Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: i_ateallthepies on October 02, 2023, 05:10:43 pm
-
Water firms want bill rises to deal with leaks and spills (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66979271)
Cheeky bas**rds. What have they been doing with all the profits over the last 30 years?
-
Water firms want bill rises to deal with leaks and spills (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66979271)
Cheeky bas**rds. What have they been doing with all the profits over the last 30 years?
Pissing and shitting it down the drain.
Edit.
Literally,into rivers and the sea. They've been helped enormously by the government in that respect tho.
-
Some leaks go months without repairs, stop ripping your customers off and lining shareholders pockets, another fine example of failed privatisation
-
It's OK, Starmer will be PM soon, and then the water companies will be back in public hands.
Oh, wait a minute.
-
Water firms want bill rises to deal with leaks and spills (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66979271)
Cheeky bas**rds. What have they been doing with all the profits over the last 30 years?
same as those that supply gas, electric, petrol, diesel, lpg etc etc
-
Liked the Daily Mash headline on this.
'Give us £96million or we'll pump sh*t into your home'
-
I can’t get my head around them borrowing billions to pay their share holders a dividend! Me thinks that sort of behaviour is worthy of a 15 stint in Prison.
-
The great water rip-off continues, with companies loaded with unsupportable debt to pay out to investors;
https://nitter.poast.org/nick_oldridge/status/1790855295033352677#m
Then UK water companies embrace PFI to deliver £14bn of infrastructure;
https://nitter.poast.org/heatpolicyrich/status/1791401877466214596#m
So customers are to be billed for any network maintenance, while the scam continues.
Both Tory parties think this is just good business practice!
-
Meanwhile people in Devon are having to boil water because the tap water is full of parasites that give you the shits.
-
It's full of cow sh!t with parasites in it
-
Tories do like to talk about getting our country back. Don't think people realised they meant back when we had no clean drinking water, cholera, and workhouses though.
-
Wasn't the whole idea of privatisation that there'd be more investment? Yet another lie the people of the UK bought. Whatever happened to education in this country?
-
The great water rip-off continues, with companies loaded with unsupportable debt to pay out to investors;
https://nitter.poast.org/nick_oldridge/status/1790855295033352677#m
Then UK water companies embrace PFI to deliver £14bn of infrastructure;
https://nitter.poast.org/heatpolicyrich/status/1791401877466214596#m
So customers are to be billed for any network maintenance, while the scam continues.
Both Tory parties think this is just good business practice!
Here we go again. "Both Tory parties". The smug smart-arse attitude from the far-left that put the Tories in No10 in 2010, because Labour were no better, apparently.
Children playing at being grown up.
-
Labour have said that they do not think public ownership of water is needed.
They are on the same page as the Tories on this.
Wake up, silly Billy.
https://www.thecanary.co/uk/analysis/2024/05/17/water-companies-labour-party/
If you can't see what is plain and in front of you, then you must be as dull as dogshit.
-
If only there was a Harry Potter Party aye?
-
How can a Party who wants to be in government abstain on such an important vote?
-
How can a Party who wants to be in government abstain on such an important vote?
Abstaining is agreement with the consensus without having the balls to say so .
-
It's a fair point though, labour appears very critical of the positions then when asked if they'd change it largely say no.
I think they're going to struggle to keep the public on side if they don't make much by way of changes.
-
It's a fair point though, labour appears very critical of the positions then when asked if they'd change it largely say no.
I think they're going to struggle to keep the public on side if they don't make much by way of changes.
Wouldn't nationalising the whole lot be putting that huge debt with a massive backlog of maintenance and upgrades on the public purse, what would your preference be pud?
-
It's a fair point though, labour appears very critical of the positions then when asked if they'd change it largely say no.
I think they're going to struggle to keep the public on side if they don't make much by way of changes.
Wouldn't nationalising the whole lot be putting that huge debt with a massive backlog of maintenance and upgrades on the public purse, what would your preference be pud?
