RugbyRebels

Zhivago wrote:Back to the topic of nationalisation.

Our water supply. This really ought to be nationalised and properly funded. Reading articles like this is really shocking.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... ish-rivers
Enforcement down from 800 per year to 17...

We should be taking care of our nature, and clearly because private money is involved, the profit motive encourages companies to cut costs by ofloading those costs onto the external environment, and by cutting the enforcement budget of environmental standards the regulations that should prevent this are not enforced. By reducing enforcement of environmental standards, competition of private companies find themselves competing who can get away with the most egregious actions.

Something should be done. Clearly nationalisation is only one solution out of many. But it seems like the problem is caused by private money, so the solution should be to remove private money.

Sandydragon wrote:

Zhivago wrote:Back to the topic of nationalisation.

Our water supply. This really ought to be nationalised and properly funded. Reading articles like this is really shocking.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... ish-rivers
Enforcement down from 800 per year to 17...

We should be taking care of our nature, and clearly because private money is involved, the profit motive encourages companies to cut costs by ofloading those costs onto the external environment, and by cutting the enforcement budget of environmental standards the regulations that should prevent this are not enforced. By reducing enforcement of environmental standards, competition of private companies find themselves competing who can get away with the most egregious actions.

Something should be done. Clearly nationalisation is only one solution out of many. But it seems like the problem is caused by private money, so the solution should be to remove private money.

Like many other quangos, the Environmental Agency was cash starved during austerity and hasn't recovered since. Any industry needs a regulator, even privatised ones, and if the regulator isnt up to the job for whatever reason, companies will take the piss.

Zhivago wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Zhivago wrote:Back to the topic of nationalisation.

Our water supply. This really ought to be nationalised and properly funded. Reading articles like this is really shocking.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... ish-rivers
Enforcement down from 800 per year to 17...

We should be taking care of our nature, and clearly because private money is involved, the profit motive encourages companies to cut costs by ofloading those costs onto the external environment, and by cutting the enforcement budget of environmental standards the regulations that should prevent this are not enforced. By reducing enforcement of environmental standards, competition of private companies find themselves competing who can get away with the most egregious actions.

Something should be done. Clearly nationalisation is only one solution out of many. But it seems like the problem is caused by private money, so the solution should be to remove private money.

Like many other quangos, the Environmental Agency was cash starved during austerity and hasn't recovered since. Any industry needs a regulator, even privatised ones, and if the regulator isnt up to the job for whatever reason, companies will take the piss.

They're taking our piss and dumping it in our rivers!!

I don't see how water companies can compete agaisnt each other. The same water all goes through the same pipes. There isn't choice for the consumer, so why is it private?

Even if it's a not-for-profit like Dwr Cymru... what is the benefit over nationalisation?

The private water companies have eye-watering debt:equity ratios of 73% on average. They've been taking loans, cutting costs, and paying dividends overseas. At some point they'll collapse and the government will have to nationalise. Meanwhile the investors would have made off with the loot. No wonder there's a drought coming. The water companies presumably haven't been investing in new reservoirs etc (or in whatever appropriate infrastructure is required).

Oh and btw, I'm sure you guessed it, but the tap water in Netherlands is better than in the UK.

Sandydragon wrote:

Zhivago wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:
Like many other quangos, the Environmental Agency was cash starved during austerity and hasn't recovered since. Any industry needs a regulator, even privatised ones, and if the regulator isnt up to the job for whatever reason, companies will take the piss.

They're taking our piss and dumping it in our rivers!!

I don't see how water companies can compete agaisnt each other. The same water all goes through the same pipes. There isn't choice for the consumer, so why is it private?

Even if it's a not-for-profit like Dwr Cymru... what is the benefit over nationalisation?

The private water companies have eye-watering debt:equity ratios of 73% on average. They've been taking loans, cutting costs, and paying dividends overseas. At some point they'll collapse and the government will have to nationalise. Meanwhile the investors would have made off with the loot. No wonder there's a drought coming. The water companies presumably haven't been investing in new reservoirs etc (or in whatever appropriate infrastructure is required).

Oh and btw, I'm sure you guessed it, but the tap water in Netherlands is better than in the UK.

If the regulator had some teeth they wouldn't take the piss.

