Well the private sector is equally just as good as burning the tax-payers money and being wasteful and inefficient (increasing rail subsidies, the banks bailout).
Granted, these things happened after Thatcher, but it is her quasi-religious belief that the private sector must do everything; not because it is better suited to do so, but that it simply MUST. This belief has been followed pretty much religiously by Major, Blair and Brown
When I worked in Local Government, in the early to mid 90's the Tories bunged their Compulsory Competitive Tendering (CCT) initiative into Council Services. What this meant was that private firms could bid to run the said service, introduce competition and therefore drive price down of the service (to the tax payer - yeah, right!)
Anyway, Dudley LG spent a bloody fortune on proving that the current staff were best placed for the initiative and ultimately won. There were a few other boroughs who didn't though, and those private companies that won were largely, well, ****, and by the time I left LG forever in 2000 they'd been booted out.
So that belief these MP's have that you mention works when it works. Private companies taking over public services isn't the be-and-end-all and I take it with a fine pinch of salt anyone who says otherwise.
Could be an idea for my next CGC entry. Milk Maggie's Mazoomas!
Here is some help.
Centre right to move left and Ctrl right to move Beanz further right... it could be a nice Game and Watch (your back) style game where the aim is to gulp down the droplets of Maggie's milky 'bitty' in order to grow up with self-responsibility and drink in the future of the new self-serving world. Any drops Beanz misses either get stolen by his hungry brother (a good thing, so you score points) or fall into Denis Thatcher's 'clear water' making him redden with anger.
When Denis goes beet red, Maggie kills you with a glare.
So that belief these MP's have that you mention works when it works. Private companies taking over public services isn't the be-and-end-all and I take it with a fine pinch of salt anyone who says otherwise.
That's because it's not a proper marketplace and there's not proper competition. What's actually happening is that a private company is being paid public money to run a public service as a monopoly and the public have very little say over whether they continue being the service provider or not. The idea that privatisation of public monopolies has anything to do with "the market" and its associated supposed efficiency is just politician's claptrap. It's largely about putting public money into commercial pockets.
I think you've got to look back a bit further as to why industries were nationalized in the first place. They were generally all loss making in the private sector, and kept going by government subsidies and purchases. Bringing them under government control was simply a means of rationalizing them, making sure that the public money propping them up was going to good uses, and preserving capabilities that were vital to the nation at the time.
This brings us to an old truism which is that a massive amount of the money going to the private sector is government money. Not just from subsidies but from privatised monopolies doing government work, government purchase of commercial goods and, arguably, wages from public sector jobs and benefits being used to buy commercial goods and services.
One of the most interesting examples of this is the military. Governments often pump huge amounts of money into their militaries and the equipment is often produced by privately-owned arms manufacturers. If the government is especially rich then the arms manufacturers (in fact anyone supplying the armed forces) can charge well over the usual mark-up since a purchase is almost guaranteed meaning they can become extremely wealthy (I think a small example of this was in the news recently involving a fillament lightbulb that cost ?20 or something - imagine what the mark-up is on a main battle tank). Unfortunately, their wealth and their workforces become completely reliant on the government continuing to pump more and more money into its defence budget.
I may be celabrating too when our own Thatcher kicks the bucket one day.
I too if our Iron maiden (Maria Fekter) bites the dust:
Okay, not the only austrian woman that I prefer to see dead, there are more...
Claudia Bandion Ortner
Barbara Rosenkranz
Hermine Reisinger
Mikl Leitner
Susanne Winter
Our country is full of female Daemons and witches.
In all seriousness I don't think the death of any other former Prime Minister of the UK is likely to be greeted with such loathing and jubilation as that of Margaret Thatcher. Divisive really isn't the word, Blair and Cameron are divisive and there won't be anything like this when they pop their clogs. Part of her philosophy whilst in office was that she was effectively at "war" with a large part of the country (the traditional, unionised working class) and so people in many places (Scotland and the North of England especially) are treating this as the final fall of a declared enemy.