I'll tell you what my preference would be; that the modern Labour Party would come clean and admit that they're no longer representatives of the working class; they're a liberalist, centrist party serving the interests of the metropolitan class of London and the South East.
-
It's a fair point though, labour appears very critical of the positions then when asked if they'd change it largely say no.
I think they're going to struggle to keep the public on side if they don't make much by way of changes.
Wouldn't nationalising the whole lot be putting that huge debt with a massive backlog of maintenance and upgrades on the public purse, what would your preference be pud?
I'll tell you what my preference would be; that the modern Labour Party would come clean and admit that they're no longer representatives of the working class; they're a liberalist, centrist party serving the interests of the metropolitan class of London and the South East.
Finally you get it, well done, now that you accept that no party in Britain left or right can win without the centre what will do with that knowledge?
-
Lost me there, Sydney.
Why would anyone think that the public accounts should take on the debt of insolvent water companies?
That debt was built up deliberately by those companies, to the benefit of their shareholders.
The responsibility for that debt rests with the management and shareholders of those companies.
The solution is to transfer the assets and infrastructure development to a public authority, while leaving the residual debt at the door of those responsible.
One way would be to ensure that water company shareholder dividends would only be distributed if sewage discharge is reduced year on year to targeted levels.
These levels should challenging and set within a parliamentary period to reduce sewage discharge levels.
Instead of fines for non-compliance, which are just added to customer bills, require a share allocation from the offending company to the successor public body.
If the water company’s share price drops, then the government could buy the shares.
At 51% share transfer effective control is in public hands, and the separation of the public interest from the private debt can be completed.
-
I was asking not instructing Albie, why haven't the masters of the financial universe (those in power right now) done something?
-
Because they are bankrolled by those profiting from the scam, Syd.
This is why business interests look to have leverage with the donation of funds to political parties.
They are buying influence, and our corrupt system encourages it!
-
It's a fair point though, labour appears very critical of the positions then when asked if they'd change it largely say no.
I think they're going to struggle to keep the public on side if they don't make much by way of changes.
Wouldn't nationalising the whole lot be putting that huge debt with a massive backlog of maintenance and upgrades on the public purse, what would your preference be pud?
I'll tell you what my preference would be; that the modern Labour Party would come clean and admit that they're no longer representatives of the working class; they're a liberalist, centrist party serving the interests of the metropolitan class of London and the South East.
Finally you get it, well done, now that you accept that no party in Britain left or right can win without the centre what will do with that knowledge?
In answer to that question, Syd, I'm seriously looking at the manifesto of Count Binface.
-
It's a fair point though, labour appears very critical of the positions then when asked if they'd change it largely say no.
I think they're going to struggle to keep the public on side if they don't make much by way of changes.
Wouldn't nationalising the whole lot be putting that huge debt with a massive backlog of maintenance and upgrades on the public purse, what would your preference be pud?
I'll tell you what my preference would be; that the modern Labour Party would come clean and admit that they're no longer representatives of the working class; they're a liberalist, centrist party serving the interests of the metropolitan class of London and the South East.
Finally you get it, well done, now that you accept that no party in Britain left or right can win without the centre what will do with that knowledge?
In answer to that question, Syd, I'm seriously looking at the manifesto of Count Binface.
If that makes sense to you rather than getting involved and changing the voting system maybe you should stop moaning about labour.
-
Because they are bankrolled by those profiting from the scam, Syd.
This is why business interests look to have leverage with the donation of funds to political parties.
They are buying influence, and our corrupt system encourages it!
You have just answered your own question, why expect labour, if they get in to instantly clean up the mess of 14+ years. The tories won't even accept nor admit the financial mess the books are in never mind clean up after themselves.
-
It's a fair point though, labour appears very critical of the positions then when asked if they'd change it largely say no.
