Keir Starmer

[Numero Veinticinco]

You boys are, once again, in for a hell of a surprise. 

[Gnasher]

 

Its not a cost/debt it's an investment. An investment that's needed as the alternative is more of what we see now.

 

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

It’s so illiterate to compare the figure it’s cost to pay for nationalisation vs the cost to reduce bills. They aren’t the same thing. You need to add the cost of purchase to the cost of cost of energy and delivering the service, minus what you charge people. Is there any wonder people don’t trust these bloggers? 

[Arniepie]

Johnson spent the last 3 years lying on a daily basis,and the media have still not fully called him out.

Starmer is not even pm and his integrity is already being questioned.

As for this red wall road to Damascus type conversion on nationalisation..if it wasn't going to affect some many people there is a temptation to tell the thick cunts they got what they voted for

 

 

[Gnasher]

4 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

It’s so illiterate to compare the figure it’s cost to pay for nationalisation vs the cost to reduce bills. They aren’t the same thing. You need to add the cost of purchase to the cost of cost of energy and delivering the service, minus what you charge people. Is there any wonder people don’t trust these bloggers? 

Er it's not "bloggers"' they are just the messenger.

 

The figures are from the TUC on the one hand and the CPS right wing think tank on the other. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

Just now, Gnasher said:

Er it's not "bloggers"' they are just the messenger.

 

The figures are from the TUC on the one hand and the CPS right wing think tank on the other. 

 

 

 

 

 

No, it’s the bloggers making the comparison. It’s right there in the tweet. Did you even read it?

[Gnasher]

26 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

No, it’s the bloggers making the comparison. It’s right there in the tweet. Did you even read it?

They just averaged the two figures which were compiled by the TUC and CPS think tank.

[Gnasher]

On the public v private ownership.. Gordon Brown, Jeremy Corbyn, Sharon Graham, Kevin Maguire, Macron, Burham, Mick Lynch etc plus 67% of the public are right.. Keir Starmer, Rachel Reeves and Liz Truss are wrong. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

6 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

They just averaged the two figures which were compiled by the TUC and CPS think tank.

No, that's not what happened. They said the averaged purchase price was 'still cheaper than Starmer's plan'. That's comparing the purchase price with the cost of lowering bills. They aren't the same things. Fucking read what people are writing. 

[Gnasher]

13 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

No, that's not what happened. They said the averaged purchase price was 'still cheaper than Starmer's plan'. That's comparing the purchase price with the cost of lowering bills. They aren't the same things. Fucking read what people are writing. 

Aww didums you getting all upset again.

 

The average between the two figures is indeed lower than Starmers plan. They are factually correct. You were playing another edition of your bizarre  'blame the messenger' game and once again you failed spectacularly.

[Gnasher]

 

 

 

[Section_31]

Andrew Pearce is such a boring cunt. I can't stand all this punch and judy banter news shows seem to depend on now, loads of double acts doing the rounds. 

[Gnasher]

Our leader on Radio 4. Kempners right, we are paying shareholders anyway and will no doubt have to keep paying them until we're brave enough to cut the cord.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

1 hour ago, Gnasher said:

Aww didums you getting all upset again.

 

The average between the two figures is indeed lower than Starmers plan. They are factually correct. You were playing another edition of your bizarre  'blame the messenger' game and once again you failed spectacularly.

So stupid. You can't even understand basic English. I'm not upset, I'm laughing at you. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

More bad news. 

[Gnasher]

32 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

So stupid. You can't even understand basic English. I'm not upset, I'm laughing at you. 

Oh I can understand you although I'd rather I couldn't. You were moaning about a journalist asking run of the mill questions on Sky earlier, fuvking oddball.

[Numero Veinticinco]

6 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Oh I can understand you although I'd rather I couldn't. You were moaning about a journalist asking run of the mill questions on Sky earlier, fuvking oddball.

I don't care they asked questioned, I just thought it was stupid. You don't understand it, I wish you did because I'm saying that the issue I have isn't that they did some magical averaging, it's that they compared the purchase price - any purchase price - with the cost of covering Starmer's plan. If you don't understand that, and keep referring to some averaging by the bloggers, then that's up to you. It makes you look even more of a daft cunt than normal. 

[Jack the Sipper]

18 hours ago, Gnasher said:

God you're an insufferable cunt.

 

I'm just as God made me, sir.

