Random Irritations

[Slime]

The complainer is saying the actor doesn’t have the lived experience - not sure who has the experience of a Middle Ages character

Keith Richards?

 

[PJ87]

TFL is not a private company it’s a local government organisation but The London Underground is the most expensive Metro system in the world

Because someone agreed to cut the central government funding so it's run on fares

Also the underground runs at a profit, those profits are taken by tfl and used to fund the buses and invest in upgrades. Profits took a dip in COVID so it had to keep it's money

 

[Fade and Die]

Because someone agreed to cut the central government funding so it's run on fares

Also the underground runs at a profit, those profits are taken by tfl and used to fund the buses and invest in upgrades. Profits took a dip in COVID so it had to keep it's money

So it seems like you are saying a nationalised industry is just as badly run as a private company?

 

[PJ87]

So it seems like you are saying a nationalised industry is just as badly run as a private company?

Firstly it's a limited company that runs at not for profit , like tfl. All profits go back into the network.

However COVID was the only reason the money stopped. Simple as that, and the bail out amounts were exactly what our government grant should have been if restored back to when they were removed.

Running at a profit again and covering day to day running costs plus covering the buses.

So id say it's run pretty well. But then I actually have an interest in it rather than snippets.

Just for reference and context

When the current mayor took over he was handed tfl with 1.5 billion operating deficit, and no gov grant.

He froze the fares and by COVID the deficit was down to 0.5 billion, so that shows how well run it was until lockdown

 

[srixon 1]

Watching the golf I've just seen an ad for a vitamin/energy/lifestyle drink that's supposed to be a great way to start your day...

It's green.....

It looks like stagnant, manky pond water.........

C'mon Guys at least make it an appealing colour.....

My thoughts exactly when I first saw the advertisement. It looks absolutely awful

 

[Deleted member 29109]

The utter degenerates that can’t use the left hand lanes of a motorway.

 

[Fade and Die]

Firstly it's a limited company that runs at not for profit , like tfl. All profits go back into the network.

However COVID was the only reason the money stopped. Simple as that, and the bail out amounts were exactly what our government grant should have been if restored back to when they were removed.

Running at a profit again and covering day to day running costs plus covering the buses.

So id say it's run pretty well. But then I actually have an interest in it rather than snippets.

Just for reference and context

When the current mayor took over he was handed tfl with 1.5 billion operating deficit, and no gov grant.

He froze the fares and by COVID the deficit was down to 0.5 billion, so that shows how well run it was until lockdown

Yes yes yes we know all that, you have posted it endlessly… my point was that a local government run industry can be run just as badly as a privatised one.

 

[PJ87]

Yes yes yes we know all that, you have posted it endlessly… my point was that a local government run industry can be run just as badly as a privatised one.

Yet my point proves it's not been badly run .. it's been quite well run .. well once somebody left.

It's easy to run when people stop taking from the troff.

 

[Fade and Die]

Yet my point proves it's not been badly run .. it's been quite well run .. well once somebody left.

It's easy to run when people stop taking from the troff.

Don’t get me wrong I think TFl should get more funding… much more. I think public transport in London should be practically free.

But the posts blaming lack of investment in infrastructure on privatisation is an extremely coloured view. All the industries that were sold off were chronically underfunded or/and woefully mismanaged.

 

[Red devil]

Don’t get me wrong I think TFl should get more funding… much more. I think public transport in London should be practically free.

But the posts blaming lack of investment in infrastructure on privatisation is an extremely coloured view. All the industries that were sold off were chronically underfunded or/and woefully mismanaged.

Utility companies?

 

[Fade and Die]

Utility companies?

Yes…in the 80s we found ourselves in the position of having a set of crumbling national infrastructures which had been chronically underfunded during the lean, post-war decades.

You can take any one of the nationalised infrastructures in isolation; the water network, the rail network, the telephone network etc. And say “We could have ramped up taxpayer investment rather than nationalising and things would be better now”. Which is quite possibly true.

