George Osborne's Autumn Statement

[WatcherZero]

As a interesting aside, it wasn't manufacturing that made GE rich, it was the banking and financing arm which offered the financing to consumers for higher purchase, founded in only 1988 it makes up more than 5/6ths of GE Groups assets and more than 3/5ths of its annual profits.

 

[The Ham]

Meanwhile back to the AS and the £15bn to be spent creating more traffic jams.

Maybe more or maybe fewer, but certainly different traffic jams.

 

[Oswyntail]

I'd say that the confrontational attitude that has been present in British industry was a major factor in the collapse of much of it from the 1970s onwards - and it takes two to have a confrontation. .....

Following the 1964 election, the TUC generally, and some unions in particular, took the view that the government was "theirs", and that union interests should be the first priority. This was the chief domestic theme over the next 15 years, as the unions pushed for more and more, and government and management weakly made concessions. One of the elections in that period even had "do the unions run the country?" as a main theme. There was confrontation, but it was more akin to a football crowd making a mess of a town centre (another feature of the period) than a confrontation between two intransigent parties.
Funnily enough, some union leaders took the same "we are in power" line in 1997, but were told to behave.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Yes it does take two for a confrontation and in my industry it was always the management picking a fight. Germany by contrast has been successful because there is a con census between managers and workers. Germany has also benefited from not having 30 years ago a govt that effectively declared war on its own working people destroying large areas of manufacturing in the process
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I couldn't care less to be honest. Whatever makes you happy.

So in that case why did you suggest in several different posts that I wasn't suitable to be a member of the Labour Party?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Just a quick note about Rolls Royce, how "no one could afford to buy them" ....

Rolls Royce currently has a share price of 868.75 pence a share with a market capitalisation of just over £16.35 billion. By comparison, General Electric has a share price of $26.385 (about £16.80/share) and a market cap of $271 billion (about £172 billion). Depite GE being more diversified, both companies to operate in the same sectors and make comparable goods. With the profits General Electric make, and their strong cash flow, the could swallow RR and barely hiccup. However, for this to happen, they would need to make an acceptable offer to the board, and hope the shareholders (which could include both you and I) vote in favour, and that the government don't veto the takeover.

That's a fair point. Given the sensitive nature of the work that Rolls Royce carry out for the MOD in my opinion the Government would never allow the sale of Rolls Royce to an overseas company.

 

[muddythefish]

So in that case why did you suggest in several different posts that I wasn't suitable to be a member of the Labour Party?
[.

I didn't say you weren't suitable (why do make things up?). I said your views weren't consistent with you being a Labour Party member, as you claim. This must be fairly easy to understand.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Industry was and continues to be crippled by poor management. Look at any failing enterprise, whether it is a government, company or football club, and failure always stem from the top.

I must say, your claims to be a Labour supporter are dubious to say the least.

Meanwhile back to Gideon and his populist mini-Budget aimed at the next election that totally ignores rail.

This would suggest that you don't believe that I'm telling the truth, in other words that I'm telling a lie.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I didn't say you weren't suitable (why do make things up?). I said your views weren't consistent with you being a Labour Party member, as you claim. This must be fairly easy to understand.

On what basis do you suggest that? My views are no different to many other members of the Labour Party, as has been reflected in your thread.

 

[Haydn1971]

I'm confused, when did it become a requirement of party support to sign up to every policy that party stands for ? I'd suggest that very few people support everything their "favourite" party peddles out.

I'm a paid up member of the Labour Party as their ideals on the vulnerable people in society most match my views, I currently work in the private sector, I've ran my own businesses over the last 20 years, I think there is a place in the public sector for the private sector to fill - does that make me a true blue Tory ? I support staying in the Eurozone, does that make me a Liberal, I like beer, but I'd not consider supporting UKIP, I've a bias towards environmentalism, but wouldn't vote Green.

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

Green is not just about environmentalism. They have alot of socialist values. If anyone cared to read their policies many would be supportive. In other EU countries they are very popular. Labour want to stay in EU just like Lib Dems.

 

[AM9]

Green is not just about environmentalism. They have alot of socialist values. If anyone cared to read their policies many would be supportive. In other EU countries they are very popular. Labour want to stay in EU just like Lib Dems.

So do many of the long-serving experienced Tories.

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

So do many of the long-serving experienced Tories.

Yes but Cameron keeps trying to cause disagreements with the EU parliament. The Tory whips will force MPs to vote for whatever the leadership wants. I think Cameron's recent 'we need a better dea or I'll leavel' nonsense is to get UKIP votes back, which he's scared of losing.

 

[Haydn1971]

Rolls eyes... Missed the point entirely :-/

 

[bussnapperwm]

I'm all for devolution for all the regions, the problem is no one wants more politicians.

But officially, the official officials who are officially elected are not officially in power because officially the officials at the civil service officially run the departments and officially official the elected officials.

(as sir humphery would say!)

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

But officially, the official officials who are officially elected are not officially in power because officially the officials at the civil service officially run the departments and officially official the elected officials.

(as sir humphery would say!)

I know the cival service are the ones running the country but MPs are the ones bossing them around in reality. It's easy to get support from MPs for faster London routes, but why would Northern MPs vote for a new Okehampton line? Why would Southern MPs vote for a new Ashington line? Both are needed but only more local MPs care.