Money Savings Expert - Renationalisation Poll

yellowbelly · Post by **yellowbelly** » 29 Sep 2017, 19:01

Totally unscientific and a bit of fun, but the Martin Lewis MSE site is running a renationalisation poll.

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/vote/2 ... r-and-more" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Votes for RM's 'Renationalisation' don't fall below 65% in any age category!

datasaint · Post by **datasaint** » 29 Sep 2017, 20:28

Bit misleading, the Post Office is still under public ownership.

NWpostie · Post by **NWpostie** » 30 Sep 2017, 09:33

norm wrote:Bit misleading, the Post Office is still under public ownership.

For now .....

Post by **baldrick** » 30 Sep 2017, 09:42

norm wrote:Bit misleading, the Post Office is still under public ownership.

But a lot of Post Offices are now private franchises, so not under public ownership.

datasaint · Post by **datasaint** » 30 Sep 2017, 13:40

baldrick wrote:
norm wrote:Bit misleading, the Post Office is still under public ownership.
But a lot of Post Offices are now private franchises, so not under public ownership.

In a lot of instances it's not commercially viable to have a post-office in a lot of small villages. So it's only because of private enterprise that they can co-exist together. So re-nationalising the post office network would be a terrible idea and probably lead to even more closures.

awesomepenguin · Post by **awesomepenguin** » 30 Sep 2017, 13:58

One major reason why re-nationalisation will never occur, even in the event of Labour coming to power, would be the shareholders of Royal Mail and many other businesses are not going to go away quietly without massive pay-offs.

When Corbyn first floated the idea of taking the energy sector back into public ownership a couple of years back it was calculated that such a move would cost his chancellor £185 billion. Even if he moved against only the big six generators and National Grid he’d have to find £124 billion.

Unfortunately renationalising may be a vote winner but it's utterly impractical and a lot more complicated than people suggest.

redneck · Post by **redneck** » 30 Sep 2017, 17:14

Compulsory purchase, in the national need. If a new government can change the rules then anything can be done. It's the only way to save any semblance of service.

Tman · Post by **Tman** » 30 Sep 2017, 18:07

Corbyn wouldn't do that as it would lead to so-called capital flight, inward UK investment going down the sh*tpipe and a long run on Sterling.
Even he's not that financially inept......though having said that Mac*****ll has said he's war gaming on just that eventuality happening.
Maybe he actually IS that cluesslessly inept..

nickbsmooth · Post by **nickbsmooth** » 30 Sep 2017, 18:10

Labour won't renationalise a thing, when voters realise it will bankrupt the country.
Royal Mail is probably the cheapest thing that the govt could renationalise,which would effect the most employees.
The idea they can borrow unlimited sums to pay off PFI loans most of which they took out as well as buying back the energy companies and railways seems madness. The last labour govt borrowed like no tomorrow and things are shitter now than 20yrs ago.
I'd be delighted if RM were back in the public purse,with all profits going back into the business and workforce.

postslippete · Post by **postslippete** » 30 Sep 2017, 18:15

Even though it would be great to see re-nationalisation I really can't see it either because the costs would just be too much. Its typical pie in the sky by the Labour Party in an attempt to win votes.

fishtank · Post by **fishtank** » 30 Sep 2017, 19:00

The last labour govt borrowed like no tomorrow

The last Labour government borrowed less on average per annum than the Conservative government that proceeded it and the Conservative government that followed it. Borrowing money is what governments do whether it's called fiscal stimulus or quantitative easing it amounts to the same thing. PFI is just a fancy name for outsourcing, there's nothing wrong with it in principle, it's the complete naivety of the contract negotiations that's laughable.

They basically started writing blank cheques for these companies and tied themselves into long term commitments. The sort of corruption and ineptitude you expect from a tin pot dictatorship in a bad movie.

jetblack · Post by **jetblack** » 30 Sep 2017, 19:21

The Govt. borrowing money at 0.5% isn't a problem if they are making 6% on it and when inflation is eating away at the debt at 2.8% a year. At least, its not nearly as big a problem as some would have you believe. It wasn't this kind of debt that sunk the economy in 2008.
Current market cap of RMG is £3.85 billion - annual pre tax profits circa £0.4 billion.
Put it all together, do the sums, and the renationalisation of RM is very easily do- able.

edit. just viewed the poll on MSE - results are very encouraging. The 'middle ground' does indeed seem to have shifted.

Post by **baldrick** » 01 Oct 2017, 07:45

norm wrote:
baldrick wrote:
norm wrote:Bit misleading, the Post Office is still under public ownership.
But a lot of Post Offices are now private franchises, so not under public ownership.
In a lot of instances it's not commercially viable to have a post-office in a lot of small villages. So it's only because of private enterprise that they can co-exist together. So re-nationalising the post office network would be a terrible idea and probably lead to even more closures.

I don't know what happens in small villages. I worked as an OPG in BOs in the City Of London (EC1-4). There used to be 8 BOs iirc. Half of them were private franchises. The private franchise BOs have all now been closed. They can be closed without the 'consultation' legally required for Post Offices owned by POCL. The so-called consultation is a sham, POCL ignores the opposition to closure, but it does make it a bit more difficult.