Conservatives.

[The God Emperor]

Some very interesting points in here,

I was thinking the other day (after reading a political blog on opinion polls) what people think about the nationalisation of energy? Like the nhs, education etc. it is (imo) something that had such a core effect on people's lives that it should be sheltered from the free market.

I must point out I am not as well informed on politics as some in this thread so be gentle with me.

I'd argue the opposite. they are too important not to privatise. doesn't mean we cant have state voucher systems to keep a safety net for people though.

[lcfc81]

Some people seem to be rewriting history to claim that the pre-privatised industries were cheap, popular and well run . They weren't.

I can well believe,

I've always been torn between the idea of open markets that reward hard work and success and the need to provide a base line quality of life through public services. The problem with public services is where do they stop.

[leicsmac]

cuts are going to have to happen if we want true economic recovery and not just a debt fueled bubble in time for an election.

the welfare state we have enjoyed for these past decades was never sustainable. its not been a case of taxing the rich to help the poor, it has been funded through a Ponzi scheme that will eventually collapse and future generations will suffer for people's good times before and now.   

 

Totally agree, but just hoping not it won't be a permanent arrangement - there should be economic growth again, one day. The welfare state should be scaled back to a degree, but be targetted and not swingeing. 

 

I'm hoping a well hung parliament will result in all elected politicians realising their job is to serve the people and not play political point scoring to the detriment of the country. I know I'm an idealist and a dreamer, but if we don't stop this opposition at all costs mentality we will end up like the states who have plunged themselves into financial meltdown because of political point scoring.

 

Totally agree with this.

 

Some people seem to be rewriting history to claim that the pre-privatised industries were cheap, popular and well run . They weren't.

 

Nor are the privatised services we have now. So we're trapped between the devil and the deep blue sea.

 

The public transportation in South Korea (private owned but subsidised), a country with similar size and population to our own works very, very well indeed, so you wonder what we're doing wrong. Perhaps infrastructure is the issue? 

 

I can well believe,

I've always been torn between the idea of open markets that reward hard work and success and the need to provide a base line quality of life through public services. The problem with public services is where do they stop.

 

Yeah, it's all about balance.

 

As for the energy companies themselves - they represent the end result of the parody of a free market economy that we have now - a cartel of companies fixing prices with no competition between them and the consumer unable to find the best deal because...there isn't one. That being said, nationalisation probably isn't the solution to that either so what to do?

[lcfc81]

I'd argue the opposite. they are too important not to privatise. doesn't mean we cant have state voucher systems to keep a safety net for people though.

It's interesting, would you get the energy companies or use taxes to pay for it?

[Zingari]

Some people seem to be rewriting history to claim that the pre-privatised industries were cheap, popular and well run . They weren't.

With hindsight , I thought they were pretty good in comparison .

I  think the post office is and has always been  an excellent service and  I doubt it will  be improved .But it will portrayed as such.

It'll become another cash cow for a select few 

[The God Emperor]

It's interesting, would you get the energy companies or use taxes to pay for it?

a negative income tax and a safety net voucher system would be a lot less expensive than than our current system of having socialised medicine and the monolithic bureaucracy thats needed to organise the current system, so I believe it could be funded through considerably lower taxes than what we pay now.

the current model of economy we have now is not a free market, the last time we had anything close to a free market was over a 100 years ago, the current system is designed to create and then prop up cartels of 'too big to fail' companies all in the name of protecting British industry from 'unfair competition'.

cartels and monopolies are a product of favours being granted to lobbying businesses. 

[Guest MattP]

Some people seem to be rewriting history to claim that the pre-privatised industries were cheap, popular and well run . They weren't.

 

If anyone says that about the trains they need carting off to the nuthouse.

[Webbo]

With hindsight , I thought they were pretty good in comparison .

I  think the post office is and has always been  an excellent service and  I doubt it will  be improved .But it will portrayed as such.

It'll become another cash cow for a select few 

The grass is always greener though isn't it?As for the PO I believe it's due to an EU directive.The last Labour government were planning to privatise it too.

[Zingari]

If anyone says that about the trains they need carting off to the nuthouse.

For a privatised company, the railways seem to need a lot of public money 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19914219

[Guest MattP]

For a privatised company, the railways seem to need a lot of public money 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19914219

 

Staggering figure for the prices charged and how full they seem to be.