I think they're going to struggle to keep the public on side if they don't make much by way of changes.
Wouldn't nationalising the whole lot be putting that huge debt with a massive backlog of maintenance and upgrades on the public purse, what would your preference be pud?
Keep it private let the private sector find efficiencies the public sector can't and split the profits via a legalised gain share agreement with the public element pushed in to a government controlled fund to fund the more difficult infrastructure developments of the system.
-
It's a fair point though, labour appears very critical of the positions then when asked if they'd change it largely say no.
I think they're going to struggle to keep the public on side if they don't make much by way of changes.
Wouldn't nationalising the whole lot be putting that huge debt with a massive backlog of maintenance and upgrades on the public purse, what would your preference be pud?
Keep it private let the private sector find efficiencies the public sector can't and split the profits via a legalised gain share agreement with the public element pushed in to a government controlled fund to fund the more difficult infrastructure developments of the system.
Thanks pud, but who is going to implement it, not the tories else they would have done something before now. And what happens in the meantime to all the shit going into the waterways, this is not an overnight fix, the sewage dumping was only discovered relatively recently. It will take years to upgrade all the plants. This is sheer corporate bas**rdry.
-
Because they are bankrolled by those profiting from the scam, Syd.
This is why business interests look to have leverage with the donation of funds to political parties.
They are buying influence, and our corrupt system encourages it!
You have just answered your own question, why expect labour, if they get in to instantly clean up the mess of 14+ years. The tories won't even accept nor admit the financial mess the books are in never mind clean up after themselves.
You are completely missing the point, Syd.
Labour are courting the same business interests who would want to preserve the water industry exploitation scam.
From the point of view of those international hedge fund interests, the objective is to influence Labour to support the bankrupt water companies, and so prolong the cash transfer.
The fly in the ointment is the fact that Thames Water (and others) are on the brink of insolvency.
The question is what happens next, when one or more go under?
-
You're a funny guy Albie, all there points that you raise and that everyone else keeps 'completely missing' all added up are the reasons that corbyn didn't get into office, twice, what a shame that this point is the one that you and your mates are completely missing aye?
-
Stay on the topic Syd, and avoid the irrelevant drivel.
It is nothing whatsoever to do with Corbyn. The problems have been there since the original privatisation of the water industry.
We are talking about the investment strategies of private equity owners of an essential public service.
"Thames Water is collapsing because it has racked up nearly £19 billion of debt. In 1989 it started out with zero debt. It has spent the last 34 years profiting at our expense. The company has paid out £7.2 billion in dividends and in 2022 paid out £37 million of “internal dividends” to its parent company."...from https://weownit.org.uk/
Water is a natural monopoly, there is no market for consumers.
The English model of privatisation is very unusual, and Scotland retains water in the public sector.
90% of the world supplies water in public ownership.
Publicly owned Scottish Water has spent £72 more per household per year (35% more) than the English water companies.
If England had invested at this rate, an extra £28 billion would have gone into the infrastructure to tackle problems like leaks and sewage.
-
Yes I know, when did you start complaining, whom do you expect to fix it and why?
-
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce55vp78n40o.amp
Seriously?
-
Meanwhile
https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/may/21/south-west-water-owner-service-dividend-devon
You couldn't make it up!
-
So what will Keith do about this scandalous situation when he gets in? Take the water industry back into public hands, or let the greedy companies continue to fleece the public to provide huge dividends for the shareholders, whilst providing an appalling service?
I think we know the answer.
-
So what will Keith do about this scandalous situation when he gets in? Take the water industry back into public hands, or let the greedy companies continue to fleece the public to provide huge dividends for the shareholders, whilst providing an appalling service?
I think we know the answer.
Wrong question Steve, what will the government do about this right now is a better one wouldn't you think, Albie is crying about debt and yet he like you wants to load it onto labour, wtf get real.
-
No Syd, as I clearly explained in post 21 debt should remain with the companies who created it to inflate dividends.
