Stamp Duty

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Businesses exist to make profit, and they will do that very efficiently thank-you very much. If in a competitive market they will do it by offering better products and services at the best possible prices. E.g. Amazon, or indeed pretty much any well run business.

But if they have a monopoly, then businesses are more than happy to just rip people off. Why not - profit is their prime motive, so if they can charge people who have nowhere to go, more money then ker-ching.

What was idiot was to sell off state assets, like the railways, and give e.g. the train operators like 10 year franchises. And WORSE, try to govern them with a toothless regulator that tolerates year upon year of above RPI increases. Shameful.

And who was it who did this? Oh wait. The government. Incompetence in action as per.

How is it that e.g. Unilever can outsource all of its procurement activity to IBM? Or Oracle outsource its marketing? And yet the NHS cannot outsource its cleaning functions without getting reamed? Oh, it's the government again. Quelle surprise. Where is the SLA that penalised poor performance and holds the private businesses to account with property penalties?

Sorry but the government aka civil servants are incompetent idiots who we should not trust to run a piss up in a brewery. We've already discussed on this very thread the omni-shambles that is HS2 and the NHS national program for IT. More incompetent cock ups. And some of you lot want MORE government? You're mad.

All those that I mentioned should be publicly owned and run by experts in their fields on a not for profit basis.

The NHS is another example of terrible management and private companies are queuing up to take the money thrown at them to get waiting times down for the upcoming general election.

The NHS should also be regulated by experts in their field, backed up by a cross party panel of politicians not using it as a political football.

There are many areas where business should be there to make a profit.

Health, transport, water and energy should be totally off limits for profiteering.

 

[Chippy_boy]

All those that I mentioned should be publicly owned and run by experts in their fields on a not for profit basis.

The NHS is another example of terrible management and private companies are queuing up to take the money thrown at them to get waiting times down for the upcoming general election.

The NHS should also be regulated by experts in their field, backed up by a cross party panel of politicians not using it as a political football.

There are many areas where business should be there to make a profit.

Health, transport, water and energy should be totally off limits for profiteering.

For "profiteering" yes. But for running the services, why?

Do Marks and Spencer offer good service? Are they a profit-oriented company? Yes they do and yes they are. The two are not mutually exclusive and if you think they are, then perhaps you could explain why you think that?

For me the key is monopolies. Businesses should not be allowed to have a monopoly. Provided they have to compete, they will strive to win your business by being better. Private (or public) monopolies are fat dumb and happy and take customers - or patients - for granted.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Why?

Because more and more people can’t afford to use them.

Have you been living in a cave for the past few years?

 

[Chippy_boy]

Because more and more people can’t afford to use them.

Have you been living in a cave for the past few years?

I'd hoped you would have thought about it a bit before responding.

First, I don't accept that all of the services you mention have become so expensive people cannot afford to use them. Trains yes, agreed.

But putting that aside, ask yourself why. Why can I get an Easyjet flight to Amsterdam for £39 when it used to cost £300 before Easyjet? They aren't nationalised, so how can this be?

First Group have been ripping off train users for 30 years+ because we have let them. That's what's gone wrong. There's nothing inherently wrong with letting a private company run a train service any more than there is letting John Lewis run a department store. But it needs proper terms, ideally with proper competition or as an absolute MINIMUM, a regulator with some actual teeth. Not once over the past 30 years has the train regulator said, "This year you must lower your prices". Not once. And yet in the private sector, businesses have to do so all the time.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

But putting that aside, ask yourself why. Why can I get an Easyjet flight to Amsterdam for £39 when it used to cost £300 before Easyjet? They aren't nationalised, so how can this be?

This is genius, Chippy. Why aren't there several train companies running competing services on the same tracks...

 

[Chippy_boy]

This is genius, Chippy. Why aren't there several train companies running competing services on the same tracks...

Simple answer: because the government fucked up the privatisation.

The train companies don't set the timetables you know. There's no reason at all why you could not have a Virgin train at 08:00 and a First Great Western at 08.15.

You do realise we carry freight on the same tracks, operated by different companies?

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

I'd hoped you would have thought about it a bit before responding.

First, I don't accept that all of the services you mention have become so expensive people cannot afford to use them. Trains yes, agreed.

But putting that aside, ask yourself why. Why can I get an Easyjet flight to Amsterdam for £39 when it used to cost £300 before Easyjet? They aren't nationalised, so how can this be?

