Cabinet Reshuffle

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Cabinet Reshuffle

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 4 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >

matt_himself Matataland 11 Jan 18 11.06am
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle USA, FDR's new deal until Raegan came along with his monetarism and union busting. If you think the policies are the same now as 70s you're hugely mistaken. Also the basic fundamentals are the same just need to be properly implemented. No politicising of services or control held too much by ministers. There are lots of new and well tested ways of running public services and investment that achieve lower inequality and higher productivity that weren't tried in the 70s. You can learn lessons from places like Portugal whatever you might think. If John McDonnell can not even provide the costing for Labour’s proposed nationalisation policies, how can you convince me it will work and be different from previous nationalisation programmes? If a detail as fundamental as how it would be paid for cannot be answered by the shadow chancellor, how can we have any faith that the operation of a newly nationalised industry will run effectively? "That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02
Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself

Matataland 11 Jan 18 11.06am

Originally posted by CambridgeEagle

USA, FDR's new deal until Raegan came along with his monetarism and union busting.

If you think the policies are the same now as 70s you're hugely mistaken. Also the basic fundamentals are the same just need to be properly implemented. No politicising of services or control held too much by ministers. There are lots of new and well tested ways of running public services and investment that achieve lower inequality and higher productivity that weren't tried in the 70s. You can learn lessons from places like Portugal whatever you might think.

If John McDonnell can not even provide the costing for Labour’s proposed nationalisation policies, how can you convince me it will work and be different from previous nationalisation programmes?

If a detail as fundamental as how it would be paid for cannot be answered by the shadow chancellor, how can we have any faith that the operation of a newly nationalised industry will run effectively?

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

Alert a moderator to this post

chelys London 11 Jan 18 11.40am
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle USA, FDR's new deal until Raegan came along with his monetarism and union busting. If you think the policies are the same now as 70s you're hugely mistaken. Also the basic fundamentals are the same just need to be properly implemented. No politicising of services or control held too much by ministers. There are lots of new and well tested ways of running public services and investment that achieve lower inequality and higher productivity that weren't tried in the 70s. You can learn lessons from places like Portugal whatever you might think. Corbyn is no FDR - more of a GDR.
Alert a moderator to this post

chelys

London 11 Jan 18 11.40am

Originally posted by CambridgeEagle

USA, FDR's new deal until Raegan came along with his monetarism and union busting.

Corbyn is no FDR - more of a GDR.

Alert a moderator to this post

croydon proud Any european country i fancy! 12 Jan 18 10.17pm
Was as much good as swapping seats on the titanic!Unlike the palace, this bunch of useless con cnuts are going down !
Alert a moderator to this post

croydon proud

Any european country i fancy! 12 Jan 18 10.17pm

Was as much good as swapping seats on the titanic!Unlike the palace, this bunch of useless con cnuts are going down !

Alert a moderator to this post

CambridgeEagle Sydenham 18 Jan 18 4.09pm
Originally posted by matt_himself If John McDonnell can not even provide the costing for Labour’s proposed nationalisation policies, how can you convince me it will work and be different from previous nationalisation programmes? If a detail as fundamental as how it would be paid for cannot be answered by the shadow chancellor, how can we have any faith that the operation of a newly nationalised industry will run effectively? He had provided the costings. They are on the Labour party website.
Alert a moderator to this post

CambridgeEagle

Sydenham 18 Jan 18 4.09pm

Send a Private Message to CambridgeEagle

Originally posted by matt_himself

If John McDonnell can not even provide the costing for Labour’s proposed nationalisation policies, how can you convince me it will work and be different from previous nationalisation programmes?

If a detail as fundamental as how it would be paid for cannot be answered by the shadow chancellor, how can we have any faith that the operation of a newly nationalised industry will run effectively?

He had provided the costings. They are on the Labour party website.

Alert a moderator to this post

chris123 hove actually 18 Jan 18 5.11pm
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle He had provided the costings. They are on the Labour party website. By borrowing presumably.
Alert a moderator to this post

chris123

hove actually 18 Jan 18 5.11pm

Originally posted by CambridgeEagle

He had provided the costings. They are on the Labour party website.

By borrowing presumably.

Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself Matataland 18 Jan 18 8.43pm
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle He had provided the costings. They are on the Labour party website. I have read the manifesto and cannot find detailed costings for how the ‘national transformation fund’ will be paid for: [Link] If you could point out where the costings are, I would be much obliged. FYI, when asked, it was reported that McDonnell himself didn’t appear to know: [Link] Edited by matt_himself (18 Jan 2018 9.52pm) "That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02
Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself

Matataland 18 Jan 18 8.43pm

Originally posted by CambridgeEagle

He had provided the costings. They are on the Labour party website.

I have read the manifesto and cannot find detailed costings for how the ‘national transformation fund’ will be paid for:

[Link]

If you could point out where the costings are, I would be much obliged.

FYI, when asked, it was reported that McDonnell himself didn’t appear to know:

[Link]

Edited by matt_himself (18 Jan 2018 9.52pm)

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself Matataland 21 Jan 18 9.18am
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle He had provided the costings. They are on the Labour party website. The Centre for Policy Reasearch has produced a report stating that the cost of the nationalisation programme would be £176bn, or £6,500 per family in the UK: [Link] This does not include the investment costs to upgrade utility networks, which will add billions to the bill. The figures don’t stack and I believe that you, and other intelligent, Labour supporters know this. "That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02
Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself

Matataland 21 Jan 18 9.18am

Originally posted by CambridgeEagle

He had provided the costings. They are on the Labour party website.

The Centre for Policy Reasearch has produced a report stating that the cost of the nationalisation programme would be £176bn, or £6,500 per family in the UK:

[Link]

This does not include the investment costs to upgrade utility networks, which will add billions to the bill.

The figures don’t stack and I believe that you, and other intelligent, Labour supporters know this.

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 21 Jan 18 10.15am
Originally posted by matt_himself The Centre for Policy Reasearch has produced a report stating that the cost of the nationalisation programme would be £176bn, or £6,500 per family in the UK: [Link] This does not include the investment costs to upgrade utility networks, which will add billions to the bill. The figures don’t stack and I believe that you, and other intelligent, Labour supporters know this. When we had the disaster of leaving the ERM in 97, which led to a recession.....that cost the nation 3.4 billion....even adjusted for inflation the affect on the economy of renationalization would be nuts. I'm not against the idea or desirability of some renationalisation......rail for example has been an awful privatization for the public. However, the reality is that it's completely unrealistic. Edited by Stirlingsays (21 Jan 2018 10.45am) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

21 Jan 18 10.15am

Originally posted by matt_himself

The Centre for Policy Reasearch has produced a report stating that the cost of the nationalisation programme would be £176bn, or £6,500 per family in the UK:

[Link]

This does not include the investment costs to upgrade utility networks, which will add billions to the bill.

The figures don’t stack and I believe that you, and other intelligent, Labour supporters know this.

When we had the disaster of leaving the ERM in 97, which led to a recession.....that cost the nation 3.4 billion....even adjusted for inflation the affect on the economy of renationalization would be nuts.

I'm not against the idea or desirability of some renationalisation......rail for example has been an awful privatization for the public.

However, the reality is that it's completely unrealistic.

Edited by Stirlingsays (21 Jan 2018 10.45am)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself Matataland 21 Jan 18 12.21pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays When we had the disaster of leaving the ERM in 97, which led to a recession.....that cost the nation 3.4 billion....even adjusted for inflation the affect on the economy of renationalization would be nuts. I'm not against the idea or desirability of some renationalisation......rail for example has been an awful privatization for the public. However, the reality is that it's completely unrealistic. Edited by Stirlingsays (21 Jan 2018 10.45am) I agree about rail being nationalised, British Rail in the 1980’s was innovative and functioning well. If it had stayed nationalised, we could have a rail network similar to that in France or Japan. However, beyond that, I cannot see any benefit to nationalising private industry. Government always manages to run business atrociously, bringing around underinvestment and dominant union power, both of which contribute to inefficiency and poor service. "That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02
Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself

Matataland 21 Jan 18 12.21pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

I'm not against the idea or desirability of some renationalisation......rail for example has been an awful privatization for the public.

However, the reality is that it's completely unrealistic.

Edited by Stirlingsays (21 Jan 2018 10.45am)

I agree about rail being nationalised, British Rail in the 1980’s was innovative and functioning well. If it had stayed nationalised, we could have a rail network similar to that in France or Japan.

