The thing is, with so many "private" utilities at the moment, we have the worst of both worlds: the disadvantages of nationalisation AND the disadvantages of privatisation.
Privatisation is supposedly meant to drive up the standards of services because, theoretically, the customer will go elsewhere if they're not satisfied - but, in practice, because so many privatised industries in this country are basically monopolies or cartels, they have no incentive to lower their prices or provide a better service, because they have no proper competitors and/or are conspiring with their competitors in order to maximise all of their profits (the "Big Six" energy companies).
So most of the privatised utilities can essentially take their customer base completely for granted in exactly the same way that nationalised industries can. Yet, at least with nationalisation, they wouldn't be jacking up their prices constantly to line their own pockets, and there would at least (theoretically) be a chance to democratically force changes to happen if we were really unhappy, through elections. As of now, there's no way of holding the managers of privatised industries to account.
The problem with privatisation is this:
Example 1: State-run. Costs 100 units. Charges 100 units. No profit. But it charges 100 units. Example 2: Private-run. Costs 85 units. Charges 90 units. Makes 5 units profit. But it charges 90 units.
People don't see that (2) is cheaper for them than (1) by 10 units. They just see the 5 unit profit at "their expense", and get annoyed by it.
But our privatised industries are very often more expensive to use than publicly-owned ones in other countries.
I wouldn't have a problem with private-utility owners making a (relatively modest) profit if it genuinely produced better services, but, in my view, it doesn't.
You clearly never dealt with a nationalised utility.
It is the threat of competition, the mercy of the market, that drives customer service.
I remember BR, just; it was awful. Train travel today is 5 x better than it was 20 years ago. And I got to Cambridge and back yesterday, via London for £51.50. Bargain.
But how much competition does a private rail company face?
If there isn’t an “end point” how can you “transition” to it?
1. There is no chance of there being any kind of deal negotiated in the remaining time. 2. The "transition deal" is therefore in fact a "negotiation deal". 3. The negotiation deal will last a lot longer than two years.
is how.
The way Mrs May has been acting, you wouldn't think she and her government are relaxed about having no deal.
Hammond today endorsed an independent OECD report saying it would be mad for the economy to go ahead with Brexit. It's clear to anyone not emotionally invested in it where this is heading...
To Mr Hammond losing his job?
I don't think he is freelancing. Do you?
Freelancing? Everything he has been saying as of late has been carefully choreographed and forms a coherent narrative doesn't it?
The thing is, with so many "private" utilities at the moment, we have the worst of both worlds: the disadvantages of nationalisation AND the disadvantages of privatisation.
Privatisation is supposedly meant to drive up the standards of services because, theoretically, the customer will go elsewhere if they're not satisfied - but, in practice, because so many privatised industries in this country are basically monopolies or cartels, they have no incentive to lower their prices or provide a better service, because they have no proper competitors and/or are conspiring with their competitors in order to maximise all of their profits (the "Big Six" energy companies).
So most of the privatised utilities can essentially take their customer base completely for granted in exactly the same way that nationalised industries can. Yet, at least with nationalisation, they wouldn't be jacking up their prices constantly to line their own pockets, and there would at least (theoretically) be a chance to democratically force changes to happen if we were really unhappy, through elections. As of now, there's no way of holding the managers of privatised industries to account.
The problem with privatisation is this:
Example 1: State-run. Costs 100 units. Charges 100 units. No profit. But it charges 100 units. Example 2: Private-run. Costs 85 units. Charges 90 units. Makes 5 units profit. But it charges 90 units.
People don't see that (2) is cheaper for them than (1) by 10 units. They just see the 5 unit profit at "their expense", and get annoyed by it.
But our privatised industries are very often more expensive to use than publicly-owned ones in other countries.
I wouldn't have a problem with private-utility owners making a (relatively modest) profit if it genuinely produced better services, but, in my view, it doesn't.
You clearly never dealt with a nationalised utility.
It is the threat of competition, the mercy of the market, that drives customer service.
I remember BR, just; it was awful. Train travel today is 5 x better than it was 20 years ago. And I got to Cambridge and back yesterday, via London for £51.50. Bargain.
But how much competition does a private rail company face?
Plenty, for my daily commute, of Dore/Sheffield to Manchester, I can go on three different operators.
The thing is, with so many "private" utilities at the moment, we have the worst of both worlds: the disadvantages of nationalisation AND the disadvantages of privatisation.
Privatisation is supposedly meant to drive up the standards of services because, theoretically, the customer will go elsewhere if they're not satisfied - but, in practice, because so many privatised industries in this country are basically monopolies or cartels, they have no incentive to lower their prices or provide a better service, because they have no proper competitors and/or are conspiring with their competitors in order to maximise all of their profits (the "Big Six" energy companies).
So most of the privatised utilities can essentially take their customer base completely for granted in exactly the same way that nationalised industries can. Yet, at least with nationalisation, they wouldn't be jacking up their prices constantly to line their own pockets, and there would at least (theoretically) be a chance to democratically force changes to happen if we were really unhappy, through elections. As of now, there's no way of holding the managers of privatised industries to account.
The problem with privatisation is this:
Example 1: State-run. Costs 100 units. Charges 100 units. No profit. But it charges 100 units. Example 2: Private-run. Costs 85 units. Charges 90 units. Makes 5 units profit. But it charges 90 units.
People don't see that (2) is cheaper for them than (1) by 10 units. They just see the 5 unit profit at "their expense", and get annoyed by it.
But our privatised industries are very often more expensive to use than publicly-owned ones in other countries.
I wouldn't have a problem with private-utility owners making a (relatively modest) profit if it genuinely produced better services, but, in my view, it doesn't.
You clearly never dealt with a nationalised utility.
It is the threat of competition, the mercy of the market, that drives customer service.
I remember BR, just; it was awful. Train travel today is 5 x better than it was 20 years ago. And I got to Cambridge and back yesterday, via London for £51.50. Bargain.
But how much competition does a private rail company face?
From London to Scotland, Virgin East Coast competes against Virgin West Coast...
I think what he means is that the transition gets agreed first in principle, to give businesses and others a degree of certainty, and then is confirmed assuming the other elements of the A50 talks get resolved. It's not a ridiculous suggestion but the EU want to do it the other way round to put pressure on the UK for those other elements. They hold the cards
If there isn’t an “end point” how can you “transition” to it?