As it happens, I do share your concerns over how you can privatise water when its all the same pipes. Its not a true competitive environment.

morepork wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Zhivago wrote:
They're taking our piss and dumping it in our rivers!!

I don't see how water companies can compete agaisnt each other. The same water all goes through the same pipes. There isn't choice for the consumer, so why is it private?

Even if it's a not-for-profit like Dwr Cymru... what is the benefit over nationalisation?

The private water companies have eye-watering debt:equity ratios of 73% on average. They've been taking loans, cutting costs, and paying dividends overseas. At some point they'll collapse and the government will have to nationalise. Meanwhile the investors would have made off with the loot. No wonder there's a drought coming. The water companies presumably haven't been investing in new reservoirs etc (or in whatever appropriate infrastructure is required).

Oh and btw, I'm sure you guessed it, but the tap water in Netherlands is better than in the UK.

If the regulator had some teeth they wouldn't take the piss.

As it happens, I do share your concerns over how you can privatise water when its all the same pipes. Its not a true competitive environment.

You think competition is the most appropriate conduit for managing the integrity of natural resources? Jesus man, that mantra died with the Dodo. The world is literally sick of this supply side bullshit. It’s failed by every available metric for the last century. Fucking hell.

Sandydragon wrote:

morepork wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:
If the regulator had some teeth they wouldn't take the piss.

As it happens, I do share your concerns over how you can privatise water when its all the same pipes. Its not a true competitive environment.

You think competition is the most appropriate conduit for managing the integrity of natural resources? Jesus man, that mantra died with the Dodo. The world is literally sick of this supply side bullshit. It’s failed by every available metric for the last century. Fucking hell.

And nationalisation doesn't work that well either. The privatised companies complained vocally when they saw the state of the network when they took over from the state provider; literally no investment. The current system doesn't work, but thats not a reason to throw out privatisation altogether because its ideologically opposed to a way of thinking.

Sandydragon wrote:

morepork wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:
If the regulator had some teeth they wouldn't take the piss.

As it happens, I do share your concerns over how you can privatise water when its all the same pipes. Its not a true competitive environment.

You think competition is the most appropriate conduit for managing the integrity of natural resources? Jesus man, that mantra died with the Dodo. The world is literally sick of this supply side bullshit. It’s failed by every available metric for the last century. Fucking hell.

And nationalisation doesn't work that well either. The privatised companies complained vocally when they saw the state of the network when they took over from the state provider; literally no investment. The current system doesn't work, but thats not a reason to throw out privatisation altogether because its ideologically opposed to a way of thinking.

Sandydragon wrote:

morepork wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:
If the regulator had some teeth they wouldn't take the piss.

As it happens, I do share your concerns over how you can privatise water when its all the same pipes. Its not a true competitive environment.

You think competition is the most appropriate conduit for managing the integrity of natural resources? Jesus man, that mantra died with the Dodo. The world is literally sick of this supply side bullshit. It’s failed by every available metric for the last century. Fucking hell.

And nationalisation doesn't work that well either. The privatised companies complained vocally when they saw the state of the network when they took over from the state provider; literally no investment. The current system doesn't work, but thats not a reason to throw out privatisation altogether because its ideologically opposed to a way of thinking.

Sewage sleuths: the men who revealed the slow, dirty death of Welsh and English rivers

A tide of effluent, broken laws and ruthless cuts is devastating the nations’ waterways. An academic and a detective have dredged up the truth of how it was allowed to happen – but will anything be done?

...

ARTICLE CONTINUES

Sandydragon wrote:

Zhivago wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:
Like many other quangos, the Environmental Agency was cash starved during austerity and hasn't recovered since. Any industry needs a regulator, even privatised ones, and if the regulator isnt up to the job for whatever reason, companies will take the piss.

They're taking our piss and dumping it in our rivers!!

I don't see how water companies can compete agaisnt each other. The same water all goes through the same pipes. There isn't choice for the consumer, so why is it private?

Even if it's a not-for-profit like Dwr Cymru... what is the benefit over nationalisation?

The private water companies have eye-watering debt:equity ratios of 73% on average. They've been taking loans, cutting costs, and paying dividends overseas. At some point they'll collapse and the government will have to nationalise. Meanwhile the investors would have made off with the loot. No wonder there's a drought coming. The water companies presumably haven't been investing in new reservoirs etc (or in whatever appropriate infrastructure is required).

