Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Heike List wrote:thats one reason I never believed in Privatisation on firms like Gas, Electric and Water... its spiralling out of control and all they can do is watch and let it be ....
I agree Keith
As I have said before - it is far better to trust the markets than bureaucrats and politicians. If the politicians are to be any use at all they should be restricted to ensure that the markets are working properly with room for lots of competition.
Nationalised monopolies are a disaster wherever they are.
We need more free enterprise, more capitalism, more market competition and less political interference and less government.
Guest 745- Registered: 27 Mar 2012
- Posts: 3,370
Barry
But aren't these industries profitable in public hands in Germany France and china Barry ?
In fact don't the French ,German and china public ,partly own the uk energy utilities
What we have is good old fashion theft of public assets ,Soled of by the conservative party
The energy networks was stolen ,,asset striped by your friends, now prices are rocketing and the people are waking up to the what the conservatives did
Are you personally profiting from shears in uk utilities??
Guest 1033- Registered: 23 Aug 2013
- Posts: 509
Whichever government gets in next should take back the energy companies for the UK, not privatise them, just make sure that the profits that are made stay in the UK, rather than be shared out around the world. Manufacturingindustries are a different matter, but anything that is supplied to the home, telephones, internet etc., should remain wholly owned by UK companies, assuming that it would be possible of course.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Barrie - stopping the world so you can get off does not work. The consequences of what you say would be less investment and cause retaliatory action against British companies. We have a global economy and it is better to work with it and turn it to our advantage than take heavy handed and counter productive action. What we need is more competition and a freer energy market not restrictions. Any problems we have are down to the market not being able to work properly so the answer is to enable more competition and new entrants.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Keith Bibby wrote:Barry
But aren't these industries profitable in public hands in Germany France and china Barry ?
In fact don't the French ,German and china public ,partly own the uk energy utilities
What we have is good old fashion theft of public assets ,Soled of by the conservative party
The energy networks was stolen ,,asset striped by your friends, now prices are rocketing and the people are waking up to the what the conservatives did
Are you personally profiting from shears in uk utilities??
Find out the meaning of the word 'asset'. Publicly owned, more accurately described as government owned commercial operations are and always have been poorly run liabilities not assets. Privatisation turns these liabilities into what really are publicly owned assets through share ownership. If you have a pension or Stocks & Shares ISA you will be benefiting from such ownership even when, nominally, the company is a French or German one in our global economy.
It certainly is a pity Blair sold Mrs Thatcher's 'golden share' that was designed to retain utilities in British ownership but we cannot cry over spilt milk.
Prices may be rocketing but that is because of two things - government green levies (started by Labour) and world energy prices caused by demand and supply. If you think some kind of renationalisation will solve that then you are mistaken. The French are lucky, something like 80% of their electricity is derived from nuclear power so they are less vulnerable to the higher prices for other forms of power incidentally.
Guest 1033- Registered: 23 Aug 2013
- Posts: 509
I understand the point of a global economy, but being as we are a net importer, other countries would have to penalise themselves to 'punish' us. I just feel that the UK has sold off too many of the assets that could help us recover from this economic disaster, and if it were run as a proper business (the country), and not as a nanny state by professional politicians we could all do much better, and with more money coming into the UK it could only make us stronger, and we could avoid this financial chaos in the future. Too many of the profits made in the UK are going outside, and the way some of the companies are run, the taxes don't get paid either. I know that's a different subject, but imagine the UK being run as a proper profit making business...
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
That is the point, a profit making business and for that you need to look at the whole. Our 'invisible earnings' include income from financial services, tourism and outsourced expertise. They are invisible because much of it does not show up in trade figures. What we must avoid is damaging what are massive earners for the UK that also provide hundreds of thousands of jobs. What you say - copied and pasted ""I just feel that the UK has sold off too many of the assets that could help us recover from this economic disaster"" assumes that nationalised industries are actually a asset that would help with this but that is not the case, they would be liabilities in government hands holding us back and adding to the deficit. We have seen it before. It is the collective might of private businesses on which we depend for economic success and they operate under the excessive weight of government legislation, red tape and taxation along with, ultimately, funding every penny of government spending and servicing the national debt. We need to relieve this burden with supply-side reform,s to help business to do what it is good at and, most of all, we need to help those that may become the big employers of the future, the small business sector but remember, they do not operate in a vacuum and we cannot ignore or punish big businesses either.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
Guest 1033- Registered: 23 Aug 2013
- Posts: 509
When I said not privatise, I meant to say not nationalise them, wouldn't want any money pits like the old ones, sorry about that, probably why we were at cross purposes.
I sort of corrected myself when I said the country should be run as a business, by businessmen with a proven track record. Hesitate to mention railtrack, which seems to have the worst aspects of a private business and a nationalised industry, perhaps we could make an exception with that one.