But it wasn’t just one piece of infrastructure, every utility, every piece of national infrastructure was screaming for investment. There just wasn’t the taxpayer appetite to basically rebuild the country.

Privatisation was sought to bring in massive investment and if you look at the figures compared to previous government investments it did. It is flawed but things were pretty dire when the industries were nationalised, people just forget.

 

[PJ87]

Yes…in the 80s we found ourselves in the position of having a set of crumbling national infrastructures which had been chronically underfunded during the lean, post-war decades.

You can take any one of the nationalised infrastructures in isolation; the water network, the rail network, the telephone network etc. And say “We could have ramped up taxpayer investment rather than nationalising and things would be better now”. Which is quite possibly true.

But it wasn’t just one piece of infrastructure, every utility, every piece of national infrastructure was screaming for investment. There just wasn’t the taxpayer appetite to basically rebuild the country.

Privatisation was sought to bring in massive investment and if you look at the figures compared to previous government investments it did. It is flawed but things were pretty dire when the industries were nationalised, people just forget.

Let's not get too policial , however the MO of selling off public services is always run them into the ground so the public support them being sold off

Dentists next

 

[Bunkermagnet]

Yes…in the 80s we found ourselves in the position of having a set of crumbling national infrastructures which had been chronically underfunded during the lean, post-war decades.

You can take any one of the nationalised infrastructures in isolation; the water network, the rail network, the telephone network etc. And say “We could have ramped up taxpayer investment rather than nationalising and things would be better now”. Which is quite possibly true.

But it wasn’t just one piece of infrastructure, every utility, every piece of national infrastructure was screaming for investment. There just wasn’t the taxpayer appetite to basically rebuild the country.

Privatisation was sought to bring in massive investment and if you look at the figures compared to previous government investments it did. It is flawed but things were pretty dire when the industries were nationalised, people just forget.

I think it was more a collection of incompitent politicians, overbearing unions and lazy staff.
Even today, we see it.

 

[PNWokingham]

Let's not get too policial , however the MO of selling off public services is always run them into the ground so the public support them being sold off

Dentists next

that is naive and stupid. End of. Money does not grow on trees. Investment needs to come from somewhere and while I do not like many public sector sell offs in principal and nice to think they should be in public hands, to think they would have all been better in public hands is ultimate naivity - public sectors are bad at running bussineesses, private sector are bad at asset stripping and cutting costs but are usuallly far more pragmatic at right sizing, moving with society trends and focussing on returns to keep a business viable, which is the opposite often in public sector that are focussed on status quo. You don't see many (actually any) final salary pension schemes in private because they are not affordable. That is the starkest difference along with the unions, over-time payments etc etc. Nothing is nirvana but...

 

[PJ87]

that is naive and stupid. End of. Money does not grow on trees. Investment needs to come from somewhere and while I do not like many public sector sell offs in principal and nice to think they should be in public hands, to think they would have all been better in public hands is ultimate naivity - public sectors are bad at running bussineesses, private sector are bad at asset stripping and cutting costs but are usuallly far more pragmatic at right sizing, moving with society trends and focussing on returns to keep a business viable, which is the opposite often in public sector that are focussed on status quo. You don't see many (actually any) final salary pension schemes in private because they are not affordable. That is the starkest difference along with the unions, over-time payments etc etc. Nothing is nirvana but...

Martin Lewis said it best.

Privatisation of the water company wasn't a bad thing. However privatising without competition was criminal.

Final salary is very old school. They don't exist anymore in the main even in the public sector.

Overtime is time and a quarter whatever day of the week it is day or night, so it's not all rainbows

 

[PNWokingham]

Martin Lewis said it best.

Privatisation of the water company wasn't a bad thing. However privatising without competition was criminal.

Final salary is very old school. They don't exist anymore in the main even in the public sector.

the differnce is that it is very easy to criticise private sector whn costs rise or big pay for directors but there are short memories for the absolute dire state that many industries were in before privitisation. Short memories. And from what i see final salary or its new version of average salsry is 100% across the public sector - either way they are far more valuable than private sector alternatives, as are the holidays, overtime, job protection, working hours, flexibilty etc etc - hence costs are significantly higher and the businesses are far less able to adapt to societal changes. As said, there is no nirvana but one side get to sleep better than the other in relation to their employment.

I would love to see basic utilities in public sector hands if they could be managed with the business focus of the private sector but that is highly unlikely to happen - and there is no abilty for public companies to invest to the same degree as public ones can.

 

[PJ87]

the differnce is that it is very easy to criticise private sector whn costs rise or big pay for directors but there are short memories for the absolute dire state that many industries were in before privitisation. Short memories. And from what i see final salary or its new version of average salsry is 100% across the public sector - either way they are far more valuable than private sector alternatives, as are the holidays, overtime, job protection, working hours, flexibilty etc etc - hence costs are significantly higher and the businesses are far less able to adapt to societal changes. As said, there is no nirvana but one side get to sleep better than the other in relation to their employment.

I would love to see basic utilities in public sector hands if they could be managed with the business focus of the private sector but that is highly unlikely to happen - and there is no abilty for public companies to invest to the same degree as public ones can.

Very true on the sleep better part for sure. (Depending on role, I know if I don't follow procedure I'm up on a manslaughter charge)

We finally agree lol basic utilities in public sector would be ideal

I mean the gov wanted to make great British rail wasn't it and wanted a tfl model which I'd a private not for profit company running public service , works well

 

[Red devil]

the differnce is that it is very easy to criticise private sector whn costs rise or big pay for directors but there are short memories for the absolute dire state that many industries were in before privitisation. Short memories. And from what i see final salary or its new version of average salsry is 100% across the public sector - either way they are far more valuable than private sector alternatives, as are the holidays, overtime, job protection, working hours, flexibilty etc etc - hence costs are significantly higher and the businesses are far less able to adapt to societal changes. As said, there is no nirvana but one side get to sleep better than the other in relation to their employment.

I would love to see basic utilities in public sector hands if they could be managed with the business focus of the private sector but that is highly unlikely to happen - and there is no abilty for public companies to invest to the same degree as public ones can.

When water was privatised the companies were debt free the water companies are now in debt to the tune of £60.3 billion and paid a total of £53.1bn in shareholder dividends. Good "business focus" if you're a shareholder. How many energy supply companies have gone bust? Taken the money gone bust and left Ofgem to sort out the mess.
There's a place for privatisation, utility companies aren't it.

 

[Voyager EMH]

When water was privatised the companies were debt free the water companies are now in debt to the tune of £60.3 billion and paid a total of £53.1bn in shareholder dividends. Good "business focus" if you're a shareholder. How many energy supply companies have gone bust? Taken the money gone bust and left Ofgem to sort out the mess.
There's a place for privatisation, utility companies aren't it.

Yes, it would seem that the "business focus of the private sector" has produced a severely worse "absolute dire state" then ever before in our water supply and sewerage.
Domestic fuel and public transport, basic necessities, are very expensive compared with other European countries. Got to keep those shareholders happy, though.
Some of those shareholders are European companies who are benefitting from us paying high prices for our necessities. Helps to keep their prices lower.
Success for them and a cost for us. Good business focus driving it.

 

[Fade and Die]

When water was privatised the companies were debt free the water companies are now in debt to the tune of £60.3 billion and paid a total of £53.1bn in shareholder dividends. Good "business focus" if you're a shareholder. How many energy supply companies have gone bust? Taken the money gone bust and left Ofgem to sort out the mess.
There's a place for privatisation, utility companies aren't it.

But since privatisation, investment in the water industry has roughly doubled… this would never have happened if the Government was in control of the purse strings.

Investment in the water industry - Ofwat

We all rely on water every day and we know how important it is for people being able to live healthy, fulfilled lives. There is more focus on the water industry than ever before, including […]

www.ofwat.gov.uk