment significantly, until Tata bought the company. Since 2007, The new owners have been struggling to improve productivity because of the archaic state of what they purchased. The infrastructure costs required to improve the main production sites to compete with the Chinese and German manufacturers will be exponential. They made moves to dispose of part of the business earlier this year only for the takeover to collapse.

For 'capitalism to work its magic' there needs to be a foundation upon which to build. The lack of investment in the industry during nationalisation smashed that foundation and all the owners of the steel industry have done since is pour money into a hole, that results in them not even standing still, let alone moving forward.

 


"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
leggedstruggle Flag Croydon 02 Oct 15 8.19am

Quote matt_himself at 02 Oct 2015 7.48am

Quote leggedstruggle at 02 Oct 2015 7.25am

Quote matt_himself at 02 Oct 2015 7.10am

Quote We are goin up! at 02 Oct 2015 6.55am

Why does everyone keep talking about nationalising things assuming that it will provide a better service than the public sector when all evidence suggests the contrary?


Is the correct answer.

You will get plenty of comments about imaginary 'fat cats' creaming profits from ex nationalised industries but the reality is very different.

I would suggest that instead of reading emotive blogs which are solely designed to incite class war, the renationationalisation crowd take a trip to a British steel mill and discuss with the management of the operation there what the effects of nationalisation had on their industry.

They will find that 40 years of underinvestment has meant that the works are losing money hand over fist. The management have received no payback for their investment and they are considering mothballing parts of the operation because it is simply to expensive to operate them.

Nationalising industry has never worked in this country. Calls for renationalising are largely driven by ideology over practicality.

I agree that the steel industry should not be nationalised, but essential services such as power and transport should. Blaming the failure of the current British steel industry on its previous nationalised incarnation is a bit strong given that steel was de-nationalised 27 years ago - how long does capitalism need to work its magic? Anyway, the owners have blamed falling steel prices, not 'underinvestment'. I worked for the nationalised gas industry in the 1970s and they certainly did not underinvest and they ran a pretty tight ship (far better than some private companies I have worked for). They were somewhat overstaffed admittedly, but for a real shambles of over-staffing, inefficiency and 'right-on' unionism, Lewisham Council where I worked for a year takes the biscuit.


This is a typically, ignorant General Talk answer. The fact is that when Tony Benn nationalised the steel industry in the 1960's all investment ceased in infrastructure and R&D. In that time different methods of manufacturing steel became standard and modern plants elsewhere in the World introduced new and improved manufacturing processes.

Britain was left behind and as such, the privatisation of British Steel and the merger that created Corus, did not increase investment significantly, until Tata bought the company. Since 2007, The new owners have been struggling to improve productivity because of the archaic state of what they purchased. The infrastructure costs required to improve the main production sites to compete with the Chinese and German manufacturers will be exponential. They made moves to dispose of part of the business earlier this year only for the takeover to collapse.

For 'capitalism to work its magic' there needs to be a foundation upon which to build. The lack of investment in the industry during nationalisation smashed that foundation and all the owners of the steel industry have done since is pour money into a hole, that results in them not even standing still, let alone moving forward.

Why aren't the owners blaming Tony Benn then instead of stating that their difficulties are due to a fall in steel prices? Why did these clever business buy into something that had had its 'foundations smashed'


Edited by leggedstruggle (02 Oct 2015 8.21am)

 


mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View sydtheeagle's Profile sydtheeagle Flag England 02 Oct 15 8.40am Send a Private Message to sydtheeagle Add sydtheeagle as a friend

Quote leggedstruggle at 02 Oct 2015 8.19am

Why aren't the owners blaming Tony Benn then instead of stating that their difficulties are due to a fall in steel prices? Why did these clever business buy into something that had had its 'foundations smashed'

Edited by leggedstruggle (02 Oct 2015 8.21am)

Is the right question, and "because they sniffed a profit without having to make a major investment" is the right answer. If you are number 1 and you don't care about much else other than your shareholders, that is pretty clever, is it not?

 


Sydenham by birth. Selhurst by the Grace of God.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View We are goin up!'s Profile We are goin up! Flag Coulsdon 02 Oct 15 9.46am Send a Private Message to We are goin up! Add We are goin up! as a friend

Quote leggedstruggle at 02 Oct 2015 7.04am

Quote We are goin up! at 02 Oct 2015 6.55am

Why does everyone keep talking about nationalising things assuming that it will provide a better service than the public sector when all evidence suggests the contrary?

Should we privatise everything then? The army, navy and airforce? The police? The fire service? The NHS? Parliament and local government - why elect people, couldn't we give the jobs to the highest bidder?


Did I say that? Defence of the country, its people and its law should of course be the responsibility of government because that cannot realistically be expected to be provided by citizens. The NHS I think should stay free at the point of service but I have no problem with privatising parts of the background to make it more efficient. I have family that work in the NHS and they endorse that, as long as it is free to use who the bloody hell cares?

My point was that because the railways are providing a poor service now, does not mean that you can wave a magic wand, nationalise it and assume that it will provide a better and cheaper service. The same goes for utilities, I don't want my power being at the hands of the unions, I don't particularly like rolling blackouts since my business that I run from home relies on it.

Corbyn is promoting fantasist economics and policies and it won't wash with the British electorate.

 


The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
nickgusset Flag Shizzlehurst 02 Oct 15 9.49am

Quote We are goin up! at 02 Oct 2015 9.46am

Quote leggedstruggle at 02 Oct 2015 7.04am

Quote We are goin up! at 02 Oct 2015 6.55am

Why does everyone keep talking about nationalising things assuming that it will provide a better service than the public sector when all evidence suggests the contrary?

