Lloyd90 Posted March 30 Report Share Posted March 30 1 hour ago, Yellow Bear said: Says the man with a large, index linked, Tax payer funded pension. Good for him. Many people avoid working in the public sector as the pays better in the private sector. A good civil service pension is the reward for years of work in awful institutions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red696 Posted March 30 Report Share Posted March 30 4 hours ago, Newbie to this said: The tax payer not funding a private company. Either another buyer can come in, buys the company at a much reduced price and put the money in required by their contract. Or it comes back into public ownership, without the Tax payer, paying Thames water for their failures. tax funding private companies, do you mean like the Railways, Nuclear power etc.etc. what money “required by the contract”? Whichever way you slice this the customer has to pay in the end, the price we have been charged has been to low since privatisation and it just wont allow the level of infrastructure investment required. Investors just loan money, they expect a return. It’ just like when someone takes a car loan, the bank wants the money back with interest, if they think it is not a safe investment they won’t loan you the money and the car stays on the forecourt… I’d also like to think that Public ownership means the shareholders get nothing, but thats not what will happen. The damage to the Pension funds would be massive, then the pension shortfall has to be covered and that’ll be us tax payers.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man Posted March 30 Report Share Posted March 30 2 hours ago, Red696 said: tax funding private companies, do you mean like the Railways, Nuclear power etc.etc. what money “required by the contract”? Whichever way you slice this the customer has to pay in the end, the price we have been charged has been to low since privatisation and it just wont allow the level of infrastructure investment required. Investors just loan money, they expect a return. It’ just like when someone takes a car loan, the bank wants the money back with interest, if they think it is not a safe investment they won’t loan you the money and the car stays on the forecourt… I’d also like to think that Public ownership means the shareholders get nothing, but thats not what will happen. The damage to the Pension funds would be massive, then the pension shortfall has to be covered and that’ll be us tax payers.. We should strive for a reasonable balance maybe, but not here. Boom and Bust! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newbie to this Posted March 30 Report Share Posted March 30 (edited) 2 hours ago, Red696 said: tax funding private companies, do you mean like the Railways, Nuclear power etc.etc. No I mean like the failing Thames water, an company that has a contract, a contract that it seems, allows them to fail and the tax payer to bail them out. 2 hours ago, Red696 said: what money “required by the contract”? Whatever is in their contract for them to supply, I'm assuming infrastructure maintenance and improvement, is part of this contract. That cost money. 2 hours ago, Red696 said: Whichever way you slice this the customer has to pay in the end Possibly, but it seems the Tax payer will be paying first, and won't see the money back. 2 hours ago, Red696 said: the price we have been charged has been to low since privatisation and it just wont allow the level of infrastructure investment required Surely this was known when they took on the contract..................... 2 hours ago, Red696 said: Investors just loan money, they expect a return. It’ just like when someone takes a car loan, the bank wants the money back with interest, if they think it is not a safe investment they won’t loan you the money and the car stays on the forecourt… Absolutely, but investments are not a sure bet, they come with risk. The company has a contract, and the investors are not really investors, they are shareholders, and as such, responsible for the company and it's contracts. So your analogy doesn't really work. They have been awarded a contract and are not fulfilling it. They are not the aggrieved party. 2 hours ago, Red696 said: I’d also like to think that Public ownership means the shareholders get nothing, but thats not what will happen. The damage to the Pension funds would be massive, then the pension shortfall has to be covered and that’ll be us tax payers.. I assume you are talking about the staff's pensions. Again should not be the tax payer's responsibility. Thames water and their owner companies, should be on the hook. If they money is not there and has been embezzled, then criminal proceedings should be brought. Edited March 30 by Newbie to this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oowee Posted March 30 Report Share Posted March 30 2 hours ago, Lloyd90 said: Good for him. Many people avoid working in the public sector as the pays better in the private sector. A good civil service pension is the reward for years of work in awful institutions. 👍 Disappointed that a life time of service was not followed up with an OBE 😞 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red696 Posted March 30 Report Share Posted March 30 43 minutes ago, Newbie to this said: No I mean like the failing Thames water, an company that has a contract, a contract that it seems, allows them to fail and the tax payer to bail them out. Whatever is in their contract for them to supply, I'm assuming infrastructure maintenance and improvement, is part of this contract. That cost money. Possibly, but it seems the Tax payer will be paying first, and won't see the money back. Surely this was known when they took on the contract..................... Absolutely, but investments are not a sure bet, they come with risk. The company has a contract, and the investors are not really investors, they are shareholders, and as such, responsible for the company and it's contracts. So your analogy doesn't really work. They have been awarded a contract and are not fulfilling it. They are not the aggrieved party. I assume you are talking about the staff's pensions. Again should not be the tax payer's responsibility. Thames water and their owner companies, should be on the hook. If they money is not there and has been embezzled, then criminal proceedings should be brought. “Contract” what contract and with who? And for clarity the other industries I mentioned do take Tax payers money, do you have the same objections? They have regulatory commitments to deliver potable water, remove and treat waste water rather than a contract with their customers. The price charged is set by OFWAT across a 5 year AMP (asset management program ), the water companies put forward a program of work, and the costs involved at each price review, OFWAT then decide what can be done, what can be spent and what can be