 

[Rico1304]

9 hours ago, Skidfingers McGonical said:

Aye! 10/10 for lack of concentration on my part. 
 

Would it really cost more than £60 billion? Genuine question here by the way. 

 

My understanding is that you would be nationalising supply, infrastructure etc. 

it’d cost a whole lot more. There’d also be the cost of repaying finance deals back early which would cost a fucking fortune 

 

Here’s a decent explainer and why it’s a bad time to do it from a green perspective. Although it doesn’t touch on redundancies. 
 

 

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

1 hour ago, Rico1304 said:

it’d cost a whole lot more. There’d also be the cost of repaying finance deals back early which would cost a fucking fortune 

 

Here’s a decent explainer and why it’s a bad time to do it from a green perspective. Although it doesn’t touch on redundancies. 
 

 

 

But Gnasher on TLW says we can just get it for nothing and that solves everything. 

[dockers_strike]

37 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

But Gnasher on TLW says we can just get it for nothing and that solves everything. 

Technically, I dont think there's anything to stop a Government nationalising an industry and not paying any compo. That's usually only done in times of national security such as in times of war.

 

In peace time, it's highly unlikely to happen because of lawsuits and, despite what some may think, it isnt only rich people who may hold shares in a company. People's pension funds may have invested in said company, not to mention annuties and stocks and shares ISAs.

 

Nationalising an industry may enable a Government to keep some prices lower than market but also means any future investment is dependent on Government finding that money.

 

As far as energy sector is concerned, private money isnt going to build new wind farms, new power stations, explore and drill for new gas fields etc if it's going to get back a fraction of its cost selling the resultant energy. at a loss to the grid etc.

 

As an old example, British Railways was nationalised back in the late 40s. It didnt have money to upgrade from steam for the best part of 20 years. When it did, the diesel electric locos it bought were pretty unreliable due to a lack of investment etc.

 

Nationalisation might solve one problem in the short term but creates others.

[Rico1304]

6 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

Technically, I dont think there's anything to stop a Government nationalising an industry and not paying any compo. That's usually only done in times of national security such as in times of war.

 

In peace time, it's highly unlikely to happen because of lawsuits and, despite what some may think, it isnt only rich people who may hold shares in a company. People's pension funds may have invested in said company, not to mention annuties and stocks and shares ISAs.

 

Nationalising an industry may enable a Government to keep some prices lower than market but also means any future investment is dependent on Government finding that money.

 

As far as energy sector is concerned, private money isnt going to build new wind farms, new power stations, explore and drill for new gas fields etc if it's going to get back a fraction of its cost selling the resultant energy. at a loss to the grid etc.

 

As an old example, British Railways was nationalised back in the late 40s. It didnt have money to upgrade from steam for the best part of 20 years. When it did, the diesel electric locos it bought were pretty unreliable due to a lack of investment etc.

 

Nationalisation might solve one problem in the short term but creates others.

Apart from a whole raft of trade agreements and removing the possibility of attracting any finance from anyone ever again. 
 

Edit:  Ha ha ha I’ve just realised what’s happened - you’ve half read that Allen & Overy (or is it Clifford Chance? - it’s one of them) opinion on privatisation from before the election and tried to present it as your own.  HA H AHA HA HA HA HA HA brilliant.  

[Strontium]

38 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Edit:  Ha ha ha I’ve just realised what’s happened - you’ve half read that Allen & Overy (or is it Clifford Chance? - it’s one of them) opinion on privatisation from before the election and tried to present it as your own.  HA H AHA HA HA HA HA HA brilliant.  

 

[Captain Howdy]

I know nothing of the industry other than the fucking horrific and believe me I do mean fucking horrific (possibly criminal) “service” I’ve had from BG in the past 12 months or so which has led me to believe that Nationalising is the only way out of this mess. Whatever the answer is it most definitely isn’t being left at the mercy of these fucking grifters.

[johnsusername]

32 minutes ago, Captain Howdy said:

I know nothing of the industry other than the fucking horrific and believe me I do mean fucking horrific (possibly criminal) “service” I’ve had from BG in the past 12 months or so which has led me to believe that Nationalising is the only way out of this mess. Whatever the answer is it most definitely isn’t being left at the mercy of these fucking grifters.

No no, we should keep handing over wheelbarrows full of cash for now and forever, the shareholders need their profits. That's what I'm reading anyway.