Labour,Manifesto, Hurry Up I want a good laugh.

[LordRaven]

Wrong answer! The question was "name a British Nationalised Industry that made a profit?"

Why do they have to make money?
Primarily they provide a service and breaking even is often good enough.

Raven, and right wing people like him, don't get the concept of a public service. They think everything and someone at least should be making money out of necessities. Other names for that are cartels, monopolies or mafia behaviour.

Total misquote you dullard! Read my post again slime mould and read my part on NHS and come back and apologise you idiot

[McAz]

I see that my question about nationalisation has lead to a lot of hot air and bluster but with not one correct answer --and that is because nationalisation failed at huge cost to the tax payer.

To coin SD "FACT!"

Such a shame, it is a wonderful concept but sadly some people will take the piss when they feel their employer (government) has bottomless pockets.

As I said, and which has been ignored, it might be the case that the workforce today would recognise a need for the government to run nationalised industries in profit --and not at a cost to the tax payer --and unless nationalisation takes place we won't know.

So for those of you attacked me for nothing, calling me a tory etc --please fucking grow up and learn to read! Idiots!

My thoughts on nationalisation are as I said (many times you rampant commie cunts - just showing you what unwarranted remarks are ) because it is a nice idea, but it requires education for all involved (lessons from a poor history on the matter in Britain) and the need for all to understand that the tax payer require a return on investment .

As for the comments that they can be run as costs, you clearly don't understand that all businesses have to evolve and need to make profits for R&D and continual modernisation to stay relevant and competitive.

p.s. Given your comments it would seem not one of you is a Captain of Industry. You all seem to think it okay to run nationalised industries at a cost. And that = Failure.

No, it has not led to anything except the exposure of your misunderstanding of what collectively owned industries are for.

[LordRaven]

I can see the lack of comprehension of ROI on here from the rampant lefties means we still have a problem and nationalisation requires far more education.

[McAz]

I can see the lack of comprehension of ROI on here from the rampant lefties means we still have a problem and nationalisation requires far more education.

Yours is the only lack of comprehension. Nationalized industries should not seek to profit for the reason I stated earlier.

Socialism is not capitalism.

[Rolluplostinspace]

I see that my question about nationalisation has lead to a lot of hot air and bluster but with not one correct answer --and that is because nationalisation failed at huge cost to the tax payer.

To coin SD "FACT!"

Such a shame, it is a wonderful concept but sadly some people will take the piss when they feel their employer (government) has bottomless pockets.

As I said, and which has been ignored, it might be the case that the workforce today would recognise a need for the government to run nationalised industries in profit --and not at a cost to the tax payer --and unless nationalisation takes place we won't know.

So for those of you attacked me for nothing, calling me a tory etc --please fucking grow up and learn to read! Idiots!

My thoughts on nationalisation are as I said (many times you rampant commie cunts - just showing you what unwarranted remarks are ) because it is a nice idea, but it requires education for all involved (lessons from a poor history on the matter in Britain) and the need for all to understand that the tax payer require a return on investment .

As for the comments that they can be run as costs, you clearly don't understand that all businesses have to evolve and need to make profits for R&D and continual modernisation to stay relevant and competitive.

p.s. Given your comments it would seem not one of you is a Captain of Industry. You all seem to think it okay to run nationalised industries at a cost. And that = Failure.

You want to remain part of Europe where government owned services like rail and electricity are doing just fine but can't and won't here?
In fact doing more much more than just fine and like I said even making money out of our privatised sytem but you can't get your head around that can you.
You can't because your stance doesn't make any sense.
You don't believe in nationalisation but want to be part of a place that has much nationalisation ... so successful you want to be part of it but it doesn't work ....

[LordRaven]

I see that my question about nationalisation has lead to a lot of hot air and bluster but with not one correct answer --and that is because nationalisation failed at huge cost to the tax payer.

To coin SD "FACT!"

Such a shame, it is a wonderful concept but sadly some people will take the piss when they feel their employer (government) has bottomless pockets.

As I said, and which has been ignored, it might be the case that the workforce today would recognise a need for the government to run nationalised industries in profit --and not at a cost to the tax payer --and unless nationalisation takes place we won't know.