charged to the customer. The water companies then search out the funding based on what they will charging over the next 5 years, they need the funding as the work has to be done in advance of the customers money coming in just like any other business selling a product or service. It appears you don’t understand shareholding is investing, dependant on how the investment is set up the investor may still be entitled to a dividend even if the business makes a loss ( now there is a contract there ) “Staff pensions”, no. Pension funds invest in Water companies as do state funds, if the business falls into bankrupcy then their investment is lost and working peoples pensions suffer. ALL water companies are broken, under charging has led to decades of ‘fix on fail’ instead of investing in new infrastructure. Population increase, climate change, changes to building practices, and other environmental challenges have all impacted on the industry and still no one wants to pay the required rate…. The companies are far from perfect, and by a long way, but they are also being held back from doing some things they want to do to improve the situation. As an aside, Thames waters main problem comes from the Australian equity fund that asset stripped them to the tune of £14billion. What we need is public ownership by region but without the return to 70’s style public ownership, run it like a business with the customers at the heart of what it does. If you ever get the opportunity to talk to an employee of Thames, I sure they will fill you in on how much good work does get done by dedicated shopfloor workers… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellow Bear Posted March 30 Report Share Posted March 30 28 minutes ago, Red696 said: As an aside, Thames waters main problem comes from the Australian equity fund that asset stripped them to the tune of £14billion Sold to them in 2006 with the approval of the government of the day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red696 Posted March 30 Report Share Posted March 30 1 hour ago, Yellow Bear said: Sold to them in 2006 with the approval of the government of the day. Yep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amateur Posted March 30 Report Share Posted March 30 2 hours ago, Yellow Bear said: Sold to them in 2006 with the approval of the government of the day. Labour, yet again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red696 Posted March 30 Report Share Posted March 30 8 minutes ago, amateur said: Labour, yet again. Labour gave approval, do you think the Tories would have refused? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldypigeonpopper Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 Hello, i see the Oxford Boat race team put their poor performance to E Coli Symptoms before the race, Cambridge were ok but maybe because they row on a different river or ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchman Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 5 hours ago, oldypigeonpopper said: Hello, i see the Oxford Boat race team put their poor performance to E Coli Symptoms before the race, Cambridge were ok but maybe because they row on a different river or ?? what a wonderful day out....rowing in excrement Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 1 minute ago, ditchman said: what a wonderful day out....rowing in excrement It's all down to the degree of dilution.................. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigbob Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 Its got to be getting recycled back into the drinking water YUCK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 12 hours ago, Bigbob said: Its got to be getting recycled back into the drinking water YUCK Yep, we all have to suck it up? Just adds flavour? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoli 12 guage Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 13 hours ago, Bigbob said: Its got to be getting recycled back into the drinking water YUCK don't know whether i dreamt it or not,but I believe that someone has drunk London tap water 7 times before you get it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldypigeonpopper Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 Hello, And still TWA want to build a new reservoir in the Vale and source the water from the Thames Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
udderlyoffroad Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 14 hours ago, Bigbob said: Its got to be getting recycled back into the drinking water YUCK Who wants to tell him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratlegs Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 On talk TV last night, one water company said the public have no right to swim in the sea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldypigeonpopper Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 12 minutes ago, Ratlegs said: On talk TV last night, one water company said the public have no right to swim in the sea Hello, Much like a few years back a TWA spokesperson said it does not pay to fix every water leak!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penelope Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 56 minutes ago, Zoli 12 guage said: don't know whether i dreamt it or not,but I believe that someone has drunk London tap water 7 times before you get it. This is true. One of the things they tell you at Sparsholt College on the fisheries HND/Degree course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McSpredder Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 1 hour ago, Zoli 12 guage said: don't know whether i dreamt it or not,but I believe that someone has drunk London tap water 7 times before you get it. We were told the same thing in student days, amost 60 years ago. Human population of the Thames catchment area must have increased a lot since then, so maybe today's London water has been drunk even more than seven times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red696 Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 1 hour ago, McSpredder said: We were told the same thing in student days, amost 60 years ago. Human population of the Thames catchment area must have increased a lot since then, so maybe today's London water has been drunk even more than seven times. Science claims the water we have now is the same water we have always had, if that is the case then the number of times it has been ‘recycled’ is well beyond comprehension…. A glass of dinosaur **** anyone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armsid Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 What will happen if Thames Water goes bust? Your thoughts please Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesj Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 the tax payers will bail it out! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.