Should we privatise everything then? The army, navy and airforce? The police? The fire service? The NHS? Parliament and local government - why elect people, couldn't we give the jobs to the highest bidder?


Did I say that? Defence of the country, its people and its law should of course be the responsibility of government because that cannot realistically be expected to be provided by citizens. The NHS I think should stay free at the point of service but I have no problem with privatising parts of the background to make it more efficient. I have family that work in the NHS and they endorse that, as long as it is free to use who the bloody hell cares?

My point was that because the railways are providing a poor service now, does not mean that you can wave a magic wand, nationalise it and assume that it will provide a better and cheaper service. The same goes for utilities, I don't want my power being at the hands of the unions, I don't particularly like rolling blackouts since my business that I run from home relies on it.

Corbyn is promoting fantasist economics and policies and it won't wash with the British electorate.


Who has said it's fantasist economics?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View We are goin up!'s Profile We are goin up! Flag Coulsdon 02 Oct 15 9.52am Send a Private Message to We are goin up! Add We are goin up! as a friend

Quote nickgusset at 02 Oct 2015 9.49am

Quote We are goin up! at 02 Oct 2015 9.46am

Did I say that? Defence of the country, its people and its law should of course be the responsibility of government because that cannot realistically be expected to be provided by citizens. The NHS I think should stay free at the point of service but I have no problem with privatising parts of the background to make it more efficient. I have family that work in the NHS and they endorse that, as long as it is free to use who the bloody hell cares?

My point was that because the railways are providing a poor service now, does not mean that you can wave a magic wand, nationalise it and assume that it will provide a better and cheaper service. The same goes for utilities, I don't want my power being at the hands of the unions, I don't particularly like rolling blackouts since my business that I run from home relies on it.

Corbyn is promoting fantasist economics and policies and it won't wash with the British electorate.


Who has said it's fantasist economics?


Erm, quite a few people... Do you need a list? You have Google.

 


The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Hoof Hearted 02 Oct 15 9.54am

Quote leggedstruggle at 02 Oct 2015 8.19am

Quote matt_himself at 02 Oct 2015 7.48am

Quote leggedstruggle at 02 Oct 2015 7.25am

Quote matt_himself at 02 Oct 2015 7.10am

Quote We are goin up! at 02 Oct 2015 6.55am

Why does everyone keep talking about nationalising things assuming that it will provide a better service than the public sector when all evidence suggests the contrary?


Is the correct answer.

You will get plenty of comments about imaginary 'fat cats' creaming profits from ex nationalised industries but the reality is very different.

I would suggest that instead of reading emotive blogs which are solely designed to incite class war, the renationationalisation crowd take a trip to a British steel mill and discuss with the management of the operation there what the effects of nationalisation had on their industry.

They will find that 40 years of underinvestment has meant that the works are losing money hand over fist. The management have received no payback for their investment and they are considering mothballing parts of the operation because it is simply to expensive to operate them.

Nationalising industry has never worked in this country. Calls for renationalising are largely driven by ideology over practicality.

I agree that the steel industry should not be nationalised, but essential services such as power and transport should. Blaming the failure of the current British steel industry on its previous nationalised incarnation is a bit strong given that steel was de-nationalised 27 years ago - how long does capitalism need to work its magic? Anyway, the owners have blamed falling steel prices, not 'underinvestment'. I worked for the nationalised gas industry in the 1970s and they certainly did not underinvest and they ran a pretty tight ship (far better than some private companies I have worked for). They were somewhat overstaffed admittedly, but for a real shambles of over-staffing, inefficiency and 'right-on' unionism, Lewisham Council where I worked for a year takes the biscuit.


This is a typically, ignorant General Talk answer. The fact is that when Tony Benn nationalised the steel industry in the 1960's all investment ceased in infrastructure and R&D. In that time different methods of manufacturing steel became standard and modern plants elsewhere in the World introduced new and improved manufacturing processes.

Britain was left behind and as such, the privatisation of British Steel and the merger that created Corus, did not increase investment significantly, until Tata bought the company. Since 2007, The new owners have been struggling to improve productivity because of the archaic state of what they purchased. The infrastructure costs required to improve the main production sites to compete with the Chinese and German manufacturers will be exponential. They made moves to dispose of part of the business earlier this year only for the takeover to collapse.

For 'capitalism to work its magic' there needs to be a foundation upon which to build. The lack of investment in the industry during nationalisation smashed that foundation and all the owners of the steel industry have done since is pour money into a hole, that results in them not even standing still, let alone moving forward.

Why aren't the owners blaming Tony Benn then instead of stating that their difficulties are due to a fall in steel prices? Why did these clever business buy into something that had had its 'foundations smashed'


Edited by leggedstruggle (02 Oct 2015 8.21am)


Because at the time the figures stacked up... China and India (amongst other emerging economies) were using vast quantities of steel for their infrastructure/expanasion, which drove up steel prices. Supply/Demand... simple economics!

Now these economies have cooled, building works have slowed and there is too much steel on the market driving the price down.

It's the same with Oil exploration... projects like the Arctic Circle are now uneconomic due to falling oil prices.

Underlying the above scenarios some industries aren't geared up for the lean times due to past under-investment.

Matt is right to highlight the failings of British Steel in the past.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 103 of 464 < 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Jeremy Corbyn