However, beyond that, I cannot see any benefit to nationalising private industry. Government always manages to run business atrociously, bringing around underinvestment and dominant union power, both of which contribute to inefficiency and poor service.

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

Alert a moderator to this post

CambridgeEagle Sydenham 22 Jan 18 10.15am
Originally posted by matt_himself I have read the manifesto and cannot find detailed costings for how the ‘national transformation fund’ will be paid for: [Link] If you could point out where the costings are, I would be much obliged. FYI, when asked, it was reported that McDonnell himself didn’t appear to know: [Link] Edited by matt_himself (18 Jan 2018 9.52pm) He couldn't recall exact figures, which, given we're talking about a large economy and a wide array of taxes and spending streams, isn't that surprising. [Link] Here are the docs you're looking for.
Alert a moderator to this post

CambridgeEagle

Sydenham 22 Jan 18 10.15am

Originally posted by matt_himself

I have read the manifesto and cannot find detailed costings for how the ‘national transformation fund’ will be paid for:

[Link]

If you could point out where the costings are, I would be much obliged.

FYI, when asked, it was reported that McDonnell himself didn’t appear to know:

[Link]

Edited by matt_himself (18 Jan 2018 9.52pm)

He couldn't recall exact figures, which, given we're talking about a large economy and a wide array of taxes and spending streams, isn't that surprising.

[Link]

Here are the docs you're looking for.

Alert a moderator to this post

CambridgeEagle Sydenham 22 Jan 18 10.19am
Originally posted by matt_himself The Centre for Policy Reasearch has produced a report stating that the cost of the nationalisation programme would be £176bn, or £6,500 per family in the UK: [Link] This does not include the investment costs to upgrade utility networks, which will add billions to the bill. The figures don’t stack and I believe that you, and other intelligent, Labour supporters know this. Why can the private sector afford to provide these services and upgrade infrastructure and a publicly owned enterprise not? Why would it magically be more expensive for the taxpayer if they take on the rewards as well as the risk? The dogma of private is always best should be consigned to the dustbin of history. The truth behind nationalisation is that it can be done at low costs as and when current contracts expire. It would actually save money as the taxpayer wouldn't have to pay for the tendering process and compensation for unsuccessful tenders.
Alert a moderator to this post

CambridgeEagle

Sydenham 22 Jan 18 10.19am

Originally posted by matt_himself

The Centre for Policy Reasearch has produced a report stating that the cost of the nationalisation programme would be £176bn, or £6,500 per family in the UK:

[Link]

This does not include the investment costs to upgrade utility networks, which will add billions to the bill.

The figures don’t stack and I believe that you, and other intelligent, Labour supporters know this.

Why can the private sector afford to provide these services and upgrade infrastructure and a publicly owned enterprise not? Why would it magically be more expensive for the taxpayer if they take on the rewards as well as the risk?

The dogma of private is always best should be consigned to the dustbin of history.

The truth behind nationalisation is that it can be done at low costs as and when current contracts expire. It would actually save money as the taxpayer wouldn't have to pay for the tendering process and compensation for unsuccessful tenders.

Alert a moderator to this post

CambridgeEagle Sydenham 22 Jan 18 10.22am
Originally posted by matt_himself I agree about rail being nationalised, British Rail in the 1980’s was innovative and functioning well. If it had stayed nationalised, we could have a rail network similar to that in France or Japan. However, beyond that, I cannot see any benefit to nationalising private industry. Government always manages to run business atrociously, bringing around underinvestment and dominant union power, both of which contribute to inefficiency and poor service. There's more than 1 way to run a publicly owned venture, the key being don't allow ministers control over the running, but have highly qualified well paid experts in their field do it, but the shareholders are the state. East Coast is a good example of a very well run government owned public service to disprove your comment that they always run business atrociously. Compare that with Branson's pickle and National Expresses mess with the same line!
Alert a moderator to this post

CambridgeEagle

Sydenham 22 Jan 18 10.22am

Originally posted by matt_himself

There's more than 1 way to run a publicly owned venture, the key being don't allow ministers control over the running, but have highly qualified well paid experts in their field do it, but the shareholders are the state.

East Coast is a good example of a very well run government owned public service to disprove your comment that they always run business atrociously. Compare that with Branson's pickle and National Expresses mess with the same line!

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 4 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Cabinet Reshuffle

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors