the Tories (and that oaf Clegg) want to privatise everything (far worse than Blair) including police, probation etc etc.

Selling off our assets that citizens and our relatives paid for and invested in over the decades and there has never been an incident where the public has benefited.

but in true capitalism shouldn't we have the right to opt out of private services we don't want ?..like jails and probation and cops etc etc..armies even ?. We can do so with trains and gas and utilities.

let the frigging shareholders invest in jails and take a punt on the public paying for them..but not with my taxes..no sireee !!

how could you disagree ITK ??

hedda wrote:
how could you disagree ITK ??

Easily, Hedda-tas !

When did we "opt out" of trains? They all still get massive subsidies!!

What this is all about is value for money. You dont pay for what you dont get. Just as these employment firms only get paid IF they find a job for one of these spongers, so other firms are brought in on a similar basis.

If they deliver the goods - we pay ... if they dont, we dont !

All entirely different from your loony Labout lot - chuck money at it noi matter how much money it loses (or wastes).

Under loony Labour they used to give subsidies to prop up the subsidies ! (and nothing ever got delivered).

In The Know wrote:
hedda wrote:
how could you disagree ITK ??

Easily, Hedda-tas !

When did we "opt out" of trains? They all still get massive subsidies!!

What this is all about is value for money. You dont pay for what you dont get. Just as these employment firms only get paid IF they find a job for one of these spongers, so other firms are brought in on a similar basis.

If they deliver the goods - we pay ... if they dont, we dont !

All entirely different from your loony Labout lot - chuck money at it noi matter how much money it loses (or wastes).

Under loony Labour they used to give subsidies to prop up the subsidies ! (and nothing ever got delivered).

The Tories gave just as much as Labour in days of yore.A look at Keith Jenkins,Maggie's golden boy back in 80 will easily confirm this.

The problem here is did we get value for money out of privatizations?
Initially no doubt,Maggie used the money to fuel a boom before the '87 election,then took us into bust soon after.
When sold off they were owned by British companies,and a lot of smaller investors,not now,I believe not a single utility company is locally owned.
There is no simple answer to this.

your response ITK confirms my points and defeats your own.

thank you

ITK is a typical Tory always loses the argument, I wonder if Tories would privatise masturbation as porn magazines sell well or The Sun.

hedda wrote:
your response ITK confirms my points and defeats your own.

thank you

I expect Mr Silliband may understand your ramblings, veritas ... the rest of us dont.

I had no idea you spoke for everyone.

Concerned wrote:
In The Know wrote:
hedda wrote:
how could you disagree ITK ??

Easily, Hedda-tas !

When did we "opt out" of trains? They all still get massive subsidies!!

What this is all about is value for money. You dont pay for what you dont get. Just as these employment firms only get paid IF they find a job for one of these spongers, so other firms are brought in on a similar basis.

If they deliver the goods - we pay ... if they dont, we dont !

All entirely different from your loony Labout lot - chuck money at it noi matter how much money it loses (or wastes).

Under loony Labour they used to give subsidies to prop up the subsidies ! (and nothing ever got delivered).

The Tories gave just as much as Labour in days of yore.A look at Keith Jenkins,Maggie's golden boy back in 80 will easily confirm this.

The problem here is did we get value for money out of privatizations?
Initially no doubt,Maggie used the money to fuel a boom before the '87 election,then took us into bust soon after.
When sold off they were owned by British companies,and a lot of smaller investors,not now,I believe not a single utility company is locally owned.
There is no simple answer to this.

Only a fool would believe one side or the other would make a big difference when elected.
Good points.