First Group have been ripping off train users for 30 years+ because we have let them. That's what's gone wrong. There's nothing inherently wrong with letting a private company run a train service any more than there is letting John Lewis run a department store. But it needs proper terms, ideally with proper competition or as an absolute MINIMUM, a regulator with some actual teeth. Not once over the past 30 years has the train regulator said, "This year you must lower your prices". Not once. And yet in the private sector, businesses have to do so all the time.

Do you look at other countries’ rail systems and ask yourself why they don’t fleece their customers more, rather than how they keep their fares so cheap, whilst being able to modernise their infrastructure?

All this whilst having more empathy for millionaires buying houses.

Bizarre.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Do you look at other countries’ rail systems and ask yourself why they don’t fleece their customers more, rather than how they keep their fares so cheap, whilst being able to modernise their infrastructure?

All this whilst having more empathy for millionaires buying houses.

Bizarre.

Did you actually read my post? Was there anything in it you actually disagreed with? Specifically?

(Some) other countries subsidize rail transport a lot... something we could do whether the operating companies were nationalised or privatised. The reality is, we don't. Who doesn't? Oh, it's the government again.

Incidentally, I have berated my MP on many occasions about the absolutely disgraceful price of train travel and the government doing fuck all about it for 30 years.

What's bizarre is your (and others) inability, or unpreparedness, to actually engage and think about what is being said. That and the rose-tinted glasses about the good old days when you had to wait 3 months to get a phone line installed when the GPO ran the phone network. And the proverbial British Rail sandwich, about which many a sad old joke was made. The services back then were even more shite, but they were sometimes cheaper shite, I grant you.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Did you actually read my post? Was there anything in it you actually disagreed with? Specifically?

(Some) other countries subsidize rail transport a lot... something we could do whether the operating companies were nationalised or privatised. The reality is, we don't. Who doesn't? Oh, it's the government again.

The Tories will never do that, so whether you think it’s a good idea or not, you’ll back your overlords.

Privatisation has failed in all essential elements of society. The Tories cannot run any of them and can’t allow them to fail, so subsidise their mates to keep them afloat.

Nationalise them. Make them non-for-profit and out of the government’s control. No government of any hue would be able to sell them off again.

Selling everything off has got us in this mess.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Simple answer: because the government fucked up the privatisation.

The train companies don't set the timetables you know. There's no reason at all why you could not have a Virgin train at 08:00 and a First Great Western at 08.15.

You do realise we carry freight on the same tracks, operated by different companies?

Should they have privatised all the infrastructure as well?

Is there an example of a successful non subsidised competitive market in railways anywhere in the world?

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Incidentally, I have berated my MP on many occasions about the absolutely disgraceful price of train travel and the government doing fuck all about it for 30 years.

Why would Giacomo do anything about it when he knows you'll still vote for him?

 

[Chippy_boy]

The Tories will never do that, so whether you think it’s a good idea or not, you’ll back your overlords.

Privatisation has failed in all essential elements of society. The Tories cannot run any of them and can’t allow them to fail, so subsidise their mates to keep them afloat.

Nationalise them. Make them non-for-profit and out of the government’s control. No government of any hue would be able to sell them off again.

Selling everything off has got us in this mess.

And who would run these businesses? How much would you pay the executives to do it? Honestly it's cloud cuckoo land if you think that (a) such expertise exists in the government or civil servants - they are fucking clueless the lot of them. And private sector bosses would want private sector pay.

No mate, I can understand your frustration about the state or our public services. I share your frustration. But them being privately run is NOT the root cause of why they are shite. It's a symptom of them being allowed to get away with it, profiteering because they can.

And likewise re-nationalising them is not the answer. Not that we could even afford it. We cannot simply take them back, or no investor who had lost their shirt would ever touch the UK ever again. Even if such taking back was legal and I am not sure it would be. So we'd have to buy them back at market rates, with vast amounts of money we have not got and which if we did have it, would be vastly better spent on e.g. more teachers, hospitals and schools etc. Nationalisation is off the table.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Why would Giacomo do anything about it when he knows you'll still vote for him?

Because MPs generally want to make a positive difference. Most of them are good people trying to do their best in a very difficult circumstance and system. And if I persuade them of something then they will try to support it.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Should they have privatised all the infrastructure as well?

Is there an example of a successful non subsidised competitive market in railways anywhere in the world?

I don't know. Is there an example of a successful non-subsidized nationalised railway system anywhere in the world? I don't know of one of those either, do you?

Seems to me what you are advocating is rail subsidies. I might agree with that, although the counter argument is why should tax payers who don't use the railways and who have no desire or intention to do so, pay even more taxes to pay for them. That said, I do think a decent infrastructure is vital for a countries prosperity, so yes, I probably would subsidize the railways.

