"Robin" wrote in message
...
Regardless , the whole motive behind blighting somewhere in the
southeast
with another runway seems to be so that airlines and BAA can make
more profit. It has zilch to do with the UK economy other than the
small amount of extra corporation tax it would deliver which would be
more than ofset by the billions it would cost to build the thing in
the first place even with partial private finance. Its a cynical
campaign by private corporations for the government to spend huge
amounts of public money on some infrastructure that will benefit
almost no one economically except themselves and their shareholders.

Do you think that multinationals don't take into account ease of travel
when deciding where to base overseas offices?

Not to a great extent no. Staff costs (including ease of hiring and firing)
will trump this by the very large margin

Eg that a Chinese company might prefer to base its European operation near
an airport with direct flights to all major Chinese cities?

Prove to me that this will be possible if LHR had an extra runway. I don't
believe that you can do it, it is nonsense speculation

Do you think that having the overseas offices of multinationals does no
good to the UK economy in terms of direct jobs, demand for support
services etc?

Do you think the French, Germans, Dutch etc are mad for building major
airports and that ur David is the only one in step?

The Germans and the Dutch made the right choice 30 years ago.

Unfortunately, we didn't and we are stuck with that bad choice

tim