Oh and btw, I'm sure you guessed it, but the tap water in Netherlands is better than in the UK.

If the regulator had some teeth they wouldn't take the piss.

As it happens, I do share your concerns over how you can privatise water when its all the same pipes. Its not a true competitive environment.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Zhivago wrote:
They're taking our piss and dumping it in our rivers!!

I don't see how water companies can compete agaisnt each other. The same water all goes through the same pipes. There isn't choice for the consumer, so why is it private?

Even if it's a not-for-profit like Dwr Cymru... what is the benefit over nationalisation?

The private water companies have eye-watering debt:equity ratios of 73% on average. They've been taking loans, cutting costs, and paying dividends overseas. At some point they'll collapse and the government will have to nationalise. Meanwhile the investors would have made off with the loot. No wonder there's a drought coming. The water companies presumably haven't been investing in new reservoirs etc (or in whatever appropriate infrastructure is required).

Oh and btw, I'm sure you guessed it, but the tap water in Netherlands is better than in the UK.

If the regulator had some teeth they wouldn't take the piss.

As it happens, I do share your concerns over how you can privatise water when its all the same pipes. Its not a true competitive environment.

That will never happen with a government that listens to lobbyists for privatised water companies.

So get a better government or end lobbying or nationalise the industry.

Preferably all three.

Sandydragon wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: If the regulator had some teeth they wouldn't take the piss.

As it happens, I do share your concerns over how you can privatise water when its all the same pipes. Its not a true competitive environment.

That will never happen with a government that listens to lobbyists for privatised water companies.

So get a better government or end lobbying or nationalise the industry.

Preferably all three.

I think austerity was the biggest culprit given that the regulator used to take companies to court and now don't. Other regulators are far less effective and probably because of politics. for the EA it feels more like a financial thing.

Zhivago wrote:It doesn't work. The companies would just provision for a fine and pass the cost onto their customers.

Sandydragon wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: If the regulator had some teeth they wouldn't take the piss.

As it happens, I do share your concerns over how you can privatise water when its all the same pipes. Its not a true competitive environment.

That will never happen with a government that listens to lobbyists for privatised water companies.

So get a better government or end lobbying or nationalise the industry.

Preferably all three.

I think austerity was the biggest culprit given that the regulator used to take companies to court and now don't. Other regulators are far less effective and probably because of politics. for the EA it feels more like a financial thing.

Puja wrote:The other thing with privatised utilities is that the government has given away one of its major economic levers. At the moment, we've got a massive cost of living crisis and ridiculous inflation and the only tools that the government has to deal with it are all by squashing the demand - fighting wage/benefit/pension rises and raising interest rates, none of which are particularly great for getting us out of a recession (and that's not thinking about the fact that fighting payrises is the government effectively saying that the poor starving is an acceptable solution to curb inflation damaging the value of capital).

If gas, electric, water, and trains were in public hands, then they'd have another tool - suppressing price rises, or even instituting price drops. It'd be costly, but probably less costly than the hit to growth that will come from suppressing demand.

Puja

Sandydragon wrote:

Puja wrote:The other thing with privatised utilities is that the government has given away one of its major economic levers. At the moment, we've got a massive cost of living crisis and ridiculous inflation and the only tools that the government has to deal with it are all by squashing the demand - fighting wage/benefit/pension rises and raising interest rates, none of which are particularly great for getting us out of a recession (and that's not thinking about the fact that fighting payrises is the government effectively saying that the poor starving is an acceptable solution to curb inflation damaging the value of capital).

If gas, electric, water, and trains were in public hands, then they'd have another tool - suppressing price rises, or even instituting price drops. It'd be costly, but probably less costly than the hit to growth that will come from suppressing demand.

Puja

They could also subsidise the r utility companies and enforce a price cap that was underpinned by public money.

Puja wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Puja wrote:The other thing with privatised utilities is that the government has given away one of its major economic levers. At the moment, we've got a massive cost of living crisis and ridiculous inflation and the only tools that the government has to deal with it are all by squashing the demand - fighting wage/benefit/pension rises and raising interest rates, none of which are particularly great for getting us out of a recession (and that's not thinking about the fact that fighting payrises is the government effectively saying that the poor starving is an acceptable solution to curb inflation damaging the value of capital).

