Go... 

Bobby Charlton 

Andrew Tate

Nancy Pelosi

Edited December 31, 20223 yr by stevieb

3 hours ago, globaldiver said:

Single-handedly dismembered final salary pensions, among numerous other “achievements”

Tbf they were basically unaffordable. The company Pension Scheme world was really messed up. The idea you could somewhere for 30 years and your Pension was based on the last 2-3 years makes very little actuarial sense. (Bet you knew that)

My main Pension scheme was on a payment holiday for at least 10 of the 16 years I worked there 😎👍🎉

https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/brown-most-successful-chancellor-say-british-political-scientists

 

23 hours ago, mickbrown said:

 

How much to get a charging pod fitted? Just looking at second hand motors and there seems to be shitloads of Leafs going cheapish.

How much are the replacement batteries for Leafs?

I was under the impression that after a certain number charges the battery declines and the replacement is >50% of the cost of the car. Would love to know for sure.

17 minutes ago, globaldiver said:

Fair question. It’ll take some thinking through, but good question.

I'll have to check but pretty sure my pension changed from final salary to average salary within the last 13 years. 

3 minutes ago, Wanderlust said:

How much are the replacement batteries for Leafs?

I was under the impression that after a certain number charges the battery declines and the replacement is >50% of the cost of the car. Would love to know for sure.

Never got that far. Just saw there was quite a lot for sale quite cheap. If  they need their batteries changing that might explain why.

22 minutes ago, mickbrown said:

Never got that far. Just saw there was quite a lot for sale quite cheap. If  they need their batteries changing that might explain why.

I have heard they're £thousands so you'd need to check out mileage/charging history if you consider buying one.

2 hours ago, Winchester White said:

I am not sure privatising water works though, I can't get my corporation pop from anyone other than United Utilities.

This is a good point, and one I was thinking about a day or two ago.

Bit like trains.

More of an argument for nationalisation when genuine competition isnt available.

More scrutiny/regulation perhaps on these?

Whoever owns these, a lot of investment is required to manage the increasing population's needs, together with increses in very heavy rain events.

It's perhaps no coincidence that ours is up there with the highest sewage spillers, given the large population density.

Land at a premium, and no doubt plenty of objections would occur to the siting of new treatment facilities.

Charging pods vary quite a bit in price.

Think the grant is still in place, but you'd have to check.

Of course electric vehicles will need a new battery at some point, but it doesn't mean a new car is required. Unlike ice vehicles, maintenance is less frequent and cheaper.

Given the advancements in battery technology, by the time one bought now needs replacing, they will be lighter/more charge dense and probably cheaper (in real terms).

Meaning more range and/or lighter vehicle.

10 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

This is a good point, and one I was thinking about a day or two ago.

Bit like trains.

More of an argument for nationalisation when genuine competition isnt available.

More scrutiny/regulation perhaps on these?

Whoever owns these, a lot of investment is required to manage the increasing population's needs, together with increses in very heavy rain events.

It's perhaps no coincidence that ours is up there with the highest sewage spillers, given the large population density.

Land at a premium, and no doubt plenty of objections would occur to the siting of new treatment facilities.

Aye.

Overly simplistic I know, but any profits would be reinvested rather then being taken out of the industry in dividends etc.

I know the counter argument is that private companies would be more efficient. 

Either way be interesting to see just how much money has been creamed off by the privatised utility companies.

55 minutes ago, Traf said:

https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/brown-most-successful-chancellor-say-british-political-scientists

 

Interesting that.

I wonder what the response would be if they widened to vote to politicians and economists who weren't members, and then did the same to the general public?

Just now, mickbrown said:

Aye.

Overly simplistic I know, but any profits would be reinvested rather then being taken out of the industry in dividends etc.

I know the counter argument is that private companies would be more efficient. 

Either way be interesting to see just how much money has been creamed off by the privatised utility companies.

Not that simple.

A government buying or creating an industry has to get the money from somewhere.

Either taxation or borrowing.

The former means the profits are essentially replacing tax. In time that may pay off, but the general public have fewer opportunities to have their investments in.

End result- maybe a higher state pension but lower private. Swings and roundabouts.

Borrowing the money is essentially the same as letting a company do it, and take any risks.

A constant debate and one which has no definitive right or wrong.

Ultimately, as ive said before, it's down to the people that work for these companies to perform efficiently. History suggests that employees haven't always done that.

These industries were already nationalised

6 minutes ago, mickbrown said:

Aye.

Overly simplistic I know, but any profits would be reinvested rather then being taken out of the industry in dividends etc.

I know the counter argument is that private companies would be more efficient. 

Either way be interesting to see just how much money has been creamed off by the privatised utility companies.

There is an argument to say that back in the 1960s, "old school" unionised labour ensured decent wages and the perception of having "a job for life" - almost a taken-for-granted entitlement - and little concern for performance which generally worked against efficiency.