1. There is no chance of there being any kind of deal negotiated in the remaining time. 2. The "transition deal" is therefore in fact a "negotiation deal". 3. The negotiation deal will last a lot longer than two years.
is how.
The way Mrs May has been acting, you wouldn't think she and her government are relaxed about having no deal.
Hammond today endorsed an independent OECD report saying it would be mad for the economy to go ahead with Brexit. It's clear to anyone not emotionally invested in it where this is heading...
To Mr Hammond losing his job?
I don't think he is freelancing. Do you?
I know that you think we will end up staying in the EU (and I'll admit I thought there was no chance of that but have revised my view a bit)... but do you really think May is the person to make that dramatic shift in policy? Is that what you are suggesting?
The thing is, with so many "private" utilities at the moment, we have the worst of both worlds: the disadvantages of nationalisation AND the disadvantages of privatisation.
Privatisation is supposedly meant to drive up the standards of services because, theoretically, the customer will go elsewhere if they're not satisfied - but, in practice, because so many privatised industries in this country are basically monopolies or cartels, they have no incentive to lower their prices or provide a better service, because they have no proper competitors and/or are conspiring with their competitors in order to maximise all of their profits (the "Big Six" energy companies).
So most of the privatised utilities can essentially take their customer base completely for granted in exactly the same way that nationalised industries can. Yet, at least with nationalisation, they wouldn't be jacking up their prices constantly to line their own pockets, and there would at least (theoretically) be a chance to democratically force changes to happen if we were really unhappy, through elections. As of now, there's no way of holding the managers of privatised industries to account.
The problem with privatisation is this:
Example 1: State-run. Costs 100 units. Charges 100 units. No profit. But it charges 100 units. Example 2: Private-run. Costs 85 units. Charges 90 units. Makes 5 units profit. But it charges 90 units.
People don't see that (2) is cheaper for them than (1) by 10 units. They just see the 5 unit profit at "their expense", and get annoyed by it.
But our privatised industries are very often more expensive to use than publicly-owned ones in other countries.
I wouldn't have a problem with private-utility owners making a (relatively modest) profit if it genuinely produced better services, but, in my view, it doesn't.
You clearly never dealt with a nationalised utility.
It is the threat of competition, the mercy of the market, that drives customer service.
I remember BR, just; it was awful. Train travel today is 5 x better than it was 20 years ago. And I got to Cambridge and back yesterday, via London for £51.50. Bargain.
But how much competition does a private rail company face?
Plenty, for my daily commute, of Dore/Sheffield to Manchester, I can go on three different operators.
If I want to travel from Norwich to London I only have a single operator - and I am sure that is pretty typical.
The thing is, with so many "private" utilities at the moment, we have the worst of both worlds: the disadvantages of nationalisation AND the disadvantages of privatisation.
Privatisation is supposedly meant to drive up the standards of services because, theoretically, the customer will go elsewhere if they're not satisfied - but, in practice, because so many privatised industries in this country are basically monopolies or cartels, they have no incentive to lower their prices or provide a better service, because they have no proper competitors and/or are conspiring with their competitors in order to maximise all of their profits (the "Big Six" energy companies).
So most of the privatised utilities can essentially take their customer base completely for granted in exactly the same way that nationalised industries can. Yet, at least with nationalisation, they wouldn't be jacking up their prices constantly to line their own pockets, and there would at least (theoretically) be a chance to democratically force changes to happen if we were really unhappy, through elections. As of now, there's no way of holding the managers of privatised industries to account.
The problem with privatisation is this:
Example 1: State-run. Costs 100 units. Charges 100 units. No profit. But it charges 100 units. Example 2: Private-run. Costs 85 units. Charges 90 units. Makes 5 units profit. But it charges 90 units.
People don't see that (2) is cheaper for them than (1) by 10 units. They just see the 5 unit profit at "their expense", and get annoyed by it.
But our privatised industries are very often more expensive to use than publicly-owned ones in other countries.
I wouldn't have a problem with private-utility owners making a (relatively modest) profit if it genuinely produced better services, but, in my view, it doesn't.
You clearly never dealt with a nationalised utility.
It is the threat of competition, the mercy of the market, that drives customer service.
I remember BR, just; it was awful. Train travel today is 5 x better than it was 20 years ago. And I got to Cambridge and back yesterday, via London for £51.50. Bargain.
But how much competition does a private rail company face?
Plenty, for my daily commute, of Dore/Sheffield to Manchester, I can go on three different operators.
There is only competition if you can buy an operator-specific ticket. Otherwise there is just a sharing out of the money.
A few routes do have some degree of competition, e.g. York - Newcastle, Birmingham - London, but these are the exception, rather than the rule.
The thing is, with so many "private" utilities at the moment, we have the worst of both worlds: the disadvantages of nationalisation AND the disadvantages of privatisation.
Privatisation is supposedly meant to drive up the standards of services because, theoretically, the customer will go elsewhere if they're not satisfied - but, in practice, because so many privatised industries in this country are basically monopolies or cartels, they have no incentive to lower their prices or provide a better service, because they have no proper competitors and/or are conspiring with their competitors in order to maximise all of their profits (the "Big Six" energy companies).
So most of the privatised utilities can essentially take their customer base completely for granted in exactly the same way that nationalised industries can. Yet, at least with nationalisation, they wouldn't be jacking up their prices constantly to line their own pockets, and there would at least (theoretically) be a chance to democratically force changes to happen if we were really unhappy, through elections. As of now, there's no way of holding the managers of privatised industries to account.
The problem with privatisation is this:
Example 1: State-run. Costs 100 units. Charges 100 units. No profit. But it charges 100 units. Example 2: Private-run. Costs 85 units. Charges 90 units. Makes 5 units profit. But it charges 90 units.
People don't see that (2) is cheaper for them than (1) by 10 units. They just see the 5 unit profit at "their expense", and get annoyed by it.
But our privatised industries are very often more expensive to use than publicly-owned ones in other countries.
I wouldn't have a problem with private-utility owners making a (relatively modest) profit if it genuinely produced better services, but, in my view, it doesn't.
You clearly never dealt with a nationalised utility.
It is the threat of competition, the mercy of the market, that drives customer service.
