Nationalisation.

[Geoff Parkstone]

I can't explain the logic other than to say that I believe service companies should be in state ownership. But to throw a few bones to the dogs - private companies piling up debt gets it out the state national debt at least.

The 57b in dividends is presumably across all denationalised industries over as much as 50 years, so let's not get it out of perspective. By far the biggest investors in these companies are the pension funds, so the biggest beneficiaries of the largesse are "Joe public" via workplace pensions and the government who can thus afford to minimise spend on pensions. So all in all I don't have a problem with dividend levels.

I do share your objection to the heavy remuneration and bonus packages in these industries although I suspect were they still nationalised these levels wouldn't be much different.

The level of infrastructural investment is however appalling and the handing over of key industries to Johnny foreigner to exploit is/was a huge mistake - although the remainers here may not agree. The powers that be should have warranted the retention of these companies in British ownership at the outset, but clearly missed a trick. The primary sell off was, IIRC, restricted thus but as soon as the shares hit the open market, whoops.....

[ramAnag]

I can't explain the logic other than to say that I believe service companies should be in state ownership. But to throw a few bones to the dogs - private companies piling up debt gets it out the state national debt at least.

The 57b in dividends is presumably across all denationalised industries over as much as 50 years, so let's not get it out of perspective. By far the biggest investors in these companies are the pension funds, so the biggest beneficiaries of the largesse are "Joe public" via workplace pensions and the government who can thus afford to minimise spend on pensions. So all in all I don't have a problem with dividend levels.

I do share your objection to the heavy remuneration and bonus packages in these industries although I suspect were they still nationalised these levels wouldn't be much different.

The level of infrastructural investment is however appalling and the handing over of key industries to Johnny foreigner to exploit is/was a huge mistake - although the remainers here may not agree. The powers that be should have warranted the retention of these companies in British ownership at the outset, but clearly missed a trick. The primary sell off was, IIRC, restricted thus but as soon as the shares hit the open market, whoops.....

So there you go. The accountant has spoken and there are grounds for agreement with those usually less cynical.
I can’t argue with GP over economic matters because he understands much more. How far that understanding extends as regards morality and ethics is perhaps for others to decide.
All I’ll say, probably idealistically according to some, is that we have to stop seeing money spent on such things as health, education, care for the elderly, clean water, sewage treatment that doesn’t jeopardise our rivers and seas, public transport etc as a drain on the public purse, and rather as essential prerequisites of any modern civilised society.
There is obviously a case for free enterprise and profit but it shouldn’t, imo, extend to any of the above and the lessons learned (or probably not) from the disaster that private ownership of service/utility industries is currently seeing seems to support such a view.

As for ‘bonus packages’. Never understood why people get a bonus for doing their job.