If gas, electric, water, and trains were in public hands, then they'd have another tool - suppressing price rises, or even instituting price drops. It'd be costly, but probably less costly than the hit to growth that will come from suppressing demand.

Puja

They could also subsidise the r utility companies and enforce a price cap that was underpinned by public money.

In theory yes, although that's got a lot more steps and a lot more places for money to leave the system, especially since utility companies' main raison d'etre is "make money" rather than "do what the government wants". Far easier to have your hand on the wheel than it is to bribe the person with the hand on the wheel to steer the way you want.

Puja

Stom wrote:

Puja wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:
They could also subsidise the r utility companies and enforce a price cap that was underpinned by public money.

In theory yes, although that's got a lot more steps and a lot more places for money to leave the system, especially since utility companies' main raison d'etre is "make money" rather than "do what the government wants". Far easier to have your hand on the wheel than it is to bribe the person with the hand on the wheel to steer the way you want.

Puja

You could always do what the Hungarian government has done in a similar situation, but with nationalised/part-nationalised utilities and transport...

Raise utility bills by 400% (nationalised industry)
Put a government funded price cap on petrol (not a nationalised industry) and chicken (again, not nationalised)
Fight to keep wages low to make sure Hungary is the go to place for Shared Service Centres looking for slave labour that isn't Indian
Kill off sole traderships
Aggressively fight the corporation tax increases led by Biden
Cut funding to Budapest by 200%
Raise government levy on Budapest controlled public transport by 200%
Budapest therefore has no choice but to increase ticket prices...

Yay, dictatorship FTW

Puja wrote:

Stom wrote:

Puja wrote:
In theory yes, although that's got a lot more steps and a lot more places for money to leave the system, especially since utility companies' main raison d'etre is "make money" rather than "do what the government wants". Far easier to have your hand on the wheel than it is to bribe the person with the hand on the wheel to steer the way you want.

Puja

You could always do what the Hungarian government has done in a similar situation, but with nationalised/part-nationalised utilities and transport...

Raise utility bills by 400% (nationalised industry)
Put a government funded price cap on petrol (not a nationalised industry) and chicken (again, not nationalised)
Fight to keep wages low to make sure Hungary is the go to place for Shared Service Centres looking for slave labour that isn't Indian
Kill off sole traderships
Aggressively fight the corporation tax increases led by Biden
Cut funding to Budapest by 200%
Raise government levy on Budapest controlled public transport by 200%
Budapest therefore has no choice but to increase ticket prices...

Yay, dictatorship FTW

Wow. That doesn't even look like the ruthlessly getting what they want of an autocracy, but instead random flailing. What's the endgame of all that?

Puja

Which Tyler wrote:

Zhivago wrote:It doesn't work. The companies would just provision for a fine and pass the cost onto their customers.

Which has been the case for donkeys years.

The cost of the fine is less than the cost of the maintenance, and you rarely have to pay the fine anyway.
The odd fine is just baked in as the cost of doing business, and way, WAY less than the cost of doing the work.

At the same time, she set out her own view of Jewish values, saying: “So many Jewish values are Conservative values and British values too, for example seeing the importance of family and always taking steps to protect the family unit; and the value of hard work and self-starting and setting up your own business.

Puja wrote:Jesus Fuck, Liz: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ke-culture

This bit especially:

At the same time, she set out her own view of Jewish values, saying: “So many Jewish values are Conservative values and British values too, for example seeing the importance of family and always taking steps to protect the family unit; and the value of hard work and self-starting and setting up your own business.

Liz Truss worries about racism against those Jewish people who she knows just want to be left alone to start businesses and earn lots of money. Spectacular.

Puja

Puja wrote:Jesus Fuck, Liz: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ke-culture

This bit especially:

At the same time, she set out her own view of Jewish values, saying: “So many Jewish values are Conservative values and British values too, for example seeing the importance of family and always taking steps to protect the family unit; and the value of hard work and self-starting and setting up your own business.

Liz Truss worries about racism against those Jewish people who she knows just want to be left alone to start businesses and earn lots of money. Spectacular.

Puja

• Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical
allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective —
such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish
conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or
other societal institutions.