I remember BR, just; it was awful. Train travel today is 5 x better than it was 20 years ago. And I got to Cambridge and back yesterday, via London for £51.50. Bargain.
But how much competition does a private rail company face?
It is the threat of competition, the mercy of the market, that drives customer service.
That's precisely the point: most of our privatised-utility companies don't face any competition in reality, so they don't feel they need to bother improving customer service. Hence why, with the current system, we get the disadvantages of nationalisation (no commercial incentives or pressure to provide a better service) with the disadvantages of privatisation (profit motive meaning prices are constantly ramped up without coinciding improvements in service).
Also, as Stephen Bush has pointed out, the subsamples of the polls show that old people are actually more likely to support renationalising industries than young people - in other words, the people who have experienced both British Rail and the current system overwhelmingly think BR was better.
In Singapore the state also spends just 14% of gdp compared to 42% in the UK and taxes just 17% of gdp compared to 36% in the UK.
It is also not the case that all European rail is fully nationalised, even Sweden has some private rail companies, though I accept UK public opinion favours rail renationalisation at the moment
But where is rail renationalisation in the list of priorities? How many of those who commute by car for example want umpteen billions spent on the trains versus the NHS? Where Corbyn's Labour is utterly exposed is in believing they can have all of these things.
Railtrack collapsed and has already been replaced by Network Rail . I think the intention is to return the services to the public sector as existing franchises expire. Not much cost involved there.
Did Railtrack really collapse? I seem to recall it was deliberately undermined by the government of the day (whichever that was).
The transformation in service upon privatisation was far from only a British phenomenon
Stint one in Belgium - telephone line 3 months appointment any time during the day, maybe. Stint two in Belgium - telephone line day after tomorrow at 10.15, sorry we can’t do it any faster.
Far too often politicians prioritise producers over consumers (they are far fewer but much more focused and vocal) - writ large with nationalised industries...
How far apart were these two stints? Are you telling us there were no technological advances between the two periods which could possibly account for it?
In Singapore the state also spends just 14% of gdp compared to 42% in the UK and taxes just 17% of gdp compared to 36% in the UK.
It is also not the case that all European rail is fully nationalised, even Sweden has some private rail companies, though I accept UK public opinion favours rail renationalisation at the moment
But where is rail renationalisation in the list of priorities? How many of those who commute by car for example want umpteen billions spent on the trains versus the NHS? Where Corbyn's Labour is utterly exposed is in believing they can have all of these things.
Railtrack collapsed and has already been replaced by Network Rail . I think the intention is to return the services to the public sector as existing franchises expire. Not much cost involved there.
Did Railtrack really collapse? I seem to recall it was deliberately undermined by the government of the day (whichever that was).
edited to add: good afternoon, everyone.
The Blair government, who used the opening day of the the Afghanistan war to seize it.
If there isn’t an “end point” how can you “transition” to it?
1. There is no chance of there being any kind of deal negotiated in the remaining time. 2. The "transition deal" is therefore in fact a "negotiation deal". 3. The negotiation deal will last a lot longer than two years.
is how.
The way Mrs May has been acting, you wouldn't think she and her government are relaxed about having no deal.
Hammond today endorsed an independent OECD report saying it would be mad for the economy to go ahead with Brexit. It's clear to anyone not emotionally invested in it where this is heading...
To Mr Hammond losing his job?
I don't think he is freelancing. Do you?
I know that you think we will end up staying in the EU (and I'll admit I thought there was no chance of that but have revised my view a bit)... but do you really think May is the person to make that dramatic shift in policy? Is that what you are suggesting?
I don't know is the honest answer. I used to think the way May could play it would be to get a 'deal' and then call a second referendum in which she would remain neutral. The strategy would have been to negotiate the best possible deal by showing the EU that we really are serious about leaving, but then giving the people the final say. The feasibility of this option seems to be fading, not least because the EU aren't willing to be toyed with, so it might all collapse in a more dramatic fashion.
If there isn’t an “end point” how can you “transition” to it?
1. There is no chance of there being any kind of deal negotiated in the remaining time. 2. The "transition deal" is therefore in fact a "negotiation deal". 3. The negotiation deal will last a lot longer than two years.
is how.
The way Mrs May has been acting, you wouldn't think she and her government are relaxed about having no deal.
Hammond today endorsed an independent OECD report saying it would be mad for the economy to go ahead with Brexit. It's clear to anyone not emotionally invested in it where this is heading...
To Mr Hammond losing his job?
I don't think he is freelancing. Do you?
I know that you think we will end up staying in the EU (and I'll admit I thought there was no chance of that but have revised my view a bit)... but do you really think May is the person to make that dramatic shift in policy? Is that what you are suggesting?
I don't know is the honest answer. I used to think the way May could play it would be to get a 'deal' and then call a second referendum in which she would remain neutral. The strategy would have been to negotiate the best possible deal by showing the EU that we really are serious about leaving, but then giving the people the final say. The feasibility of this option seems to be fading, not least because the EU aren't willing to be toyed with, so it might all collapse in a more dramatic fashion.
The more the EU acts like an organisation we don't want to be part of, the greater the chance that we will Remain.
If there isn’t an “end point” how can you “transition” to it?
1. There is no chance of there being any kind of deal negotiated in the remaining time. 2. The "transition deal" is therefore in fact a "negotiation deal". 3. The negotiation deal will last a lot longer than two years.
is how.
The way Mrs May has been acting, you wouldn't think she and her government are relaxed about having no deal.
Hammond today endorsed an independent OECD report saying it would be mad for the economy to go ahead with Brexit. It's clear to anyone not emotionally invested in it where this is heading...
Is why I'm tempted to vote for Boris as next PM, only he could repent over the sin of Brexit, and take the country.
We all know Boris puts his own ambition first, does he really want to be the man that trashed the economy and made Corbyn PM, Hellz no.
BJ4PM.
There is something in your mazy logic... but the assumption that BoJo would see sense is a big one, and makes it a huge gamble.
The more the EU acts like an organisation we don't want to be part of, the greater the chance that we will Remain.
A paradox, but you have something there. I said previously there was little likelihood of the EU offering us a deal so bad it would be better to walk away. I should revise that a bit. It is conceivable, although I don't think it likely, that the offered deal would be so bad we might as well walk away and save ourselves the €60 billion. Deal and no deal are as bad as each other and we're fucked either way. In that case the only sensible response is to plead with the EU to let us stay. I think we will do better than that, however.
