O/F'ing/T Carillion

[gm_gm]

They can't be bailed out by the taxpayer , the same as Virgin rail shouldn't be because that's Socialism .

Now according to the Tory government this is something they oppose strongly because it's bad for you the consumer .

Capitalism exists so that the wheat is removed from the chaff , poor businesses are eradicated and the good one's provide great products or services that are profitable , the market is the judge and jury .

No Virgin Rail and Carillion are poor companies who are hemorrhaging money and bad for you the consumer so their problems are not the tax payers problems in a capitalist state .

I have yet to hear Richard Branson offer free rail tickets to the taxpayer during profitable times and neither have Carillion offered to build affordable housing FOC .

So don't dump your failed capitalist model on me and millions of UK taxpayers , sort your own mess out .

Wrong.

It’s a policy decision as opposed to a political ideology, interventionism or non interventionism is an economic ideological construct, points scoring by politicians with buzzwords and sound bites only appeal to the uneducated.

[ragingpup]

Wrong.

It’s a policy decision as opposed to a political ideology, interventionism or non interventionism is an economic ideological construct, points scoring by politicians with buzzwords and sound bites only appeal to the uneducated.

Isn't unregulated capitalism, survival of the fittest via market forces, a political ideology? How is it not?

[gm_gm]

Isn't unregulated capitalism, survival of the fittest via market forces, a political ideology? How is it not?

There’s also non such thing as “unregulated capitalism” is a silly slogan invented to impress the uneducated....see above

[millmoormagic]

Wrong.

It’s a policy decision as opposed to a political ideology, interventionism or non interventionism is an economic ideological construct, points scoring by politicians with buzzwords and sound bites only appeal to the uneducated.

To be fair i don't know how anyone could say this isn't political, when half the tory cabinet has shares in Carillion, the chairman/ceo are contributors to the tory party, and the chairman is an advisor to the gov't.....time this corruption was stamped on.

This may seem radical to some, but why not put a ban on any MP having a vote on anything they have a vested interest in? instead of actually thinking they would do the honourable thing anyway...because clearly they don't do anything honourable in the slightest.

[gm_gm]

To be fair i don't know how anyone could say this isn't political, when half the tory cabinet has shares in Carillion, the chairman/ceo are contributors to the tory party, and the chairman is an advisor to the gov't.....time this corruption was stamped on.

This may seem radical to some, but why not put a ban on any MP having a vote on anything they have a vested interest in? instead of actually thinking they would do the honourable thing anyway...because clearly they don't do anything honourable in the slightest.

Thats a different question! and its a fair one. There needs to be an investigation into why the directors continued to trade on this basis and why after several profit warnings contracts were still handed out.

Anyone involved in contract negotiations and who has shares in the company has a conflict of interest which I believe should be declared. I'd be amazed if any MP with shares had be directly involved in contract talks, if they have then I think they could be in trouble

[millmoormagic]

Thats a different question! and its a fair one. There needs to be an investigation into why the directors continued to trade on this basis and why after several profit warnings contracts were still handed out.

Anyone involved in contract negotiations and who has shares in the company has a conflict of interest which I believe should be declared. I'd be amazed if any MP with shares had be directly involved in contract talks, if they have then I think they could be in trouble

Yeh i suppose it is different, the commons is rife with it though, across party's also (though you will forgive me for saying that it's predominantly a tory thing ) there's many MP's who vote on many different subjects when they have a specific interest in it, and it's time we had some rules to prevent this, it's 2018 for crying out loud.

[gm_gm]

Yeh i suppose it is different, the commons is rife with it though, across party's also (though you will forgive me for saying that it's predominantly a tory thing ) there's many MP's who vote on many different subjects when they have a specific interest in it, and it's time we had some rules to prevent this, it's 2018 for crying out loud.

There has been for a while

https://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-...ial-interests/

[millmoormagic]

There has been for a while

https://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-...ial-interests/

Yeh, but the rules don't stop them voting on bills regarding said interests do they, theirin a corrupt sysem open to abuse.

[Ericsladkilnhurst]

One of their vans parked in Rotherham railway station car park today, didn't see a for sale sign on it.

[frogmiller]

To be fair i don't know how anyone could say this isn't political, when half the tory cabinet has shares in Carillion, the chairman/ceo are contributors to the tory party, and the chairman is an advisor to the gov't.....time this corruption was stamped on.

This may seem radical to some, but why not put a ban on any MP having a vote on anything they have a vested interest in? instead of actually thinking they would do the honourable thing anyway...because clearly they don't do anything honourable in the slightest.

Anyone who has a private pension will have shares in it. Not personally but bought on their behalf by the pension companies.