So for those of you attacked me for nothing, calling me a tory etc --please fucking grow up and learn to read! Idiots!

My thoughts on nationalisation are as I said (many times you rampant commie cunts - just showing you what unwarranted remarks are ) because it is a nice idea, but it requires education for all involved (lessons from a poor history on the matter in Britain) and the need for all to understand that the tax payer require a return on investment .

As for the comments that they can be run as costs, you clearly don't understand that all businesses have to evolve and need to make profits for R&D and continual modernisation to stay relevant and competitive.

p.s. Given your comments it would seem not one of you is a Captain of Industry. You all seem to think it okay to run nationalised industries at a cost. And that = Failure.

No, it has not led to anything except the exposure of your misunderstanding of what collectively owned industries are for.

No, it shows that you just don't get that UK Plc has got to be competitive in all aspects for the good of all tax payers and that RO is paramount to keep the UK competitive and keep it alive and well finance-wise.
Oh I would love to nationalise industry and for the UK to close the trade gap and become a real tiger.
Sadly you rampant lefties think ROI unimportant and that is why nationalisation failed in Britain

[Rolluplostinspace]

I see that my question about nationalisation has lead to a lot of hot air and bluster but with not one correct answer --and that is because nationalisation failed at huge cost to the tax payer.

To coin SD "FACT!"

Such a shame, it is a wonderful concept but sadly some people will take the piss when they feel their employer (government) has bottomless pockets.

As I said, and which has been ignored, it might be the case that the workforce today would recognise a need for the government to run nationalised industries in profit --and not at a cost to the tax payer --and unless nationalisation takes place we won't know.

So for those of you attacked me for nothing, calling me a tory etc --please fucking grow up and learn to read! Idiots!

My thoughts on nationalisation are as I said (many times you rampant commie cunts - just showing you what unwarranted remarks are ) because it is a nice idea, but it requires education for all involved (lessons from a poor history on the matter in Britain) and the need for all to understand that the tax payer require a return on investment .

As for the comments that they can be run as costs, you clearly don't understand that all businesses have to evolve and need to make profits for R&D and continual modernisation to stay relevant and competitive.

p.s. Given your comments it would seem not one of you is a Captain of Industry. You all seem to think it okay to run nationalised industries at a cost. And that = Failure.

No, it has not led to anything except the exposure of your misunderstanding of what collectively owned industries are for.

No, it shows that you just don't get that UK Plc has got to be competitive in all aspects for the good of all tax payers and that RO is paramount to keep the UK competitive and keep it alive and well finance-wise.
Oh I would love to nationalise industry and for the UK to close the trade gap and become a real tiger.
Sadly you rampant lefties think ROI unimportant and that is why nationalisation failed in Britain

Why are you pro Europe?
Be honest and if you don't know just say so ....

[McAz]

I see that my question about nationalisation has lead to a lot of hot air and bluster but with not one correct answer --and that is because nationalisation failed at huge cost to the tax payer.

To coin SD "FACT!"

Such a shame, it is a wonderful concept but sadly some people will take the piss when they feel their employer (government) has bottomless pockets.

As I said, and which has been ignored, it might be the case that the workforce today would recognise a need for the government to run nationalised industries in profit --and not at a cost to the tax payer --and unless nationalisation takes place we won't know.

So for those of you attacked me for nothing, calling me a tory etc --please fucking grow up and learn to read! Idiots!

My thoughts on nationalisation are as I said (many times you rampant commie cunts - just showing you what unwarranted remarks are ) because it is a nice idea, but it requires education for all involved (lessons from a poor history on the matter in Britain) and the need for all to understand that the tax payer require a return on investment .

As for the comments that they can be run as costs, you clearly don't understand that all businesses have to evolve and need to make profits for R&D and continual modernisation to stay relevant and competitive.

p.s. Given your comments it would seem not one of you is a Captain of Industry. You all seem to think it okay to run nationalised industries at a cost. And that = Failure.

No, it has not led to anything except the exposure of your misunderstanding of what collectively owned industries are for.

