ender4

:shock: BARTON IMAGE RIGHTS

I'd hazard a guess that the workers who haven't lost this would give a limb to be in that position. i'm not debating that, i'm sure they would. But the point i was making was how the unions are jepordizing (sp?) all their workers jobs, rather than protecting them.

A total free-market is that you let the market decide everything - no rules or regulations stopping the market working to the best of its ability. This is the ideal case in theory, a pure efficient working of the market. In reality this cannot be allowed to occur, as you need safety rules, environmental legislation, you need to make sure basic services are provided to those who can't afford them, you need to provide access to the market for those who have no access. This can still be a free market, but working within a framework. Too much framework, and it impedes the efficiency of the free-market. Not enough framework, and it won't benefit the wider population.

no, in a media company.

That may be due to circumstance actually. I'm in management in a large company, where the unions are always threatening to go on strike. In fact, they have just announced another strike ballot today :evil: and yet we're trying to keep the company afloat, we really aren't trying to screw the workers. I've had my pay frozen just like the rest of the workers, and i lost around £6k in my annual bonus which the workers haven't lost. Yet the union doesn't see that, or the fact that we are currently making a loss.

You're anti-union You're pro-privatisation and you vote labour I don't geddit. i'm also: 1) pro high taxes 2) pro good public services (health & education) paid out of general taxation 3) pro looking after the vunerable in society 4) I believe in the free-market with proper regulation, rather than total free-market like the Tories. i guess you could say i'm New Labour, rather than Old Labour. i was a big supporter of Tony Blair, and i am anti-Cameron. basically, i guess i have opinions on all aspects of politics, and then i see which party meets the most important of my opinions. To date, that has always been Labour. Gordon Brown is pushing Labour a bit too left for my liking, but Tories are still way too right for me to vote for them.

you make some good points. i'll split them up in my reply: unbundling - surely this is just a one-off inefficiency of privatisation. Once unbundled once, it should be smooth thereafter. IT systems - no worse than any major IT system brought in by the government. I don't think you can use that as a reason not to privatise. complexities of regulation - well maybe the regulation needs to be tidied up a bit, or maybe its complex so as to protect the consumers? Will this regulation not settle down over time? and is it more complex than the inefficiencies the government had when they owned them. whim of suppliers - the complex regulations means its not totally at the whim of suppliers. there are rules to follow, and these can be tightened/loosened by any government at any time. surely thats just a failure of the current government not tightening the rules (assuming they need tightening). Bills less but more risk - well, thats a trade-off. at least the risk being with the customer is better than being with the tax-payer. Surely the lower bills make up for the increased risk to each individual. Low incomes - fair point, people on low incomes need to be protected. i thought the government already do that through winter payments for elderly and special tariffs for those 'vunerable'. maybe the government needs to tweak this is if its felt some people are slipping the net. overall, i don't think those are reasons for not privatising though. It sounds like a few tweaks are needed around the edges, rather than a wholesale nationalisation.

It depends on what you accept from the public infrastructure as responsibility to the people. true. which is why i put buses as Fail. i don't look at flights as public infrastructure, its a private service with a choice to use it or not. and when you do choose to use it, each person should just go with their best choice of airline based on what they want (cheapness, service, speed, etc). I guess Health & Education are the big public infrastructures which i believe need to be paid for out of general taxation. I can see private services working well in the Health industry (like France & Germany do) as long as its still free at point of use. Education it cannot work because learning is intangible, so its hard to quantify SLA's (service level agreements) to a private firm.

Again I would disagree. They are no longer a UK based airline. Consequently other companies now fill the void left by London airways which results in monies going to "foreign" companies (using your arguments). Business class customers always had choice anyway, privatisation has resulted in BA London just catering for the capital based populace and the shareholders. Awful company isn't that my point :? they are no longer a UK airline, they are an international firm. we don't need to care about it, if it goes bump, it doesn't affect the taxpayers or the government. Uk passengers should just use Emirates, etc instead. The best airline wins, and rubbish like BA disappears. result. much better than the UK government propping up their losses, and BA continuing with their shambolic service forever.

is it any worse than it was before it was privatised? yes lying about leaks, yet the leaks are less than they would be under government control. also:

I think I'd pretty much disagree with every assessment that says 100% anything and that is without getting into an idealogical debate on running utilities or vital infrastructure services on a profit-led, shareholder-first basis. It is both. fair point - lets call it "generally successful" or "generally failed". ignore the 100%'s. Gas - maybe it is. i was in two minds which is why i started with one assessment on Electricity & moved to another assessment on Gas. Lets just call them both "generally successful". unless you think they "generally failed"?

Thomas Cook going under - how is that bad? thats a good point of free-market, that rubbish inefficient businesses improve or die. There's enough other better travel agents to take its place. At least it won't die using up taxpayers cash. Buses - i called that a FAIL, not a success. Council Houses - i'd say the issue is not enough housing being built over the past 25 years. Its an issue of rubbish planning permission. If te government let private compnies build enough houses over the past 3 decades, housing would be a lot cheaper, and so social housing wouldn't be needed so much. BA - very much a success. Government gets money. taxpayer doesn't lose any money. Business class customer can choose whichever airline they want, which is good customer choice. Water - yet the leaks are much less than they used to be, our water is the cleanest its ever been, our bills are cheap (inflation adjusted), and so much of the sewers & pipes are being replaced after 100 years of not doing anything.

Surely, if you were to be consistent then you'd have mentioned the regulators in regard to gas? true. yes. i kind of changed my thought process as i worked my way down the list. :? i started by thinking the regulators taking their eye of the ball was a failure of privatisation. By the time i got down to Gas, i decided that it was a failure of whichever government is in power when the regulator becomes too soft, rather than a failure of the privatisation of that industry.

its my subjective opinion.... mainly based on cost to taxpayer before vs cost to customer once privatised. followed by Efficiency of business before and after. Choice to consumer as well. any in particular stand out that you agree? and any stand out that you disagree with?

Rail - 50/50 - pretty good, i think it'll be a success long-term Water - 95% success Electricity - 90% success (the fail was the regulators becoming too soft) Telecoms - 100% Success Health - i think it'll be a success (as long as the governemnt still pays for it through general taxation) Education - i agree it won't. 100% Fail. BP - 100% success British Airways - 100% success Britsh Gas - 100% success British Leyland - 100% success (though no longer exists, which is what a free-market should do to rubbish companies). Thomas cook - 100% success Air Traffic - 100% success Rolls Royce - 100% success British Steel - 100% success British Energy - Fail (conceptually should have succeeded, but totally cocked-up) Buses - 100% Fail. Council-houses - 100% success. Ports - 100% Success.

are you saying that they shouldn't have privatised the railways? I've always voted labour in every general election, but even i can see that privatisation is beneficial in most (not all) industries.

sensible choice - spend less Labour choice - spend more. hmmmmm.....

i'm surprised Michael Jordan is so high, and i'm especially surprised that Michael Knight & Michael Schumacher are so low.

The Comedy show continues.... COMEDY CLUB

just checked it out on iplayer. If your daughter looks like that when she is 19, i'll bath her for you! :winkold:

Classy. I think there are far less classy comments on here than me pointing out she has probably played a fair few tunes on the pink oboe. i believe she's a virgin.

:shock: errrr..... not sure how to take that.

MICHAEL J FOX:

as in Peter Andre & Jordan? :?

ooo, thats so hard. my vote is split between Michael Schumacher, Michael Jackson, & Michael Knight.