RANT CORNER

[jimibt]

I've just seen a woman across the road, standing by her window in knickers and bra, smoking a cigarette. Absolutely gross!!!

Good on you for condemning her gross smoking habit

But usually you would post that line in the Happy Corner

Yes, that's how Happy Corner started out, but this wasn't such a pretty sight.

yup, the camera never lies!

[Kai]

Good on you for condemning her gross smoking habit

But usually you would post that line in the Happy Corner

Yes, that's how Happy Corner started out, but this wasn't such a pretty sight.

yup, the camera never lies!

Doesn't it add a few pounds?

Either way, body shaming is not very cool

[greenmark]

Such a parcel of rogues.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2lgl9kypno

[jimibt]

Such a parcel of rogues.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2lgl9kypno

no wonder it's in trouble (and not just in the last year or so). quoting from that article:

Water firms have faced a fierce backlash over sewage discharges and leaks in recent years. Critics have also said companies have historically neglected investment in favour of paying executive bonuses and shareholder dividends.

[Archery1969]

Such a parcel of rogues.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2lgl9kypno

no wonder it's in trouble (and not just in the last year or so). quoting from that article:

Water firms have faced a fierce backlash over sewage discharges and leaks in recent years. Critics have also said companies have historically neglected investment in favour of paying executive bonuses and shareholder dividends.

One problem is if they don’t offer investors and potential shareholders enough percentages on the dividend returns then no investor will put the money in. I suspect most of the water companies will fail over the next 18 months which will the government having to fork out billions in paying shareholder and investor compensation. Plus the government will have to take over all the companies involved and they will run at a huge loss for decades with probably no new government investment to fix the pipe architecture etc.

It’s a huge time bomb waiting to explode…

[Derek27]

Such a parcel of rogues.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2lgl9kypno

Labour says they can't afford to nationalise water. Fergal Sharkey says it will cost £1. Don't know the full legalities of it, but I'm inclined to have it nationalised - fuck the shareholders, don't pay them anything!

[Derek27]

Such a parcel of rogues.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2lgl9kypno

no wonder it's in trouble (and not just in the last year or so). quoting from that article:

Water firms have faced a fierce backlash over sewage discharges and leaks in recent years. Critics have also said companies have historically neglected investment in favour of paying executive bonuses and shareholder dividends.

One problem is if they don’t offer investors and potential shareholders enough percentages on the dividend returns then no investor will put the money in. I suspect most of the water companies will fail over the next 18 months which will the government having to fork out billions in paying shareholder and investor compensation. Plus the government will have to take over all the companies involved and they will run at a huge loss for decades with probably no new government investment to fix the pipe architecture etc.

It’s a huge time bomb waiting to explode…

The water companies have effectively been stealing of customers and giving it to the shareholders. They haven't really been running the company and maintaining infrastructure. If anything, they should be locking up the fraudster executives running the company and compensating customers.

[greenmark]

The fallacy that private companies are better at running public services is now clearly nonsense. Problem is the govt are pretty crap at it too.
We need a cultural shift. Instead of "me" it needs to be "us". I only use trains 3 times a year but the on board and station staff are excellent. They really are lions led by donkeys (greedy ones to boot).

[Archery1969]

no wonder it's in trouble (and not just in the last year or so). quoting from that article:

Water firms have faced a fierce backlash over sewage discharges and leaks in recent years. Critics have also said companies have historically neglected investment in favour of paying executive bonuses and shareholder dividends.

One problem is if they don’t offer investors and potential shareholders enough percentages on the dividend returns then no investor will put the money in. I suspect most of the water companies will fail over the next 18 months which will the government having to fork out billions in paying shareholder and investor compensation. Plus the government will have to take over all the companies involved and they will run at a huge loss for decades with probably no new government investment to fix the pipe architecture etc.

It’s a huge time bomb waiting to explode…

The water companies have effectively been stealing of customers and giving it to the shareholders. They haven't really been running the company and maintaining infrastructure. If anything, they should be locking up the fraudster executives running the company and compensating customers.

Shareholders expect a return on their investments, regardless of the industry involved. They won’t care about the pipes or spilling shit and chemicals into rivers and the sea. It’s all about making a profit.

Pension funds and banks take billions of customers in charges and interest rates. It’s nothing new, just a different way of making money.

You could argue it’s no different to someone new to BF, making a mistake and generating a fat finger trade. I doubt anyone on here would be complaining while at the same time taking advantage out of the situation.

With water companies, the only solution is to either allow them to increase prices by 70% with legislation to clean the system up or for the government to buy them back and invest. But the latter would cost billions and therefore prices rising anyway as a consequence.

It’s one of those catch 22 scenarios.

Of course you could go after the directors and CEOs but sooner or later someone has to pay and unfortunately it will in the end be the customer.

[jamesedwards]

The fallacy that private companies are better at running public services is now clearly nonsense. Problem is the govt are pretty crap at it too.
We need a cultural shift. Instead of "me" it needs to be "us". I only use trains 3 times a year but the on board and station staff are excellent. They really are lions led by donkeys (greedy ones to boot).

You only have to glance at the public sector to understand why, on average, the private sector are significantly more efficient at running public services. I don't know the detail about Thames Water specifically. Perhaps they've been badly mismanaged, or perhaps it all would have been far worse under public sector management? It certainly would have cost the UK tax payer far more, whatever the outcome.