It is the threat of competition, the mercy of the market, that drives customer service.
That's precisely the point: most of our privatised-utility companies don't face any competition in reality, so they don't feel they need to bother improving customer service. Hence why, with the current system, we get the disadvantages of nationalisation (no commercial incentives or pressure to provide a better service) with the disadvantages of privatisation (profit motive meaning prices are constantly ramped up without coinciding improvements in service).
Also, as Stephen Bush has pointed out, the subsamples of the polls show that old people are actually more likely to support renationalising industries than young people - in other words, the people who have experienced both British Rail and the current system overwhelmingly think BR was better.
They don't face competition as long as people insist on remaining with the Big Six despite the fact it costs them more. It's the same electricity and gas coming down the same pipes - go for the cheaper alternatives!
If anyone fancies the cheapest rates at the moment and giving my better half an Amazon gift card please do feel free to switch to Tonik - https://tonikenergy.mention-me.com/m/fb/zq9ci-stephanie-garnett They aren't part of the easy switch service offered by the comparison websites but changing was just as easy. I like the fact they pay interest on my account balance too.
A thread on the benefits of nationalisation... Sheesh, these are worrying days and I'm not just thinking of tonight's game!
All gone to shit since Cameron retired and the pound shop Gordon Brown fired George Osborne.
Or perhaps since the Quad broke up....
All gone to shit since 6th May 2010 imo.
We'll have to differ on that.... getting rid of THE worst Chancellor and then Prime Minister (still) of my lifetime is still a day of celebration in Scrap towers.
In other news RPI is now at 3.9%, making the interest on student loans 6.9%! A student in the last year of their course will accrue 3,500 odd pounds of interest alone this year... and people wonder why the couple of hundred quid that generous Phil gave us a few weeks ago didn't have much effect.
It is the threat of competition, the mercy of the market, that drives customer service.
That's precisely the point: most of our privatised-utility companies don't face any competition in reality, so they don't feel they need to bother improving customer service. Hence why, with the current system, we get the disadvantages of nationalisation (no commercial incentives or pressure to provide a better service) with the disadvantages of privatisation (profit motive meaning prices are constantly ramped up without coinciding improvements in service).
Also, as Stephen Bush has pointed out, the subsamples of the polls show that old people are actually more likely to support renationalising industries than young people - in other words, the people who have experienced both British Rail and the current system overwhelmingly think BR was better.
They don't face competition as long as people insist on remaining with the Big Six despite the fact it costs them more. It's the same electricity and gas coming down the same pipes - go for the cheaper alternatives!
If anyone fancies the cheapest rates at the moment and giving my better half an Amazon gift card please do feel free to switch to Tonik - https://tonikenergy.mention-me.com/m/fb/zq9ci-stephanie-garnett They aren't part of the easy switch service offered by the comparison websites but changing was just as easy. I like the fact they pay interest on my account balance too.
Those of us who can be arsed to switch are being subsidised by those who don't have the nous/time/facilities to switch. Generally those losing subsidising us are the poorer or older sections of society.
It's not even a zero-sum game of course because collectively we all pay for the advertising, call centres, IT and admin required to support switching. The whole utilities 'market' is a crap idea, implemented in a crap way.
This Post is wrong on so may levels I do not know where to start. But for anybody who is interested in Singapore the home ownership rate is 90.8% and the second highest in the would! if you doubt me please google it. or please check this link:
Singapore has one of the freest economy in the would with total government as a % of GDP at only around 20% and overall is the 2nd freest economy in the would! for those that are interested:
Singapore is on page 158. Economic freedom, leas to grater prosperity, and more equal distribution of that prosperity, protections of civil liberty's, and is a bulwark against oppression.
The '20% of GDP controlled by the government' in the article is simple the fact that the Singaporean have properly funded there pensions funds, and the quote of 85% of housing being government just that most housing in Singapore is in tower blocks and there 'leasehold' 'freehold' legalese system is arranged differently to this country.
When I see people people willfully distorting the truth to advance there political course I fear for the country.
In other news RPI is now at 3.9%, making the interest on student loans 6.9%! A student in the last year of their course will accrue 3,500 odd pounds of interest alone this year... and people wonder why the couple of hundred quid that generous Phil gave us a few weeks ago didn't have much effect.
The proposed raising of the income threshold when student 9% marginal tax becomes payable is a massive improvement.
A thread on the benefits of nationalisation... Sheesh, these are worrying days and I'm not just thinking of tonight's game!
All gone to shit since Cameron retired and the pound shop Gordon Brown fired George Osborne.
Or perhaps since the Quad broke up....
All gone to shit since 6th May 2010 imo.
We'll have to differ on that.... getting rid of THE worst Chancellor and then Prime Minister (still) of my lifetime is still a day of celebration in Scrap towers.
Fair enough I am sure we will disagree... but do you honestly think the country is in a better place now than in 2010?
The more the EU acts like an organisation we don't want to be part of, the greater the chance that we will Remain.
A paradox, but you have something there.
Setting aside all the distortions of the Brexit campaign, there is one piece of genuinely new information that nobody before last June could have known for sure and that's the reaction of the EU. Its resilience, combined with the resurgence in public support for it across the EU, means we're in a very different political landscape from the one in which many people envisaged Brexit taking place.
A thread on the benefits of nationalisation... Sheesh, these are worrying days and I'm not just thinking of tonight's game!
All gone to shit since Cameron retired and the pound shop Gordon Brown fired George Osborne.
Or perhaps since the Quad broke up....
All gone to shit since 6th May 2010 imo.
We'll have to differ on that.... getting rid of THE worst Chancellor and then Prime Minister (still) of my lifetime is still a day of celebration in Scrap towers.
Fair enough I am sure we will disagree... but do you honestly think the country is in a better place now that in 2010?
A thread on the benefits of nationalisation... Sheesh, these are worrying days and I'm not just thinking of tonight's game!
All gone to shit since Cameron retired and the pound shop Gordon Brown fired George Osborne.
Or perhaps since the Quad broke up....
All gone to shit since 6th May 2010 imo.