[Zingari]

The grass is always greener though isn't it?As for the PO I believe it's due to an EU directive.The last Labour government were planning to privatise it too.

They all piss in the same pot really, politics and democracy is a big fookin charade . 

They're  all got the same goal , but they are steering us there by different routes to appease various sections of us along the way

 .

[Zingari]

Staggering figure for the prices charged and how full they seem to be.

maybe privatisation is  just not as efficient  as they'd have us  believe 

[The God Emperor]

For a privatised company, the railways seem to need a lot of public money 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19914219

I doubt they even need it, they lobby for it and the government is daft enough to prop them up. if they didn't have the public money they'd find a way to make themselves profitable like they did before.

[leicsmac]

I doubt they even need it, they lobby for it and the government is daft enough to prop them up. if they didn't have the public money they'd find a way to make themselves profitable like they did before.

 

And you know exactly how that would happen, and that wouldn't really benefit the consumer, would it?

[Zingari]

I doubt they even need it, they lobby for it and the government is daft enough to prop them up. if they didn't have the public money they'd find a way to make themselves profitable like they did before.

Oh they need it alright, they just don't want to admit it's no better and probably less well run  in private hands than it was before.

it's just idealogical stubbornness . 

[The God Emperor]

And you know exactly how that would happen, and that wouldn't really benefit the consumer, would it?

they may over charge at first but with out the government propping them up competitors will be able to enter the market. some clever bugger will offer his service for less and then if everyone else wants to compete they will too.

[Webbo]

Oh they need it alright, they just don't want to admit it's no better and probably less well run  in private hands than it was before.

it's just idealogical stubbornness . 

The passenger numbers are up though and safety has improved,it all depends on how you measure success.

[The God Emperor]

Oh they need it alright, they just don't want to admit it's no better and probably less well run  in private hands than it was before.

it's just idealogical stubbornness . 

they don't need it. the people who run the rail companies just like getting free money even if they provide a poor service.

[Zingari]

The passenger numbers are up though and safety has improved,it all depends on how you measure success.

I think it's measured however the privatised companies want it measured .

I'm pretty sure the bottom line profit  is usually the best indicator , but when that is shown to be a myth , they think of something else . 

they don't need it. the people who run the rail companies just like getting free money even if they provide a poor service.

maybe so , there could be an element of "spoilt dependant child" in it too 

[leicsmac]

they may over charge at first but with out the government propping them up competitors will be able to enter the market. some clever bugger will offer his service for less and then if everyone else wants to compete they will too.

 

When have these companies ever reduced their charges after raising them?

 

If only that idea of competition were true...kind of the point I've been making all along. Private control of essential services leads to cartels, not competition.

[Webbo]

I think it's measured however the privatised companies want it measured .

I'm pretty sure the bottom line profit  is usually the best indicator , but when that is shown to be a myth , they think of something else . 

maybe so , there could be an element of "spoilt dependant child" in it too 

Private companies exist to make profit that's no secret.What I said is still true though.

[The God Emperor]

When have these companies ever reduced their charges after raising them?

 

If only that idea of competition were true...kind of the point I've been making all along. Private control of essential services leads to cartels, not competition.

it leads to cartels if the government props those companies up like we have done since the war yes. this is the reason they don't reduce prices, the government makes them immune to the pricing system.

[Zingari]

Private companies exist to make profit that's no secret.What I said is still true though.

What about the ones that don't,   but  expect us to subsidise them and still give out massive bonuses to directors and shareholders?

[MooseBreath]

I think the post office is and has always been an excellent service and I doubt it will be improved .But it will portrayed as such.

It'll become another cash cow for a select few

It'll hopefully become a cash cow for pension funds and and anybody else who wants to invest. What's wrong with allowing members of the public to benefit directly from a successful business? Surely if you're all about fair distribution of profits then that's a lot better than having them wasted on inefficient government admin and welfare programmes which only benefit those who contribute the least?

[leicsmac]

it leads to cartels if the government props those companies up like we have done since the war yes. this is the reason they don't reduce prices, the government makes them immune to the pricing system.

 

TBH I think in this day and age it leads to cartels anyway. The energy companies being the proto-example - they don't have any Government subsidies yet a few of them utterly control the market, control the prices and will continue to do so.