[greenmark]

The fallacy that private companies are better at running public services is now clearly nonsense. Problem is the govt are pretty crap at it too.
We need a cultural shift. Instead of "me" it needs to be "us". I only use trains 3 times a year but the on board and station staff are excellent. They really are lions led by donkeys (greedy ones to boot).

You only have to glance at the public sector to understand why, on average, the private sector are significantly more efficient at running public services. I don't know the detail about Thames Water specifically. Perhaps they've been badly mismanaged, or perhaps it all would have been far worse under public sector management? It certainly would have cost the UK tax payer far more, whatever the outcome.

We accepted private companes running public services and paying dividends to shareholders. That was on the basis they could do it more cheaply than nationalisation. That appears to be naive. Politically I don't care one way or another. I just want comptetent public services. These services are the basis of a civilised society. To run them for profit alone isn''t acceptable to me. There has to be a social conscience. If the private companies knew the service they were taking on was unviable they should have negotiated for a viable deal. But these private companies are like wolves and the govt is either incompetent at negotiating contracts or, worse still, complicit in signing off unworkable deals.

[sionascaig]

But these private companies are like wolves and the govt is either incompetent at negotiating contracts or, worse still, complicit in signing off unworkable deals.

I blame the regulator primarily... Then the government for creating an environment in which this mess could happen.

The private companies have a responsibility to maximise returns for shareholders & it was the regulators job to recognise this and balance that with customer / national interest. Especially in light of the fact these companies run local monopolies and so face no competition / pressures to make themselves more efficient / provide good value to customers.

I'd also argue against James's point in this case (that private companies are more efficient) as we have a direct comparison with the still nationalised Scottish Water & the fiasco down south... Just one of example of which is the chief exec gets paid a tiny fraction of the massive renumeration packages of his peers in England.

[jimibt]

But these private companies are like wolves and the govt is either incompetent at negotiating contracts or, worse still, complicit in signing off unworkable deals.

I blame the regulator primarily... Then the government for creating an environment in which this mess could happen.

The private companies have a responsibility to maximise returns for shareholders & it was the regulators job to recognise this and balance that with customer / national interest. Especially in light of the fact these companies run local monopolies and so face no competition / pressures to make themselves more efficient / provide good value to customers.

I'd also argue against James's point in this case (that private companies are more efficient) as we have a direct comparison with the still nationalised Scottish Water & the fiasco down south... Just one of example of which is the chief exec gets paid a tiny fraction of the massive renumeration packages of his peers in England.

sionascaig - let's face it, up here in scotland the remit and approach is very different. one only has to review areas such as social care, university fees, free prescriptions etc, etc... to see where the heart and soul of this society is.

[jamesedwards]

The fallacy that private companies are better at running public services is now clearly nonsense. Problem is the govt are pretty crap at it too.
We need a cultural shift. Instead of "me" it needs to be "us". I only use trains 3 times a year but the on board and station staff are excellent. They really are lions led by donkeys (greedy ones to boot).

You only have to glance at the public sector to understand why, on average, the private sector are significantly more efficient at running public services. I don't know the detail about Thames Water specifically. Perhaps they've been badly mismanaged, or perhaps it all would have been far worse under public sector management? It certainly would have cost the UK tax payer far more, whatever the outcome.

We accepted private companes running public services and paying dividends to shareholders. That was on the basis they could do it more cheaply than nationalisation. That appears to be naive. Politically I don't care one way or another. I just want comptetent public services. These services are the basis of a civilised society. To run them for profit alone isn''t acceptable to me. There has to be a social conscience. If the private companies knew the service they were taking on was unviable they should have negotiated for a viable deal. But these private companies are like wolves and the govt is either incompetent at negotiating contracts or, worse still, complicit in signing off unworkable deals.

Typical dividend yield in the service industry is about 2.5%, on which shareholders pay tax at about 40%. So as long as private averages at least 1.5% greater efficiency that public, then the economy is better off. If you want competent public services then either way you have to pay more for them, but on average it's likely to cost you more publicly owned than privately.

I'm all in favour of paying more tax, especially right now. I just wish Labour had not insisted on ruling out the obvious choices (income tax/vat etc) because now it's going to be much harder for them to achieve what the country needs.

[jamesedwards]

But these private companies are like wolves and the govt is either incompetent at negotiating contracts or, worse still, complicit in signing off unworkable deals.

I blame the regulator primarily... Then the government for creating an environment in which this mess could happen.

The private companies have a responsibility to maximise returns for shareholders & it was the regulators job to recognise this and balance that with customer / national interest. Especially in light of the fact these companies run local monopolies and so face no competition / pressures to make themselves more efficient / provide good value to customers.

I'd also argue against James's point in this case (that private companies are more efficient) as we have a direct comparison with the still nationalised Scottish Water & the fiasco down south... Just one of example of which is the chief exec gets paid a tiny fraction of the massive renumeration packages of his peers in England.

sionascaig - let's face it, up here in scotland the remit and approach is very different. one only has to review areas such as social care, university fees, free prescriptions etc, etc... to see where the heart and soul of this society is.

Same as everywhere, there's only a finite pot. Giving people free XYZ just means another department somewhere else is losing out.