We'll have to differ on that.... getting rid of THE worst Chancellor and then Prime Minister (still) of my lifetime is still a day of celebration in Scrap towers.
Fair enough I am sure we will disagree... but do you honestly think the country is in a better place now than in 2010?
Currently yes it most certainly is .... where it will be in 2019 is another matter.
A thread on the benefits of nationalisation... Sheesh, these are worrying days and I'm not just thinking of tonight's game!
All gone to shit since Cameron retired and the pound shop Gordon Brown fired George Osborne.
Or perhaps since the Quad broke up....
All gone to shit since 6th May 2010 imo.
We'll have to differ on that.... getting rid of THE worst Chancellor and then Prime Minister (still) of my lifetime is still a day of celebration in Scrap towers.
Fair enough I am sure we will disagree... but do you honestly think the country is in a better place now than in 2010?
The more the EU acts like an organisation we don't want to be part of, the greater the chance that we will Remain.
A paradox, but you have something there.
Setting aside all the distortions of the Brexit campaign, there is one piece of genuinely new information that nobody before last June could have known for sure and that's the reaction of the EU. Its resilience, combined with the resurgence in public support for it across the EU, means we're in a very different political landscape from the one in which many people envisaged Brexit taking place.
No, no, you must have that wrong William... once we decided to leave the whole EU house of cards was going to come tumbling down.
In other news RPI is now at 3.9%, making the interest on student loans 6.9%! A student in the last year of their course will accrue 3,500 odd pounds of interest alone this year... and people wonder why the couple of hundred quid that generous Phil gave us a few weeks ago didn't have much effect.
The proposed raising of the income threshold when student 9% marginal tax becomes payable is a massive improvement.
The interest rate on student loans doesn't actually matter these days unless you're pulling ~ 90k on graduation..
The more the EU acts like an organisation we don't want to be part of, the greater the chance that we will Remain.
A paradox, but you have something there.
Setting aside all the distortions of the Brexit campaign, there is one piece of genuinely new information that nobody before last June could have known for sure and that's the reaction of the EU. Its resilience, combined with the resurgence in public support for it across the EU, means we're in a very different political landscape from the one in which many people envisaged Brexit taking place.
I would say broadly the EU have acted as I expected. There was a Spectator role-play exercise before the referendum, which indicated how they would react - and selling cars wasn't a factor. But you are right they have been impressively coherent so far.
I didn't expect our government to be quite so dysfunctional, but strangely it hasn't made a difference to my expected outcomes so far. I do expect the government to agree EU demands, however. We will see how that plays.
The more the EU acts like an organisation we don't want to be part of, the greater the chance that we will Remain.
A paradox, but you have something there.
Setting aside all the distortions of the Brexit campaign, there is one piece of genuinely new information that nobody before last June could have known for sure and that's the reaction of the EU. Its resilience, combined with the resurgence in public support for it across the EU, means we're in a very different political landscape from the one in which many people envisaged Brexit taking place.
No, no, you must have that wrong William... once we decided to leave the whole EU house of cards was going to come tumbling down.
I've never assumed that the EU is going to roll over. One would assume that both sides will act in their own interests.
The more the EU acts like an organisation we don't want to be part of, the greater the chance that we will Remain.
A paradox, but you have something there.
Setting aside all the distortions of the Brexit campaign, there is one piece of genuinely new information that nobody before last June could have known for sure and that's the reaction of the EU. Its resilience, combined with the resurgence in public support for it across the EU, means we're in a very different political landscape from the one in which many people envisaged Brexit taking place.
I would say broadly the EU have acted as I expected. There was a Spectator role-play exercise before the referendum, which indicated how they would react - and selling cars wasn't a factor. But you are right they have been impressively coherent so far.
I didn't expect our government to be quite so dysfunctional, but strangely it hasn't made a difference to my expected outcomes so far. I do expect the government to agree EU demands, however. We will see how that plays.
The big difference in expectations for me was that I expected the government to have a clear majority in the Commons.
In other news RPI is now at 3.9%, making the interest on student loans 6.9%! A student in the last year of their course will accrue 3,500 odd pounds of interest alone this year... and people wonder why the couple of hundred quid that generous Phil gave us a few weeks ago didn't have much effect.
The proposed raising of the income threshold when student 9% marginal tax becomes payable is a massive improvement.
The interest rate on student loans doesn't actually matter these days unless you're pulling ~ 90k on graduation..
i know. it should really be renamed the well paid graduate marginal repayment tax.
The more the EU acts like an organisation we don't want to be part of, the greater the chance that we will Remain.
A paradox, but you have something there.
Setting aside all the distortions of the Brexit campaign, there is one piece of genuinely new information that nobody before last June could have known for sure and that's the reaction of the EU. Its resilience, combined with the resurgence in public support for it across the EU, means we're in a very different political landscape from the one in which many people envisaged Brexit taking place.
No, no, you must have that wrong William... once we decided to leave the whole EU house of cards was going to come tumbling down.
I've never assumed that the EU is going to roll over. One would assume that both sides will act in their own interests.
Ahem there was a lot of BMW will force Merkel to ....
The more the EU acts like an organisation we don't want to be part of, the greater the chance that we will Remain.
A paradox, but you have something there.
Setting aside all the distortions of the Brexit campaign, there is one piece of genuinely new information that nobody before last June could have known for sure and that's the reaction of the EU. Its resilience, combined with the resurgence in public support for it across the EU, means we're in a very different political landscape from the one in which many people envisaged Brexit taking place.
I would say broadly the EU have acted as I expected. There was a Spectator role-play exercise before the referendum, which indicated how they would react - and selling cars wasn't a factor. But you are right they have been impressively coherent so far.
I didn't expect our government to be quite so dysfunctional, but strangely it hasn't made a difference to my expected outcomes so far. I do expect the government to agree EU demands, however. We will see how that plays.
The big difference in expectations for me was that I expected the government to have a clear majority in the Commons.
I don't think that makes a difference to the outcomes. It makes it more difficult for the government. I may be wrong, of course.
The more the EU acts like an organisation we don't want to be part of, the greater the chance that we will Remain.
A paradox, but you have something there.
Setting aside all the distortions of the Brexit campaign, there is one piece of genuinely new information that nobody before last June could have known for sure and that's the reaction of the EU. Its resilience, combined with the resurgence in public support for it across the EU, means we're in a very different political landscape from the one in which many people envisaged Brexit taking place.
