Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The worst thing about this is that the Labour Party are saying the same thing.
Anyone who things the private sector is efficient has probably never worked in it. I've worked for a large supermarket and the wastage is staggering. All large organisations are inefficient, regardless of public/private ownership. Obviously complete state control of the industry strangles the economy but that's not what's being suggested here.

Yeah, but Joey, the cost of waste in a private company falls on its shareholders and customers, who are free to take their money and business elsewhere. Public sector waste comes directly out of all of our pockets, and out of the coffers of other public services. That's the rub. Like I say, it's competition that is the issue, not privatisation. I don't mind public options as long as there are other credible options to choose from. It's choice I want - I don't really care who provides it. I think that's true of most Tories - this idea that we're all Randian fanatics that want to privatise everything is a leftist myth that really needs to die.

Joey wrote:The worst thing about this is that the Labour Party are saying the same thing.

Have you been away for the last 15 years?

Perhaps if there was more genuine choice the national monopolies or public services that were privatised privatisation would be a better thing. Quality an accountability are so much easier to reduce than waste.

Albatross wrote:Yeah, but Joey, the cost of waste in a private company falls on its shareholders and customers, who are free to take their money and business elsewhere. Public sector waste comes directly out of all of our pockets, and out of the coffers of other public services. That's the rub. Like I say, it's competition that is the issue, not privatisation. I don't mind public options as long as there are other credible options to choose from. It's choice I want - I don't really care who provides it. I think that's true of most Tories - this idea that we're all Randian fanatics that want to privatise everything is a leftist myth that really needs to die.

I just want a road that works. I do NOT want the maintainance on that road to be compromised by the choices of others.
I also don't want the economy to be choked by a monopoly on a nessesary resource - access to road infrastructure.

I can't tell whether you're in favour of these proposals or against them, based on that statement.

In regards to where the press stories are found, is it still true of the papers there, that they pander to their readers prejudices and that the break down is as follows.

The Daily Mirror is read by people who Think they run the country.
The Guardian is read by people who think They ought to run the country.
The Times is read by people who actually Do run the country.
The Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people that run the country.
The Financial Times is read by the people that Own the country.
The Morning Star is read by people who think that the country should be run by another country.
The Daily Telegraph is read by people that think it is run by another country.
What about people who read The Sun? The people who read The Sun don't care about who runs the country as long as she has big bosoms.

[excerpt from an episode of "Yes Minister" ]

Cameron would definitely be more popular if he had massive tits. With me, at least.