No, it shows that you just don't get that UK Plc has got to be competitive in all aspects for the good of all tax payers and that RO is paramount to keep the UK competitive and keep it alive and well finance-wise.
Oh I would love to nationalise industry and for the UK to close the trade gap and become a real tiger.
Sadly you rampant lefties think ROI unimportant and that is why nationalisation failed in Britain

There is no such entity as UK plc. Collective enterprises do not exist to compete, they exist to serve. Who does the Army compete with?

[LordRaven]

I can see the lack of comprehension of ROI on here from the rampant lefties means we still have a problem and nationalisation requires far more education.

Yours is the only lack of comprehension. Nationalized industries should not seek to profit for the reason I stated earlier.

Socialism is not capitalism.

That remark exemplifies why you would be destined to failure on nationalisation, you haven't learned from the last fiasco when the tax payer had to continually prop up non-profitable nationalised industries that cost far too much, produced shite that couldn't be exported and resulted in abject failure.

[Cannydc]

The nationalisation of water, energy grids and the Royal Mail would save UK households £7.8bn a year and pay for itself within seven years, according to new academic research.

Professor Hall calculates that the average household would be £142 better off a year as a result of nationalising energy grids, and £113 better off if English water companies were publicly owned.

Labour's manifesto will be out in good time to be properly scrutinised and will, as usual, be fully costed.

Compare and contrast to the Tory manifesto, which will be released as late as possible to avoid scrutiny, and like in 2017 won't be costed.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 03636.html

Who is costing Labour's manifesto? Free universal broadband for all inc businesses? That is a big cost, how exactly will that be paid for? I look forward to hearing. Great idea! Who wouldn't want that?

Your professor is putting a sunny spin on nationalisation, I guess that that is what he is prone to do as he has been employed to do just that, but we all know what happens to nationalised industries.

I often ask what nationalised industry "made a profit and was a roaring success" and many shout "The NHS" when we all know that the NHS is incapable of and not designed to make a profit because of its very nature and it will always be a huge cost, but that is a price worth paying for free healthcare.

It's a shame that nationalisation leads to "big firm, they can afford it" attitudes that causes failure but that is what happens and then waste is covered by pumping more and more money into organisations that are run at a cost to taxpayers. Which just fucks the country.

Or it could be the case that current generations recognise this and are willing to be accountable and it might perhaps work but we won't know unless it happens.

Life has moved on apace since the 1980s when our family silver was hocked to give tax cuts to the wealthy. Unions work differently, production is all just-in-time, but we still pay a great chunk of our utility bills to give dividends to (often foreign) shareholders. That shouldn't be what utility profit is for, it should in part be re-invested and in part used to reduce bills.

Almost three decades after water was sold-off, share ownership is now largely in the hands of a small group of international investors – many of them based in tax havens. Meanwhile, prices have increased by 40 per cent and over a quarter of the amount consumers pay on bills goes towards servicing debt interest and paying out dividends.

New investment has been financed by borrowing rather than by shareholders. When water was privatised, the Government generously took on the outstanding debts of the sector – all £4.9bn of them – leaving the new owners debt free. The private owners have taken advantage, ratcheting up a breathtaking £46bn of debt between them by 2016.

While racking up debt at taxpayers’ expense, the water firms have paid out billions to shareholders in dividends. Out of a combined total post-tax profit of £18.8bn over the last 10 years, all but £700m of it was paid out in dividends to shareholders. That’s more than £18bn flowing into the pockets of shareholders instead of being used to bring down bills and improve services.

The daylight robbery is also taking place in the energy sector. In 2016-17, National Grid made a £1.9bn profit on UK electricity and gas transmission. Around £660m in dividends were paid out on these operations, meaning a 12 per cent increase in hidden costs for consumers.

The promised benefits of market competition have never materialised: the "Big Six" energy companies have taken advantage of consumers, overcharging customers by £2bn in 2015. People don’t want to have to research options and shop around for a decent deal; they just want affordable and reliable energy.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/pr ... 75216.html

[Fletch]

Wrong answer! The question was "name a British Nationalised Industry that made a profit?"