No, no, you must have that wrong William... once we decided to leave the whole EU house of cards was going to come tumbling down.
I've never assumed that the EU is going to roll over. One would assume that both sides will act in their own interests.
Ahem there was a lot of BMW will force Merkel to ....
Fast forward to 36:30 and you’ll see that it was Tony Benn who pioneered that argument.
In other news RPI is now at 3.9%, making the interest on student loans 6.9%! A student in the last year of their course will accrue 3,500 odd pounds of interest alone this year... and people wonder why the couple of hundred quid that generous Phil gave us a few weeks ago didn't have much effect.
The proposed raising of the income threshold when student 9% marginal tax becomes payable is a massive improvement.
The interest rate on student loans doesn't actually matter these days unless you're pulling ~ 90k on graduation..
My teacher grandchildren are paying back their loans. Two/three years out of Uni. And no way are they on £90k. 27 or so.
TOPPING - Easy test, send the next boat load of BMWs, Mercedes back without unloading. See if anybody complains.
Well I worry that if you let them in but 10% more expensive on account of WTO rules, the Brits will keep buying them on the never-never as they do today.
What percentage of car buyers do you think buy their personal use car with their own money and without a finance deal? I've no idea but I bet it's small because I can't see how all those people living in small semis in Worksop can otherwise have brand spanking new Range Rover Evoques outside their homes.
In other news RPI is now at 3.9%, making the interest on student loans 6.9%! A student in the last year of their course will accrue 3,500 odd pounds of interest alone this year... and people wonder why the couple of hundred quid that generous Phil gave us a few weeks ago didn't have much effect.
The proposed raising of the income threshold when student 9% marginal tax becomes payable is a massive improvement.
The interest rate on student loans doesn't actually matter these days unless you're pulling ~ 90k on graduation..
My teacher grandchildren are paying back their loans. Two/three years out of Uni. And no way are they on £90k. 27 or so.
I think puplstar was talking about interest, which depends on your salary, not repayment. Only at a higher salary is it RPI+3. For those on more modest salaries it is just RPI.
In other news RPI is now at 3.9%, making the interest on student loans 6.9%! A student in the last year of their course will accrue 3,500 odd pounds of interest alone this year... and people wonder why the couple of hundred quid that generous Phil gave us a few weeks ago didn't have much effect.
The proposed raising of the income threshold when student 9% marginal tax becomes payable is a massive improvement.
The interest rate on student loans doesn't actually matter these days unless you're pulling ~ 90k on graduation..
My teacher grandchildren are paying back their loans. Two/three years out of Uni. And no way are they on £90k. 27 or so.
Misses the point a little. How much £ do you think they are paying and at that £ rate how much will they have paid in the 30 years max window before the debt balance is written off
In other news RPI is now at 3.9%, making the interest on student loans 6.9%! A student in the last year of their course will accrue 3,500 odd pounds of interest alone this year... and people wonder why the couple of hundred quid that generous Phil gave us a few weeks ago didn't have much effect.
The proposed raising of the income threshold when student 9% marginal tax becomes payable is a massive improvement.
The interest rate on student loans doesn't actually matter these days unless you're pulling ~ 90k on graduation..
My teacher grandchildren are paying back their loans. Two/three years out of Uni. And no way are they on £90k. 27 or so.
The loan rate is completely irrelevant unless they get to academy head pdq if they're post 2012 graduates with the 25k threshold incoming. It makes a colossal difference to the net cash total at 55.
I think he's just trying to convince himself. Cliff-edge Brexit is now the prevailing desire within the Leave movement. In fact, it's amazing how the quickly and seamlessly the Ultras have seized the agenda. The Softies have barely put up a fight.
TheScreamingEagles - the EU stopped beef imports, why not stop polluting diesels - we are mugs to allow BMW, Volkswagen and Mercedes to sell cars in the UK when the EU is also fining us for air pollution from their engines. JLR diesels pass the American tests, not one German manufacturer appears to be able to do the same - so why not ban them.
TheScreamingEagles - the EU stopped beef imports, why not stop polluting diesels - we are mugs to allow BMW, Volkswagen and Mercedes to sell cars in the UK when the EU is also fining us for air pollution from their engines. JLR diesels pass the American tests, not one German manufacturer appears to be able to do the same - so why not ban them.
TheScreamingEagles - the EU stopped beef imports, why not stop polluting diesels - we are mugs to allow BMW, Volkswagen and Mercedes to sell cars in the UK when the EU is also fining us for air pollution from their engines. JLR diesels pass the American tests, not one German manufacturer appears to be able to do the same - so why not ban them.
TOPPING - Easy test, send the next boat load of BMWs, Mercedes back without unloading. See if anybody complains.
There's actually a new facility being built at Immingham for the import of BMWs. (Dare I say 'Despite Brexit').
Spoil from Kellingley Colliery washeries is being used in the construction. A bit ironic that they couldn't sell any more coal, but now they are selling the waste!
TheScreamingEagles - the EU stopped beef imports, why not stop polluting diesels - we are mugs to allow BMW, Volkswagen and Mercedes to sell cars in the UK when the EU is also fining us for air pollution from their engines. JLR diesels pass the American tests, not one German manufacturer appears to be able to do the same - so why not ban them.
Worth noting what happens when government gets to do train procurement - the 125 replacement programme started in 2005, after a huge amount of toing and froing that included Virgin saying they didn't want the more expensive Hitachi trains imposed by government, the first passengers travelled this week, although services on the East Coast line won't start for more than a year.
TheScreamingEagles - the EU stopped beef imports, why not stop polluting diesels - we are mugs to allow BMW, Volkswagen and Mercedes to sell cars in the UK when the EU is also fining us for air pollution from their engines. JLR diesels pass the American tests, not one German manufacturer appears to be able to do the same - so why not ban them.
Because I like my German cars.
Youre more of a Renault driver
Apart from a brief flirtation with an Italian car, since about 2002 onwards I've driven nought but German cars.
TheScreamingEagles - the EU stopped beef imports, why not stop polluting diesels - we are mugs to allow BMW, Volkswagen and Mercedes to sell cars in the UK when the EU is also fining us for air pollution from their engines. JLR diesels pass the American tests, not one German manufacturer appears to be able to do the same - so why not ban them.
