Nationalisation

[pap]

Recent events have made me consider the value of nationalised industries. We used to do this sort of thing all the time, with many of the companies that were formerly owned by the public doing pretty well.

 

We've also got large gaps in our economy, especially in sectors like manufacturing. Ultimately, I don't believe that we can trust the private sector to create new jobs in these areas, yet we still need those jobs.

 

Personally, I look at George Osborne's latest scheme, to pump money into banks who can then lend to businesses, and find it a bit of a non-starter. I'd much rather the Government established a new national corporation to build something ( cars would be a good example ).

 

I appreciate that there are a load of factors at play here, but right now, we need industry to act in the country's interest, and industry is doing its usual trick of not giving much of a feck. You can lend all the money you want to SMEs, but at the end of the day, only customers will keep them going.

 

What are your thoughts on nationalisation? Are there any particular industries that you feel that this sort of intervention is justified?

[bridge too far]

Railways (OK not manufacturing, but definitely in need of joined up thinking and control).

[trousers]

Railways (OK not manufacturing, but definitely in need of joined up thinking and control).

 

Nooooooooo! Leave my nice new shiny, clean and on-time trains alone!

[pap]

Nooooooooo! Leave my nice new shiny, clean and on-time trains alone!

 

You could still have nice new shiny trains. They could even be on-time too. However, the railways really are an example of how some industries can't really be privatised.

 

If the train operating companies had to pay for the upkeep of the lines, there is no way they'd turn a profit.

[solentstars]

Recent events have made me consider the value of nationalised industries. We used to do this sort of thing all the time, with many of the companies that were formerly owned by the public doing pretty well.

 

We've also got large gaps in our economy, especially in sectors like manufacturing. Ultimately, I don't believe that we can trust the private sector to create new jobs in these areas, yet we still need those jobs.

 

Personally, I look at George Osborne's latest scheme, to pump money into banks who can then lend to businesses, and find it a bit of a non-starter. I'd much rather the Government established a new national corporation to build something ( cars would be a good example ).

 

I appreciate that there are a load of factors at play here, but right now, we need industry to act in the country's interest, and industry is doing its usual trick of not giving much of a feck. You can lend all the money you want to SMEs, but at the end of the day, only customers will keep them going.

 

What are your thoughts on nationalisation? Are there any particular industries that you feel that this sort of intervention is justified?

agree with it on trains,bus and electric and gas but think private sector should manage the rest and only only nationalize sectors which effect the national interest and then sale back to the private sector

[bridge too far]

agree with it on trains,bus and electric and gas but think private sector should manage the rest and only only nationalize sectors which effect the national interest and then sale back to the private sector

 

And water. These essential industries and commodities should be answerable to the users and not the shareholders.

[trousers]

You could still have nice new shiny trains. They could even be on-time too.

 

Agree, but shame they couldn't achieve that the last time it was under state control.

[trousers]

If the train operating companies had to pay for the upkeep of the lines, there is no way they'd turn a profit.

 

Likewise for bus and coach companies if they had to pay for the upkeep of the roads

[pap]

agree with it on trains,bus and electric and gas but think private sector should manage the rest and only only nationalize sectors which effect the national interest and then sale back to the private sector

 

Which I could definitely live with. Problem is that we have a lot of sectors to create in the national interest. The national interest at the moment is economic recovery.

 

Now, would you be more amenable to say, a new British car company, if there was a solid plan to sell it off within 20 years?

[pap]

Likewise for bus and coach companies if they had to pay for the upkeep of the roads

 

True, but the roads are for general purpose use. Rail infrastructure is specifically tailored towards trains. Not really the same comparison.

[thefunkygibbons]

No way

 

Government should set the regulations and then leave well alone

 

I think there is enough evidence that the Govt is a terrible spotter of winners

[trousers]

True, but the roads are for general purpose use. Rail infrastructure is specifically tailored towards trains. Not really the same comparison.

 

But this is the Saints Web Forum. I thought comparing apples with oranges was actively encouraged....? ;-)

Edited 6 December, 2011 by trousers

[Jillyanne]

But this is the Saints Web Forum. I thought comparing apples with oranges was actively encouraged....? ;-)

 

Well they are both fruits.

[pap]

No way

 

Government should set the regulations and then leave well alone

 

I think there is enough evidence that the Govt is a terrible spotter of winners

 

Which is exactly the point that was made during Osborne's plan to squirt liquidity at SMEs. Seems to me that's a much more haphazard way of doing things.

 

I would generally be in agreement with you. I like small government, and to be honest, if we did create a national corporation, wouldn't want them anywhere near it. It'd have to be in stable and experienced hands, not a numpty minister who only got the job because the last one had his hand in the till.