And I would also stop these stupidly long franchises with no competition, AND start enforcing price cuts.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Because MPs generally want to make a positive difference. Most of them are good people trying to do their best in a very difficult circumstance and system. And if I persuade them of something then they will try to support it.

But you'll still vote for him even if tells you to fuck off and then shits outside your front door so it doesn't cost him to ignore you completely.

Which is precisely what the Tories have done for most issues for the last 13 years.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

I don't know. Is there an example of a successful non-subsidized nationalised railway system anywhere in the world? I don't know of one of those either, do you?

Ignore the subsidised part then. Where is the successful competitive market?

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

And who would run these businesses? How much would you pay the executives to do it? Honestly it's cloud cuckoo land if you think that (a) such expertise exists in the government or civil servants - they are fucking clueless the lot of them. And private sector bosses would want private sector pay.

No mate, I can understand your frustration about the state or our public services. I share your frustration. But them being privately run is NOT the root cause of why they are shite. It's a symptom of them being allowed to get away with it, profiteering because they can.

And likewise re-nationalising them is not the answer. Not that we could even afford it. We cannot simply take them back, or no investor who had lost their shirt would ever touch the UK ever again. Even if such taking back was legal and I am not sure it would be. So we'd have to buy them back at market rates, with vast amounts of money we have not got and which if we did have it, would be vastly better spent on e.g. more teachers, hospitals and schools etc. Nationalisation is off the table.

Why are we the only country in the world with all these things being privatised, non subsidised and paying through the teeth for, whilst watching all of their infrastructure decaying.

Water? Leaks everywhere. Sewage pumped out wherever’s cheapest to get rid.

Railways? Tracks deteriorating, being patched up to keep them just about running. Franchises not giving a fuck, creaming off profits and being subsidised to fail.

Roads? No need for speed bumps these days, the potholes are more effective in keeping speed down.

Energy? Bin off green projects for tidal energy to become world leading in that field. Not proceeding with nuclear plants to replace end of life older ones, leaving us open to the free market and fucking over the whole country on heating their homes.

Hospitals falling apart. Not enough staff anyway.

No new affordable housing.

Yet all we hear about is the boat people crippling our country. Oh and stamp duty. ;-)

The whole country has decayed. It needs investment now. Look at how angry people are about everything.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

And who would run these businesses? How much would you pay the executives to do it? Honestly it's cloud cuckoo land if you think that (a) such expertise exists in the government or civil servants - they are fucking clueless the lot of them. And private sector bosses would want private sector pay.

No mate, I can understand your frustration about the state or our public services. I share your frustration. But them being privately run is NOT the root cause of why they are shite. It's a symptom of them being allowed to get away with it, profiteering because they can.

And likewise re-nationalising them is not the answer. Not that we could even afford it. We cannot simply take them back, or no investor who had lost their shirt would ever touch the UK ever again. Even if such taking back was legal and I am not sure it would be. So we'd have to buy them back at market rates, with vast amounts of money we have not got and which if we did have it, would be vastly better spent on e.g. more teachers, hospitals and schools etc. Nationalisation is off the table.

P.S. I’d have no issue paying the going rate for experts to run our systems. They’d be working under the instructions to work for the benefit of the public, not shareholder profits.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Ignore the subsidised part then. Where is the successful competitive market?

I've already answered you: I don't know of any. That doesn't mean there are none, maybe there aren't, maybe there are. Europe is more socialist generally and they tend to be nationalised but I don't know about e.g. South Korea or Japan or Australia for example. I have no idea.

Anyway what's your answer to my question? Where are the successful non-subsidized state railway systems???

It's a fair question because your position seems to be that our railway services are shite simply because private companies run them. Whereas my position is that they are shite because they are (a) not subsidized and (b) they are monopolies with the customer over a barrel and a shite regulator that allows it.

I put it to you that if you were right then necessarily other private businesses providing public services like e.g. John Lewis would also be shite. And evidently they are not. So why do you think John Lewis can offer outstanding customer service and prices, when train companies do not? This is a serious debate, not a point scoring exercise where we just argue. If you think I am wrong, i'd be interested to know why you think so.

 

[Corky]

Because MPs generally want to make a positive difference. Most of them are good people trying to do their best in a very difficult circumstance and system. And if I persuade them of something then they will try to support it.

CUP MPs in the Red Wallers are just desperate to keep their jobs, one I know is going to struggle after buying a new house 2 years ago, which is affordable on £86k but not in 3 years when then they need a new mortgage deal and they are on £30k.