'Let's start a trade war with the EU.' They should have put that on the side of the bus.
The more the EU acts like an organisation we don't want to be part of, the greater the chance that we will Remain.
A paradox, but you have something there.
Setting aside all the distortions of the Brexit campaign, there is one piece of genuinely new information that nobody before last June could have known for sure and that's the reaction of the EU. Its resilience, combined with the resurgence in public support for it across the EU, means we're in a very different political landscape from the one in which many people envisaged Brexit taking place.
No, no, you must have that wrong William... once we decided to leave the whole EU house of cards was going to come tumbling down.
I've never assumed that the EU is going to roll over. One would assume that both sides will act in their own interests.
Ahem there was a lot of BMW will force Merkel to ....
Fast forward to 36:30 and you’ll see that it was Tony Benn who pioneered that argument.
Benn of course was a mentor of Corbyn and David Davis toured the country with Benn in a 2 man show.
It seems Benn is directing the UK's approach to the EU from the grave, a UK out of the EU and single market under a Corbyn government implementing socialism would be the final triumph of Bennism!
TheScreamingEagles - the EU stopped beef imports, why not stop polluting diesels - we are mugs to allow BMW, Volkswagen and Mercedes to sell cars in the UK when the EU is also fining us for air pollution from their engines. JLR diesels pass the American tests, not one German manufacturer appears to be able to do the same - so why not ban them.
Because I like my German cars.
Youre more of a Renault driver
Apart from a brief flirtation with an Italian car, since about 2002 onwards I've driven nought but German cars.
TheScreamingEagles - the EU stopped beef imports, why not stop polluting diesels - we are mugs to allow BMW, Volkswagen and Mercedes to sell cars in the UK when the EU is also fining us for air pollution from their engines. JLR diesels pass the American tests, not one German manufacturer appears to be able to do the same - so why not ban them.
Because I like my German cars.
Youre more of a Renault driver
Apart from a brief flirtation with an Italian car, since about 2002 onwards I've driven nought but German cars.
chances are theyre not made there
I don't care, just because I was born in a barn, it doesn't make me a horse.
The more the EU acts like an organisation we don't want to be part of, the greater the chance that we will Remain.
A paradox, but you have something there.
Setting aside all the distortions of the Brexit campaign, there is one piece of genuinely new information that nobody before last June could have known for sure and that's the reaction of the EU. Its resilience, combined with the resurgence in public support for it across the EU, means we're in a very different political landscape from the one in which many people envisaged Brexit taking place.
I would say broadly the EU have acted as I expected. There was a Spectator role-play exercise before the referendum, which indicated how they would react - and selling cars wasn't a factor. But you are right they have been impressively coherent so far.
I didn't expect our government to be quite so dysfunctional, but strangely it hasn't made a difference to my expected outcomes so far. I do expect the government to agree EU demands, however. We will see how that plays.
The big difference in expectations for me was that I expected the government to have a clear majority in the Commons.
The one thing that hasn't turned out as I expected was I thought there would be a big problem with the UK's WTO membership without having our own negotiated set of schedules in place. It turns out that doesn't matter if you are already a member. It would be if we were applying for the first time.
TheScreamingEagles - the EU stopped beef imports, why not stop polluting diesels - we are mugs to allow BMW, Volkswagen and Mercedes to sell cars in the UK when the EU is also fining us for air pollution from their engines. JLR diesels pass the American tests, not one German manufacturer appears to be able to do the same - so why not ban them.
Because I like my German cars.
Youre more of a Renault driver
Apart from a brief flirtation with an Italian car, since about 2002 onwards I've driven nought but German cars.
chances are theyre not made there
I don't care, just because I was born in a barn, it doesn't make me a horse.
Economic freedom, leas to grater prosperity, and more equal distribution of that prosperity, protections of civil liberty's, and is a bulwark against oppression.
snip
Privatize Everything!
I am not persuaded that there is any meaningful link between economic freedom and civil liberties. China is the classic counter example. Turkey looks like another one. There are many others.
Singapore is an authoritarian regime with a strong state, of course certain parts of the economy are under state control. Many countries around the world have strong state involvement in housing, transportation, energy, infrastructure. The UK is a unique exception, driven by in my view an entirely blinkered commitment to free markets. This has led to bizarre and probably disastorous experiments eg attempts to privatise defence procurement.
I doubt that there is any link whatsoever between nationalisation and strong economic performance.
TheScreamingEagles - the EU stopped beef imports, why not stop polluting diesels - we are mugs to allow BMW, Volkswagen and Mercedes to sell cars in the UK when the EU is also fining us for air pollution from their engines. JLR diesels pass the American tests, not one German manufacturer appears to be able to do the same - so why not ban them.
Because I like my German cars.
Youre more of a Renault driver
Apart from a brief flirtation with an Italian car, since about 2002 onwards I've driven nought but German cars.
chances are theyre not made there
I don't care, just because I was born in a barn, it doesn't make me a horse.
TheScreamingEagles - the EU stopped beef imports, why not stop polluting diesels - we are mugs to allow BMW, Volkswagen and Mercedes to sell cars in the UK when the EU is also fining us for air pollution from their engines. JLR diesels pass the American tests, not one German manufacturer appears to be able to do the same - so why not ban them.
Because I like my German cars.
Youre more of a Renault driver
Apart from a brief flirtation with an Italian car, since about 2002 onwards I've driven nought but German cars.
chances are theyre not made there
I don't care, just because I was born in a barn, it doesn't make me a horse.
That's a straw-man argument...
You're calling The Duke of Wellington a straw man.
TheScreamingEagles - the EU stopped beef imports, why not stop polluting diesels - we are mugs to allow BMW, Volkswagen and Mercedes to sell cars in the UK when the EU is also fining us for air pollution from their engines. JLR diesels pass the American tests, not one German manufacturer appears to be able to do the same - so why not ban them.
Because I like my German cars.
Youre more of a Renault driver
Apart from a brief flirtation with an Italian car, since about 2002 onwards I've driven nought but German cars.
chances are theyre not made there
I don't care, just because I was born in a barn, it doesn't make me a horse.
That's a straw-man argument...
You're calling The Duke of Wellington a straw man.