The voices in your head are getting the upper hand again.
The Tories will only act if Thames go bankrupt when they still in government, otherwise they will wait it out.
Labour have a chance to set out a policy for change, but will not do so!
-
Perhaps if there had been a new reservoir built in the last 30+ years to cope with increased demand then bills wouldn’t be so high?
-
No Syd, as I clearly explained in post 21 debt should remain with the companies who created it to inflate dividends.
The voices in your head are getting the upper hand again.
The Tories will only act if Thames go bankrupt when they still in government, otherwise they will wait it out.
Labour have a chance to set out a policy for change, but will not do so!
Yes you clearly explained as always, but why put it all on the opposition as always, its the government that has the power.
I think you're crapping yourself that labour may win.
-
No Syd, as I clearly explained in post 21 debt should remain with the companies who created it to inflate dividends.
The voices in your head are getting the upper hand again.
The Tories will only act if Thames go bankrupt when they still in government, otherwise they will wait it out.
Labour have a chance to set out a policy for change, but will not do so!
Yes you clearly explained as always, but why put it all on the opposition as always, its the government that has the power.
I think you're crapping yourself that labour may win.
You have done it again Syd.
“Labour may win”.
Are you now unsure about the great victory that you were predicting a few months ago?
-
Nationalise
-
Nationalise
Yep, the old saying coming your way from the far left, nationalise the debt and privatise the profit
-
Nationalise
Yep, the old saying coming your way from the far left, nationalise the debt and privatise the profit
Your hero, Keith, wants public ownership doesn't he?
Oh sorry, I keep forgetting. That was just for the Labour leadership.
-
Nationalise
Yep, the old saying coming your way from the far left, nationalise the debt and privatise the profit
Your story Steve, give us the details
Your hero, Keith, wants public ownership doesn't he?
Oh sorry, I keep forgetting. That was just for the Labour leadership.
-
It’s about time they cleaned our local sewerage works up. It’s a right shit pit.
-
Nationalise
Yep, the old saying coming your way from the far left, nationalise the debt and privatise the profit
Your hero, Keith, wants public ownership doesn't he?
Oh sorry, I keep forgetting. That was just for the Labour leadership.
One of the water companies down south can't remember the name of the company.
Just let it go bankrupt and bring it back into public hands instead of the taxpayer bailing it out.
Cannot believe that in this day and age customers having to boil their water and having to hand out bottled water.
-
Nationalise
Yep, the old saying coming your way from the far left, nationalise the debt and privatise the profit
Your hero, Keith, wants public ownership doesn't he?
Oh sorry, I keep forgetting. That was just for the Labour leadership.
One of the water companies down south can't remember the name of the company.
Just let it go bankrupt and bring it back into public hands instead of the taxpayer bailing it out.
Cannot believe that in this day and age customers having to boil their water and having to hand out bottled water.
Just let it go bankrupt..... How does that work? You do realise that when a company becomes insolvent there is a huge amount of cost to pay, you can't just ignore the debt.
-
Nationalise
Yep, the old saying coming your way from the far left, nationalise the debt and privatise the profit
Your hero, Keith, wants public ownership doesn't he?
Oh sorry, I keep forgetting. That was just for the Labour leadership.
One of the water companies down south can't remember the name of the company.
Just let it go bankrupt and bring it back into public hands instead of the taxpayer bailing it out.
Cannot believe that in this day and age customers having to boil their water and having to hand out bottled water.
Just let it go bankrupt..... How does that work? You do realise that when a company becomes insolvent there is a huge amount of cost to pay, you can't just ignore the debt.
The companies debt. Not the taxpayers. Just renationalise it.
Why have they paid all these dividends to shareholders and not invested in the infrastructure?
But then expect the customers to pay for it.
-
Exactly. A bonus or dividend should be met out of profits, not just awarded when you are losing money or failing.
-
Still the bonuses flow in the water industry:
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/water-bosses-pocketed-100m-in-pay-and-bonuses-in-past-10-years-3125741
Despite this, both Blue and Red parties think a tweak or two to regulation will cut the mustard.
They are just about the only people who can't see (or don't want to see) the need for public ownership.
It's like wading through treacle!
-
Still the bonuses flow in the water industry:
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/water-bosses-pocketed-100m-in-pay-and-bonuses-in-past-10-years-3125741
Despite this, both Blue and Red parties think a tweak or two to regulation will cut the mustard.
They are just about the only people who can't see (or don't want to see) the need for public ownership.
It's like wading through treacle!
maybe the greens can magic up the money?
-
No money needed to bring water back into public ownership Syd.
It has been on here before, the options of how to do it.
They are in breach of their statutory obligations in relation to sewage discharges.
Instead of fining them (which is then passed to consumers), take a equity share for the public for every breach.
Once the public have 51%, they have control.
That is just one way...there are others!
-
So what will Keith do about this scandalous situation when he gets in? Take the water industry back into public hands, or let the greedy companies continue to fleece the public to provide huge dividends for the shareholders, whilst providing an appalling service?
I think we know the answer.
But you're gonna vote for Reform or the Tories? Do you know what they'll do?!
-
No money needed to bring water back into public ownership Syd.
It has been on here before, the options of how to do it.
They are in breach of their statutory obligations in relation to sewage discharges.
Instead of fining them (which is then passed to consumers), take a equity share for the public for every breach.
Once the public have 51%, they have control.
That is just one way...there are others!
Yes, maybe, but until the whole lot has been effectively audited it would be hard to move without compounding the problems I would have thought, think if the mess the trains have been left in.
-
Syd,
I posted this before, but here you are for reference;
https://weownit.org.uk/public-ownership/water
The key part is
"If we gave the shareholders back what they put in (i.e. the equity value of the shares) it would cost just under £15 billion to buy back the water companies. We would save around £2.5 billion a year because we wouldn’t have to pay out shareholder dividends and borrowing costs are lower in the public sector. Bringing water into public ownership pays for itself in around 6 years on that basis."
But like I say, you can follow the link through to the shares option;
https://weownit.org.uk/act-now/take-shares-not-fines
So the means exist, what is lacking is the political will.
-
Syd,
I posted this before, but here you are for reference;
https://weownit.org.uk/public-ownership/water
The key part is
"If we gave the shareholders back what they put in (i.e. the equity value of the shares) it would cost just under £15 billion to buy back the water companies. We would save around £2.5 billion a year because we wouldn’t have to pay out shareholder dividends and borrowing costs are lower in the public sector. Bringing water into public ownership pays for itself in around 6 years on that basis."
But like I say, you can follow the link through to the shares option;
https://weownit.org.uk/act-now/take-shares-not-fines
So the means exist, what is lacking is the political will.
political reality says otherwise Albie, if labour take on too much and don't deliver they'll be heading for a fall. I know all those with no skin in the game have plenty of ideas but this is a long game and it has to work. This isn't the same as taking over a company, stripping the assets and sacking the workforce.
14+ years of maladministration have left a mountain of work.
-
Political reality says exactly the opposite Syd.
Look at who the owners of the water companies are, and how unusual it is for a monopoly provider of an essential public service to be allowed to offshore excess profits while failing to invest. Nowhere else does water the UK way.
Labour can do this without significant impact on the spending plans for other areas, and can reap a dividend in terms of the public accounts in short order.
It is achievable within a defined timetable, and is easily chalked up as a win in accordance with public opinion.
Failure to act promptly on key issues will lead to a widespread disillusion within 2 years.
This is the low hanging fruit, and the only reason not to do so is that your policy is compromised by donations from those who benefit from this cash cow.