Why do they have to make money?
Primarily they provide a service and breaking even is often good enough.

Raven, and right wing people like him, don't get the concept of a public service. They think everything and someone at least should be making money out of necessities. Other names for that are cartels, monopolies or mafia behaviour.

Total misquote you dullard! Read my post again slime mould and read my part on NHS and come back and apologise you idiot

What do you believe taxes should be used for?

[McAz]

I can see the lack of comprehension of ROI on here from the rampant lefties means we still have a problem and nationalisation requires far more education.

Yours is the only lack of comprehension. Nationalized industries should not seek to profit for the reason I stated earlier.

Socialism is not capitalism.

That remark exemplifies why you would be destined to failure on nationalisation, you haven't learned from the last fiasco when the tax payer had to continually prop up non-profitable nationalised industries that cost far too much, produced shite that couldn't be exported and resulted in abject failure.

Does the Army fail because it does not make profit?

[Rolluplostinspace]

I can see the lack of comprehension of ROI on here from the rampant lefties means we still have a problem and nationalisation requires far more education.

Yours is the only lack of comprehension. Nationalized industries should not seek to profit for the reason I stated earlier.

Socialism is not capitalism.

That remark exemplifies why you would be destined to failure on nationalisation, you haven't learned from the last fiasco when the tax payer had to continually prop up non-profitable nationalised industries that cost far too much, produced shite that couldn't be exported and resulted in abject failure.

You think the taxpayer isn't paying to prop up capitalism?
The car industroies are not up for privatisation Lordy

[LordRaven]

I see that my question about nationalisation has lead to a lot of hot air and bluster but with not one correct answer --and that is because nationalisation failed at huge cost to the tax payer.

To coin SD "FACT!"

Such a shame, it is a wonderful concept but sadly some people will take the piss when they feel their employer (government) has bottomless pockets.

As I said, and which has been ignored, it might be the case that the workforce today would recognise a need for the government to run nationalised industries in profit --and not at a cost to the tax payer --and unless nationalisation takes place we won't know.

So for those of you attacked me for nothing, calling me a tory etc --please fucking grow up and learn to read! Idiots!

My thoughts on nationalisation are as I said (many times you rampant commie cunts - just showing you what unwarranted remarks are ) because it is a nice idea, but it requires education for all involved (lessons from a poor history on the matter in Britain) and the need for all to understand that the tax payer require a return on investment .

As for the comments that they can be run as costs, you clearly don't understand that all businesses have to evolve and need to make profits for R&D and continual modernisation to stay relevant and competitive.

p.s. Given your comments it would seem not one of you is a Captain of Industry. You all seem to think it okay to run nationalised industries at a cost. And that = Failure.

No, it has not led to anything except the exposure of your misunderstanding of what collectively owned industries are for.

No, it shows that you just don't get that UK Plc has got to be competitive in all aspects for the good of all tax payers and that RO is paramount to keep the UK competitive and keep it alive and well finance-wise.
Oh I would love to nationalise industry and for the UK to close the trade gap and become a real tiger.
Sadly you rampant lefties think ROI unimportant and that is why nationalisation failed in Britain

There is no such entity as UK plc. Collective enterprises do not exist to compete, they exist to serve. Who does the Army compete with?

Stop trying to take the piss and pretend to be thick ffs!

You know as well as I do that all countries have to compete globally on trade, and we UK plc (for want of a better expression) are not exempt from that.

We are a nation that relies on trade, as the germans proved on two occasions, and we do need to compete if we want the best for future generations.

What you propose is stagnation and zero growth, and that is why I know you are taking the piss!

Grow up! This is a serious issue, GB needs to close the trade gap. Should nationalisation take place all employees, and Gov appointed management especially, need to understand the need for growth and ROI.

[Rolluplostinspace]

I love it when Raven starts calling us lefties.
Raven .... you constantly expose your real Tory self.
The Lib shite is sucking up to your new mate Stooo.
You're a fucking Tory through and through and it kind of shows ... a lot .... often but for some reason you never have the bottle to make a stance for what you believe.