Forum menu
I heard on the radio today that a reason for Thatcher not privatising Royal Mail was that it might upset the royal family!? But also the historical and technological context has moved on quite a bit since then...
Anyway, yes, renationalisation is 'free' at the point of acquisition (through economic sleight of hand), but from then on there is the small matter of its ongoing and perpetual operational cost and burden of risk and management. None of that is free, and it's not like the government of the day is naturally equipped to run the industries in contention for silver bullet renationalisation. Public opinion might favour renationalisation, but is that just for the act of taking ownership itself and the brief relief and belief it provides, or for the full deal of taking on all the risk, operational cost, difficulties and complexities? I think the latter is less likely.
Oh, and i'm not a fan of privatisation at all, and it has been a mixed bag of disaster. But I am a pragmatist, and right now it's about making the best of the hospital pass of a country we find ourselves in. Of the available solutions to many failing industries, I don't think it's the best solution on the table when looked at in the stark light of our present context and situation.
Why does anybody care about the fact many previously state owned companies are now privatised – except of course for hard left wingers who think the means of production should be owned by the state?
Well I guess you can pretend that it is only "hard left wingers" who want to renationalise the utilities but the claim is totally false, it has the support of even the majority of Tory voters, which unless you are a Trump supporter are not classed as hard left.
Large majorities of Britons now want to see water, energy, railway and bus companies nationalised
I heard on the radio today that a reason for Thatcher not privatising Royal Mail was that it might upset the royal family!?
I love it! Who dreams up stuff like that ?
Deal with the substantive point of this thread. Why should anyone “giveashit” that The Royal Mail is being sold by is current private owner to a new foreign private owner? That is what seemed to upset the OP.
It’s not “vital” in any sense, it’s already privatised - the only thing that’s changed is it’s going to a foreigner.
As I originally said, of all the things wrong with the world, or in this country, this is right at the bottom of the heap.
Nothing I have heard in the discussion makes this register higher on my “giveashitometer” - in fact I care even less.
Rm was doing ok when it was both a parcel service and mail delivery. Following privatisation the parcel service which was profitable was spun out, and the PO's chiefs were back to government cap in hand to ask for subsidy which had previously been provided by the parcel side of the business, which was now delivering handsomely for share holders. Darren Jones MP as chair of the business select committee last year, iirc, was pretty excoriating on it.
As to government's ability to run business successfully I give you the east coast line. Twice taken back under governmental control and twice returned to profitability and reasonably high levels of customer satisfaction, only to be thrown out to contract again. ?
Nothing I have heard in the discussion makes this register higher on my “giveashitometer” – in fact I care even less.
With every new post of yours I can see that it is a complete non issue which you don't give a shit about and have no interest at all in.
However according to a recent poll 75% of voters believe that RM should be renationalised and 15% believe that it shouldn't be. Even with a large margin of error that is a very significant majority.
The poll doesn't reveal how give a shit though. Perhaps they didn't ask them the question?
'What 'Upsets the OP' is the sheer amount of assets sold off to foreign investors (including state owned or partly state-owned ones). I may be wrong, but I just can't see other countries allowing it. Let's face it, if these companies weren't attractive, they wouldn't find a buyer, would they? We are constantly told how important and successful 'Our' financial sector is, how about they invest some of their vast profits in British Industry? I'm looking at you Jim Ratcliffe, you James Dyson and you John Bloor. As to private companies being more efficient than state owned ones, given a level playing field and with good salaries paid to good people, I don't see why that should be the case. A previous poster said that I should get off my arse and do something about it. Maybe if I wasn't nearly 70, I might (although I don't know what except by entering politics).
I may be wrong, but I just can’t see other countries allowing it.
The UK company selling Royal Mail is keeping similar “assets” in Canada & Austria. So there’s two to start with.
I share your sentiment in general though, I felt the same when ARM was allowed to be sold to buyers outside the UK. I feel the same about monopoly operators like the water companies as well. But Royal Mail isn’t what it was, the Post Office counters work for any delivery company that will give them a slice, letter numbers are dwindling, the landscape is completely different now, and even if RM was kept in UK ownership (or nationalised) it won’t survive without complete reregulation of the delivery and collection marketplace, which I don’t think the public would accept.