At least our Prime Minister never appeared like this... *** NSFW ***
What's so scandalous about it? Nudism - or Frei K?rper Kultur as they call it - has been a widespread and socially accepted custom in Germany since the beginning of the 20th century.
What's so scandalous about it? Nudism - or Frei K?rper Kultur as they call it - has been a widespread and socially accepted custom in Germany since the beginning of the 20th century.
You forget, we're British, we quite straitlaced and prudish.
She could have tidied the 'lady-garden' up as well...
Comments
Could be an idea for my next CGC entry. Milk Maggie's Mazoomas!
When I worked in Local Government, in the early to mid 90's the Tories bunged their Compulsory Competitive Tendering (CCT) initiative into Council Services. What this meant was that private firms could bid to run the said service, introduce competition and therefore drive price down of the service (to the tax payer - yeah, right!)
Anyway, Dudley LG spent a bloody fortune on proving that the current staff were best placed for the initiative and ultimately won. There were a few other boroughs who didn't though, and those private companies that won were largely, well, ****, and by the time I left LG forever in 2000 they'd been booted out.
So that belief these MP's have that you mention works when it works. Private companies taking over public services isn't the be-and-end-all and I take it with a fine pinch of salt anyone who says otherwise.
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/margaret-thatcher-dies--media-blunders-tv-station-mistakes-095924463.html#nRBC9D4
- IONIAN-GAMES.com -
where Cher fans read that Cher's dead!
:D:D:D:D
we are looking forward to it.
Here is some help.
Centre right to move left and Ctrl right to move Beanz further right... it could be a nice Game and Watch (your back) style game where the aim is to gulp down the droplets of Maggie's milky 'bitty' in order to grow up with self-responsibility and drink in the future of the new self-serving world. Any drops Beanz misses either get stolen by his hungry brother (a good thing, so you score points) or fall into Denis Thatcher's 'clear water' making him redden with anger.
When Denis goes beet red, Maggie kills you with a glare.
That's because it's not a proper marketplace and there's not proper competition. What's actually happening is that a private company is being paid public money to run a public service as a monopoly and the public have very little say over whether they continue being the service provider or not. The idea that privatisation of public monopolies has anything to do with "the market" and its associated supposed efficiency is just politician's claptrap. It's largely about putting public money into commercial pockets.
*closes eyes, pretends he saw nothing and quickly backs away again*
Surely this would be beset value for the tax payer?
This brings us to an old truism which is that a massive amount of the money going to the private sector is government money. Not just from subsidies but from privatised monopolies doing government work, government purchase of commercial goods and, arguably, wages from public sector jobs and benefits being used to buy commercial goods and services.
One of the most interesting examples of this is the military. Governments often pump huge amounts of money into their militaries and the equipment is often produced by privately-owned arms manufacturers. If the government is especially rich then the arms manufacturers (in fact anyone supplying the armed forces) can charge well over the usual mark-up since a purchase is almost guaranteed meaning they can become extremely wealthy (I think a small example of this was in the news recently involving a fillament lightbulb that cost ?20 or something - imagine what the mark-up is on a main battle tank). Unfortunately, their wealth and their workforces become completely reliant on the government continuing to pump more and more money into its defence budget.
Iron lady dies:
a tombstone with the text : "Rust in peace"
It had to be translated to Dutch first!
yes..
Okay, not the only austrian woman that I prefer to see dead, there are more...
Claudia Bandion Ortner
Barbara Rosenkranz
Hermine Reisinger
Mikl Leitner
Susanne Winter
Our country is full of female Daemons and witches.
In all seriousness I don't think the death of any other former Prime Minister of the UK is likely to be greeted with such loathing and jubilation as that of Margaret Thatcher. Divisive really isn't the word, Blair and Cameron are divisive and there won't be anything like this when they pop their clogs. Part of her philosophy whilst in office was that she was effectively at "war" with a large part of the country (the traditional, unionised working class) and so people in many places (Scotland and the North of England especially) are treating this as the final fall of a declared enemy.
She could have tidied the 'lady-garden' up as well...