However the world has changed. Demand for services is up, Job security isn't what it was and performance measures are generally accepted as a part of life so there is absolutely no reason whatsoever that nationalised industries couldn't be as efficient as private companies providing they are managed properly.

And the nationalised business model is far superior to the private sector model as it ensures national control of supply and as you rightly point out, a greater share of profit can be reinvested in the business.

You'd think that nationalists and pro UKPLC voters would be right behind nationalisation whilst profits from delivery of our services continue to leave the country and we haven't got control of our own resources.

5 hours ago, Ani said:

Tbf they were basically unaffordable. The company Pension Scheme world was really messed up. The idea you could somewhere for 30 years and your Pension was based on the last 2-3 years makes very little actuarial sense. (Bet you knew that)

My main Pension scheme was on a payment holiday for at least 10 of the 16 years I worked there 😎👍🎉

Kind of.

I haven’t finalised my thinking, but a (significant) aspect was that they were made unaffordable because of the cranking up legislation. 

4 hours ago, Wanderlust said:

There is an argument to say that back in the 1960s, "old school" unionised labour ensured decent wages and the perception of having "a job for life" - almost a taken-for-granted entitlement - and little concern for performance which generally worked against efficiency.

However the world has changed. Demand for services is up, Job security isn't what it was and performance measures are generally accepted as a part of life so there is absolutely no reason whatsoever that nationalised industries couldn't be as efficient as private companies providing they are managed properly.

And the nationalised business model is far superior to the private sector model as it ensures national control of supply and as you rightly point out, a greater share of profit can be reinvested in the business.

You'd think that nationalists and pro UKPLC voters would be right behind nationalisation whilst profits from delivery of our services continue to leave the country and we haven't got control of our own resources.

To a point.

However we're in a global system now, with companies owning others all over the place.

The financial set up in london is a massive earner for the uk, it's essential to the economy, so we can't have our cake and eat it.

Can’t wait for another celebrity to curl up his/her toes to get this thread back on track. Could it be Alex Ferguson please?

3 hours ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

To a point.

However we're in a global system now, with companies owning others all over the place.

The financial set up in london is a massive earner for the uk, it's essential to the economy, so we can't have our cake and eat it.

Why not?

The French for example are just as much a global player as we are and yet their nationalised electricity company EDF is building our nuclear power stations and profiting from our consumption.

18 hours ago, MickyD said:

Can’t wait for another celebrity to curl up his/her toes to get this thread back on track. Could it be Alex Ferguson please?

Unfortunately, it’s an S Club party rather than a jelly and ice cream party.

22 minutes ago, Jol_BWFC said:

Unfortunately, it’s an S Club party rather than a jelly and ice cream party.

FFS I had Bradley as well

S Club 6 Don't have the same ring about it.

19 hours ago, Wanderlust said:

Why not?

The French for example are just as much a global player as we are and yet their nationalised electricity company EDF is building our nuclear power stations and profiting from our consumption.

And the uk earns loads from other nations by investing in and dealing with others.

If you want to nationslise stuff, go ahead, borrow fortunes to pay off investors, and in turn see what happens when other countries tell you to fuck off, you're not investing here. Or worse still make selling energy into the uk more difficult or expensive.

Also remember EDF wasn't a fully publicly owned company until recently. Macron had to spend lots to buy the rest, and all this in response to the energy crisis. Made all the worse by the fact that they were to undertake a huge amount of maintenance on their nuclear power plants, lowering their generation capacity. Markets help with that. Being insular is a risk when we're not yet self sufficient in generation.

And that is the last post of mine of this nature in this (incorrect) thread.

6 hours ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

And the uk earns loads from other nations by investing in and dealing with others.

If you want to nationslise stuff, go ahead, borrow fortunes to pay off investors, and in turn see what happens when other countries tell you to fuck off, you're not investing here. Or worse still make selling energy into the uk more difficult or expensive.

Also remember EDF wasn't a fully publicly owned company until recently. Macron had to spend lots to buy the rest, and all this in response to the energy crisis. Made all the worse by the fact that they were to undertake a huge amount of maintenance on their nuclear power plants, lowering their generation capacity. Markets help with that. Being insular is a risk when we're not yet self sufficient in generation.

And that is the last post of mine of this nature in this (incorrect) thread.

 

EDF was nationalised in 1946.

There is no reason why a nationalised company can't be as competitive as a private company and no reason why any procurer would refuse the best deal.

Leave All the Other Shit to Other Pages 

This is for GETTING DEAD  only 

34 minutes ago, little whitt said:

Leave All the Other Shit to Other Pages 

This is for GETTING DEAD  only 

You know it’s heartfelt when it’s spelt correctly

One from the swinging sixties (no not the Dave Aquarium's type of swinging), Mary Quant.