HE WANTS POLITICAL ??

[Uncle Urchin]

well I object to the 'harnessing' of personal gain....(greed is a much abused word usually aimed at hard working businessmen by resentful pinko layabouts)

 

if you want flames from the fire....put some fckin wood on it...

 

if you want money...work.....hard...24/7

 

if you dont.... shut the fck up and starve...

[American FLEET FAN No1]

Did Sadspam Hussien or Gaddaffi work for their personal wealth???.....

[Colin, Germany]

Some people work hard, but don't have the right ideas to earn lots of money. People only work hard because they want to earn lots, but it also needs spotting ideas, and turning them into commercial propositions. It also requires the right timing. So the hope of big rewards keeps far more people working hard than only those who strike it rich.

[Uncle Urchin]

thats the most fckin stupid post yet from you redneck....

 

of course they didn't work hard...

 

but we all know that they were not businessmen.....

 

they were international gangsters.....murderers and terrorists....a subtle difference methinks.....

 

errr...do try and keep up.....

[American FLEET FAN No1]

I was answering somebody who said the way to become rich was to work hard....so the point is valid......and i made the point earlier that personal GREED was the worlds problem......people who work hard for their money, can't see that is greed.......just rewards more likke it!

The majority of the work force work hard........and never end up rich.....because they are making money for shareholders who don't work at all for their riches!

[Uncle Urchin]

working hard for personal gain and greed are two different vices redneck...

 

ones healthy...one aint.... <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[American FLEET FAN No1]

How do you decide which is which ?

[CANV EFM]

if you work for it you have earnt it .. good luck to you..

if you get lucky either at work on the lottery and have a great idea good luck to you as well

if you own shares that you have worked to buy enjoy your free time and dividends

even if you inherit it off a rich mummy and daddy good luck to you, they worked hard so their kids could loaf, thats their choice..

some people are unlucky n dont get the breaks, some are happy nine to fiving for someone else..

i suppose you could say greed comes into it if you exploit people or work outside the law but business is tough and its a competitive world out there.. its a wide blurry line between right n wrong

[Big J R]

So I was right earlier on in another thread when I said our illustrious Nationals would be flown from Cuba, courtesy of the R.A.F., evade customs, go through the formality of an arrest warrant, be taken to Paddington Green Nick for a slap up three course lunch before being released.

 

A mate of mine, (a journo, no less), wanted an interview with one, but was told he was 'Unavailable !!!'

 

[color:"red"] C-O-R-S-E he was fuc*ing unavailable !! Probably being driven down the Social to sign on and claim 'back-benefits', before applying for Legal Aid, so he can take a case to the Court of Human Rights.

 

In the good 'ol days, Treason carried the Death Sentence ! [color:"black"]

 

 

 

[mikef]

No doubt their stories will be/have been sold to the tabloids.

That should boost their income.

 

Mike F

<img src="/images/graemlins/chat.gif" alt="" />

[Colin, Germany]

Then they won't need Social Security.

[mala_D]

Or be allowed to claim Legal Aid - which you can't if you have a certain income or savings!

[At least, you CAN'T if you've lived in this country all your bleeding life and have worked hard and paid into the system - know what I mean?]

 

 

Back to this privitisation thing - if I may:

 

There is a real and desperate need for developed countries to find sustainable sources of energy.

 

We have a problem, in that the development and establishment of sustainable sources of energy is considered "unprofitable" for the existing utility companies as their development requires a large initial capital expenditure.

 

The companies appear to be more concerned with giving dividends to their share-holders, instead of alloting a greater proportion of profits towards industrial development.

 

[ Short-term'ism is an attitudal problem within British economics - and has been endemic since the 1880s Depression, and has allowed GB to become eclipsed by USA and Japan in terms of industrial innovation. Something which the great economist John Maynard Keynes identified in the early to mid-20th century!! ]

 

If the utility companies are unwilling to contribute towards the development of these new energy sources, then they should be taken back [nationalised]whereupon no one individual owns them.

 

So,okay! You think the existing situation is fine?

 

Think of this likely scenario...

 

British taxpayers fund the development of these new sources of energy.

The Govt create wind farms, hydro-electric plants etc, all at massive financial expense to the taxpayer.

Once they are built, they are then handed over to a business concern [just like Concord and Brit Airways] who then makes a profit upon what you and I and everyone else has contributed to.

They then charge us for using it.

 

Behave you lot! They are treating us like mugs!

 

 

[Colin, Germany]

Short termism of shareholders is certainly a big problem, forcing managers to concentrate on short term goals. I don't know whether or how the USA has less short termism as UK.

 

Since short termism is a problem in this area, the government could subsidise such development. The government (i.e. the taxpayer) pays for a lot of research for which no commercial funding is available.

 

Once the new sources of energy are built and running at a profit they should be sold. The government has already done this successfully before. At first a small tranche of shares is sold, and anyone applying receives some, so that no-one makes huge profits on it. Then, when a proice for the shares has been established on the stock market, further tranches can be sold.

[CANV EFM]

short termism is the us of a's speciality.. we are amatuers compared to them.. if you are worried about industrial development the any form of nationalisation would make anyone wary of developing anything in this 'scared of its own shadow without the govmnt saying its ok country' in the states property and intellectual rights are sacrosanct (spelling?) try n fk with that and they will shoot you, much as they would if u tried to charge em 2 bucks for a gallon of four star.. dont blame short termism for this countrys global decline.. blame excessive and incompetent government..

if you want a new energy source let the person who invents it keep his profits.. much like when the computing world wanted a user frdly p.c. system.. Q bill gates