 

That said, we've seen private industry at work post-globalisation, and it's not pretty. They have no interest in creating jobs here unless heavily subsidised to do so. Manufacturing has moved East on a massive scale, and that is largely due to cost and a company's bottom line.

[Joensuu]

Rule of thumb on privatisation - will this industry have true competion?

 

If you have to apply fake competion though say punctuality figures, the industry is better off being nationalised. If however a truely competitive market could exist, then why not privatise.

 

Trousers, your trains might be shiny, and somewhat punctual, but they are stupidly overpriced.

[pap]

Rule of thumb on privatisation - will this industry have true competion?

 

If you have to apply fake competion though say punctuality figures, the industry is better off being nationalised. If however a truely competitive market could exist, then why not privatise.

 

Trousers, your trains might be shiny, and somewhat punctual, but they are stupidly overpriced.

 

That's a pretty good rule, imo.

 

There is virtually no competition on the railways, and for some people, the choice is "use the train or lose a job". Not saying that there is no overlap, but mostly, the train operating companies are subsidised monopolies that are raking above-inflation rises from an effectively captive market, year-on-year.

[trousers]

Rule of thumb on privatisation - will this industry have true competion?

 

If you have to apply fake competion though say punctuality figures, the industry is better off being nationalised. If however a truely competitive market could exist, then why not privatise.

 

Trousers, your trains might be shiny, and somewhat punctual, but they are stupidly overpriced.

 

I've often wondered about the price comparison. I'm happy to pay "a bit more" for a decent service but I'd be interested to see actual stats comparing the price of my season ticket when I first started commuting on the nationalised service versus the relative price I'm paying now. I'll do a bit of research. It doesn't 'feel' like I've been hit by huge increases but that could just be the effect of my wages going up over the same period of time which would have cushioned the blow of any significant increases.

 

I'll report back once I've got anything resembling factual stats

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Capitalism may well be in crisis, but I don't think a return to the 1970's is in order just yet.

 

Mind you, I was watching a programme about how Rolls Royce make their magnificent 'Trent' series jet engines the other day, and it must be said that RR would have disappeared had the state not stepped in and rescued it in the 70's. Given the much reduced state of our manufacturing industry I think we can all agree that that would had been a bad thing.

[revolution saint]

Rule of thumb on privatisation - will this industry have true competion?

 

If you have to apply fake competion though say punctuality figures, the industry is better off being nationalised. If however a truely competitive market could exist, then why not privatise.

 

Trousers, your trains might be shiny, and somewhat punctual, but they are stupidly overpriced.

 

I'd agree with this - there's too much artificial competition in the newly privatised industries that doesn't really benefit the consumer. There are other benefits to a nationalised industry such as decent apprenticeship schemes - as a country we're crying out for skilled labour but private industry can't or won't put in the investment for long term gain. Nationalised industry used to do this and it benefited the economy.

[Jonnyboy]

Well they are both fruits.

 

Just like trousers ;-)

[pap]

But this is the Saints Web Forum. I thought comparing apples with oranges was actively encouraged....? ;-)

 

Sorry trousers. Wasn't thinking. I'll try not to let it happen again

[Millbrook Saint]

Trouble is although privatisation is supposed to give the customer a choice and competition is supposed to give better services at better prices. The CEO's always end up having to answer to shareholders who are more worried about profit than service, just look at gas and electric lots of competition but their prices are all about the same, one increases their prices and the others follow.

 

We need to nationalise these services but still employ the same CEO's on the same wages and bonuses so we get the most competent people running them. Their emphasis should then be on service and keeping consumer costs down instead of profit for shareholders which keeps consumer costs up. Any profits that are made can then be passed on to us with lower bills and the CEO's pay/bonus will depend on this.

 

Trouble is politicians will just see it as another way of making more money and will end up using the profits for filling the countries coffers instead of making our lives easier. In the end whether nationalised or privatised, greed will take over and we'll lose out.

[1976_Child]

the country should nationilse Man u

 

they re sh!te n need putting out thier misruey/

 

Ha!!!!

 

Cannae do a worse job on them than Leyland would do.

 

Yeah!!!! Nationoalise my liver as weoll whilemu at it..

 

ah fek u all. fekk off skate cunrtrs. go on. go impregnet your grandmother agan you fkin stikning skatn ctunts.

Edited 8 December, 2011 by 1976_Child

[Jillyanne]

That went well.

[norwaysaint]

Well the government should never have privatised North Sea oil. Keeping the oil nationalised has made the Norwegian state incredibly wealthy, the economic crisis has not had anything like the same effect over here. In fact, when everyone else was panicking, the Norwegian state began investing even more. Nearly all of my students aspire to getting jobs with Statoil (state oil) as the pay, benefits and working conditions are immense. The conservative government sold it all off for a quick buck to fund their golden era in the eighties, instead of keeping it to secure the future. Privatisation was right in many cases, but not that one.