-
Syd,
I posted this before, but here you are for reference;
https://weownit.org.uk/public-ownership/water
The key part is
"If we gave the shareholders back what they put in (i.e. the equity value of the shares) it would cost just under £15 billion to buy back the water companies. We would save around £2.5 billion a year because we wouldn’t have to pay out shareholder dividends and borrowing costs are lower in the public sector. Bringing water into public ownership pays for itself in around 6 years on that basis."
But like I say, you can follow the link through to the shares option;
https://weownit.org.uk/act-now/take-shares-not-fines
So the means exist, what is lacking is the political will.
political reality says otherwise Albie, if labour take on too much and don't deliver they'll be heading for a fall. I know all those with no skin in the game have plenty of ideas but this is a long game and it has to work. This isn't the same as taking over a company, stripping the assets and sacking the workforce.
14+ years of maladministration have left a mountain of work.
Syd Labour can't be heading for a fall, Gove says they are going to rig it to stay in power for perpetuity. If Gove says it it must be right......... or just bo!!ocks
-
Political reality says exactly the opposite Syd.
Look at who the owners of the water companies are, and how unusual it is for a monopoly provider of an essential public service to be allowed to offshore excess profits while failing to invest. Nowhere else does water the UK way.
Labour can do this without significant impact on the spending plans for other areas, and can reap a dividend in terms of the public accounts in short order.
It is achievable within a defined timetable, and is easily chalked up as a win in accordance with public opinion.
Failure to act promptly on key issues will lead to a widespread disillusion within 2 years.
This is the low hanging fruit, and the only reason not to do so is that your policy is compromised by donations from those who benefit from this cash cow.
If it was so east to fix you'd reckon even the thickos in one of the tory governments would have fixed it just to save all the bad pr. As I said it's the quantity of work and money required that's the problem and his name is Starmer not Harry Potter.
-
Reynolds wriggling like a worm on a hook over Thames Water;
https://www.ft.com/content/fb43156e-a038-4d1a-9a3e-82e1981fab96
Thames Water is insolvent, and possibly continuing to trade unlawfully.
The only sane response is to take it into public ownership in some form.
Pretending otherwise is just hoping that the Unicorns come up with an answer.
-
Reynolds wriggling like a worm on a hook over Thames Water;
https://www.ft.com/content/fb43156e-a038-4d1a-9a3e-82e1981fab96
Thames Water is insolvent, and possibly continuing to trade unlawfully.
The only sane response is to take it into public ownership in some form.
Pretending otherwise is just hoping that the Unicorns come up with an answer.
Do the greens have any unicorns handy Albie?
-
What have the Greens got to do with it?
The article is about the likely government not having a clue about what the realistic options are for Thames Water, or the whole industry.
Some semblance of competence would at least understand the nature of the problem.
Reynolds is talking complete nonsense.
-
What have the Greens got to do with it?
The article is about the likely government not having a clue about what the realistic options are for Thames Water, or the whole industry.
Some semblance of competence would at least understand the nature of the problem.
Reynolds is talking complete nonsense.
Tel me how you are going to implement all these proposed policies you keep posting without your party gaining government Albie?
-
The "We Own It" link explains how, please read links before posting or folk will think that you are a timewaster.
I don't have a party, Syd, and I am not standing for election.
Not sure why you think I am, but your process is a mystery to us all.
-
The "We Own It" link explains how, please read links before posting or folk will think that you are a timewaster.
I don't have a party, Syd, and I am not standing for election.
Not sure why you think I am, but your process is a mystery to us all.
Albie tell me how the party of your choice is going to win government with the wish list of policies you post, if you don't win you can't do a thing, sort of rhymes aye?
-
The "We Own It" link explains how, please read links before posting or folk will think that you are a timewaster.
I don't have a party, Syd, and I am not standing for election.
Not sure why you think I am, but your process is a mystery to us all.
Syd at it again! He doesn’t seem to read the stupid links he posts he just posts them to get a response!