Brave.
He stood in Jezza's constituency a few years before Jezza claimed control.
In other news RPI is now at 3.9%, making the interest on student loans 6.9%! A student in the last year of their course will accrue 3,500 odd pounds of interest alone this year... and people wonder why the couple of hundred quid that generous Phil gave us a few weeks ago didn't have much effect.
The proposed raising of the income threshold when student 9% marginal tax becomes payable is a massive improvement.
The interest rate on student loans doesn't actually matter these days unless you're pulling ~ 90k on graduation..
My teacher grandchildren are paying back their loans. Two/three years out of Uni. And no way are they on £90k. 27 or so.
I think it becomes a significant problem if you hit £41k, which is not unrealistic if you are 10 years in to your career in the public sector (although many will not).
Even on the lower rate, say you had borrowed £55k over three years, your loan would be increasing by about £181 per month just in interest payments at the beginning of the repayment term. So, in reality, if you are a public sector worker you will never really reduce the debt burden, it just acts as an additional tax.
Worth noting what happens when government gets to do train procurement - the 125 replacement programme started in 2005, after a huge amount of toing and froing that included Virgin saying they didn't want the more expensive Hitachi trains imposed by government, the first passengers travelled this week, although services on the East Coast line won't start for more than a year.
Yes, and as I've said passim, the IEP project is a disaster in the making. It bodes ill for any nationalised operators.
The problem is less the ownership structure and more the pressures on management and workforce. Nationalised industries did badly in Britain in the 1970s because they were more geared towards the interests of the producer than towards the interests of the nation, the consumer or the customer.
It is entirely conceivable to have nationalised industries that are focused, more usefully, on other interests. I am, however, sceptical whether Mr Corbyn is the man to find a different path from the one walked in the 1970s.
The problem is less the ownership structure and more the pressures on management and workforce. Nationalised industries did badly in Britain in the 1970s because they were more geared towards the interests of the producer than towards the interests of the nation, the consumer or the customer.
It is entirely conceivable to have nationalised industries that are focused, more usefully, on other interests. I am, however, sceptical whether Mr Corbyn is the man to find a different path from the one walked in the 1970s.
Comments
Hammond is a man desperately grasping at straws.
A few routes do have some degree of competition, e.g. York - Newcastle, Birmingham - London, but these are the exception, rather than the rule.
https://twitter.com/NadineDorries/status/919844526524715008
Also, as Stephen Bush has pointed out, the subsamples of the polls show that old people are actually more likely to support renationalising industries than young people - in other words, the people who have experienced both British Rail and the current system overwhelmingly think BR was better.
edited to add: good afternoon, everyone.
A Sunday no less.
A thread on the benefits of nationalisation... Sheesh, these are worrying days and I'm not just thinking of tonight's game!
If anyone fancies the cheapest rates at the moment and giving my better half an Amazon gift card please do feel free to switch to Tonik - https://tonikenergy.mention-me.com/m/fb/zq9ci-stephanie-garnett They aren't part of the easy switch service offered by the comparison websites but changing was just as easy. I like the fact they pay interest on my account balance too.
Totally understandable after last season. They need someone they are in mortal fear of - Big Sam springs to mind.
https://www.axios.com/young-people-flock-to-snap-flee-facebook-2497611272.html
I wonder if the media can come up with some puns.
It's not even a zero-sum game of course because collectively we all pay for the advertising, call centres, IT and admin required to support switching. The whole utilities 'market' is a crap idea, implemented in a crap way.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_home_ownership_rate
Singapore has one of the freest economy in the would with total government as a % of GDP at only around 20% and overall is the 2nd freest economy in the would! for those that are interested:
https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/efw/efw2017/efw-2017-chapter-2.pdf
Singapore is on page 158. Economic freedom, leas to grater prosperity, and more equal distribution of that prosperity, protections of civil liberty's, and is a bulwark against oppression.
The '20% of GDP controlled by the government' in the article is simple the fact that the Singaporean have properly funded there pensions funds, and the quote of 85% of housing being government just that most housing in Singapore is in tower blocks and there 'leasehold' 'freehold' legalese system is arranged differently to this country.
When I see people people willfully distorting the truth to advance there political course I fear for the country.
Privatize Everything!
I didn't expect our government to be quite so dysfunctional, but strangely it hasn't made a difference to my expected outcomes so far. I do expect the government to agree EU demands, however. We will see how that plays.
https://youtu.be/_zBFh6bpcMo
What percentage of car buyers do you think buy their personal use car with their own money and without a finance deal? I've no idea but I bet it's small because I can't see how all those people living in small semis in Worksop can otherwise have brand spanking new Range Rover Evoques outside their homes.
https://twitter.com/HonestFrank/status/920301688455680007
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/10/amber-rudd-says-that-a-no-deal-brexit-is-unthinkable-shes-very-wrong/
I think he's just trying to convince himself. Cliff-edge Brexit is now the prevailing desire within the Leave movement. In fact, it's amazing how the quickly and seamlessly the Ultras have seized the agenda. The Softies have barely put up a fight.
Spoil from Kellingley Colliery washeries is being used in the construction. A bit ironic that they couldn't sell any more coal, but now they are selling the waste!
It seems Benn is directing the UK's approach to the EU from the grave, a UK out of the EU and single market under a Corbyn government implementing socialism would be the final triumph of Bennism!
That's a straw-man argument...
Singapore is an authoritarian regime with a strong state, of course certain parts of the economy are under state control. Many countries around the world have strong state involvement in housing, transportation, energy, infrastructure. The UK is a unique exception, driven by in my view an entirely blinkered commitment to free markets. This has led to bizarre and probably disastorous experiments eg attempts to privatise defence procurement.
I doubt that there is any link whatsoever between nationalisation and strong economic performance.
Brave.
Even on the lower rate, say you had borrowed £55k over three years, your loan would be increasing by about £181 per month just in interest payments at the beginning of the repayment term. So, in reality, if you are a public sector worker you will never really reduce the debt burden, it just acts as an additional tax.
Vote Corbyn, take back control.
It is entirely conceivable to have nationalised industries that are focused, more usefully, on other interests. I am, however, sceptical whether Mr Corbyn is the man to find a different path from the one walked in the 1970s.
That doesn't seem unreasonable.