Businesses are the money makers, and all I was trying to say is that I would like to see a lot more of that money stay in the UK as wages and as legitimate tax, and not slipped out the back door to other countries.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
heike
thankyou.
we continue to hear the view that in todays climate its fine that we have high earners giving themselves big big pay rises whilst those in the same company at the bottom are on there 3rd wage freeze
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Autumn statement 2013
David Cameron accused of 'smoke and mirrors' on energy bills
Labour accuses PM of secret deals with big six firms, while charity says cuts to green levies will come at expense of poorest.
Ed Miliband will point out that most fuel bills are at a record high, while accusing the PM of making secret deals with the big six firms.
David Cameron stands accused of using "smoke and mirrors" tactics over his pledge to cut energy bills, with critics claiming that fuel prices will be at a record high this winter and cuts to energy efficiency schemes will come at the expense of some of the poorest households.
The government has pledged to bring down energy costs by taking £50 off bills and offering new homebuyers up to £1,000 to help install insulation, double glazing or green boilers as part of Thursday's autumn statement, which will be set out by George Osborne.
The chancellor confirmed on Sunday that the measures would be funded by a further crackdown on tax avoidance and also by scaling back the Energy Company Obligation, a scheme to help poor households use less energy.
Osborne also hinted that more benefit cuts are needed to ensure the economy is "sustainable", telling the BBC's Andrew Marr Show he was "clear more action will be required on welfare". It is understood the autumn statement will contain more details of a £100bn cap on welfare spending after the next parliament, but there will be no further benefit cuts before 2015.
It will also detail more help for small businesses, including a likely freeze on business rates, while Nick Clegg is announcing an extra £250m of funding for the government's new business bank to be based in Sheffield, near the deputy prime minister's own constituency.
However, the main focus of the autumn statement has so far been on energy costs, as the coalition scrambles to respond to Labour's promise of a price freeze after 2015 if it wins power.
The big six firms - British Gas, EDF, EON, Npower, Scottish Power and SSE - will come under pressure to announce official price cuts or freezes within days of the government's detailed plans being published, which are estimated to save the typical family £50. One energy company, EDF, has already said the announcement means it will not have to raise bills again for another year and it is understood that Npower is in a similar position.
However, Ed Miliband will point out on Monday that most fuel bills are at a record high. The Labour leader will accuse Cameron of making secret deals with the big six energy firms, claiming that fuel costs this winter will be £120 higher on average than last year.
Speaking at the Volkswagen National Training Centre in Milton Keynes, Miliband is expected to say Labour would deliver "not smoke and mirrors on electricity and gas bills or cosy deals with the big six that mean bills still rise this winter, but a real price freeze and action to reset the market to stop them overcharging again in the future".
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
the energy companies do need to be sorted
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
if they where still under government control it would have help bring the deficit down.with there high profits.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
Which is something ED is looking at
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Some people really do live is a total fantasy world about government control and monopolies. It did not work before and would be a disaster again.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
just let it go on then barryw??
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
What Keith - the government green levies that push up the price of power?
Why does it not sink into your head that even government monopolies cannot buck world prices for power.
What needs to be done is to encourage new entrants and to increase competition. More information and clearer information to customers to make it easier to switch energy supplier will also help.
One thing is certain, old and failed solutions like price freezes and nationalisation offer no solution at all and would be a disaster.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
There are bits of what you say barryw that even I could agree with!!!
More information and clearer information to customers to make it easier to switch energy supplliers good idea
Obviously privatised companies such as the energy suppliers have shown thats the wrong route.
Of course old style Nationalised industries is not the way, somewhere in the middle required
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Crossing the ruby con: Failing firm valued £8,000 gem at £11m
Two company directors have been disqualified from business after using a falsely valued ruby to inflate their failing company's accounts.
David Unwin and Nicholas Ibbotson received significant bans after trying to assuage their construction company's woes with "The Gem of Tanzania", which had purportedly been valued at£11m uncut ruby but was actually worth just £8,000.
The 10,700-carat lump of anyolite, a practically worthless grade of ruby, was sold by administrators after Shropshire-based firm Wrekin Construction went into liquidation. The directors' disqualification came after an inquiry by the Insolvency Service. Investigators found Mr Unwin bought the uncut gem in 2006 and transferred it to the assets of Wrekin after he took over the firm in 2007. It was listed as an £11m asset, based on a valuation supposedly carried out in Italy.
Wrekin collapsed into administration in March 2009 with losses of more than £45m to creditors. When the administrators tried to sell the gem, they found that the document showing the £11m valuation was a forgery.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
oh dear the list goes on,,,,,,,
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
