Am 05.01.2012 15:16, schrieb The Real Doctor:

Ownership and financial goals are orthogonal. There are private
non-profits, private for-profits, state-owned non-profits, state-owned
for-profits and many other variations.

Finally an approach to reality!

On 05/01/2012 13:46, Lüko Willms wrote:
Am 04.01.2012 14:26, schrieb Graham Nye:
On 04/01/2012 10:01, Lüko Willms wrote:
Under capitalist rule, you will find that most state owned
enterprises are actually operated with the objective to make profit.
I haven't found that.

Then open your eyes.

I did, and I noticed the behaviour you've chosen to snip from my post
so that you could add an insult.

Right of centre states aren't likely, by their own principles, to
retain profitable enterprises under state control. Can you give
some examples of capitalist states operating profitable enterprises?
(Shouldn't be difficult, as you suggest this is the majority position.)



--
Graham Nye
news(a)thenyes.org.uk

Am 05.01.2012 15:26, schrieb The Real Doctor:
Ich mag keine Katze im Sack kaufen (sorry, don't know a fitting
translation).

"I don't like to buy a pig in a poke."

Thanks.


L.W.

Am 05.01.2012 15:13, schrieb The Real Doctor:
All I asked was whether you believed that the holocaust (a) occurred and
(b) mattered.

I do not think that it matters for the issue under discussion. See
the Subject line, see the name of the Newsgroup.

On 05/01/2012 14:46, Graham Nye wrote:
On 05/01/2012 13:46, Lüko Willms wrote:
Am 04.01.2012 14:26, schrieb Graham Nye:
On 04/01/2012 10:01, Lüko Willms wrote:
Under capitalist rule, you will find that most state owned
enterprises are actually operated with the objective to make profit.
I haven't found that.

Then open your eyes.

I did, and I noticed the behaviour you've chosen to snip from my post
so that you could add an insult.

Right of centre states aren't likely, by their own principles, to
retain profitable enterprises under state control. Can you give
some examples of capitalist states operating profitable enterprises?
(Shouldn't be difficult, as you suggest this is the majority position.)




The British government used to run a profitable brewery at one time.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

On Jan 5, 2:17*pm, Neil Williams wrote:

I'm sure the company has, but not because they are gay.

To expand on that statement which could be taken the wrong way, the
sexuality of an employee will be irrelevant to the decision to fire
them. It will have been because of gross misconduct, or because of
not doing their job properly over a period of time with formal
warnings in place. Just like with any other company.

Neil

On Jan 5, 2:42*pm, Lüko Willms wrote:

* Did they put the shares of British Rail up for sale on the stock
exchange?

Yes, they did. Railtrack was traded, as were most of the TOCs. The
collapse of Railtrack involved shares owned by individuals collapsing
in value.

ian

On 05/01/2012 14:47, Lüko Willms wrote:
Am 05.01.2012 15:26, schrieb The Real Doctor:
Ich mag keine Katze im Sack kaufen (sorry, don't know a fitting
translation).

"I don't like to buy a pig in a poke."


The links are legitimate. You can look at them safely.


--
Graham Nye
news(a)thenyes.org.uk

On 2 Jan., 13:04, Lüko Willms wrote:
Am 01.01.2012 23:27, schrieb Neil Williams:

If it's owned by the Government it's nationalised, whatever means that
ownership may take, IMO.

* *you have a strange concept of "nationalization"

It's the one that agrees with my dictionary (and wikipedia).

* *Do you really believe that the composition of the shareholders makes
a qualitative difference for the commercial activity of a company?

Absolutely it does. There are reams and reams of laws governing the
relationships between parent companies and subsidiaries, and the stake
one company can hold in another before it is deemed to be a subsidiary
(so that its financial performance must be incorporated into the
figures of the parent company), and the size of holding one company
can have in another before the parent must make an offer to buy out
the subsidiary. It is well understood that if one single organisation
holds a controlling interest (50% +1 shares) in another, the remaining
shareholders effectively have no control over what that company does.

* *At which percentage of ownership by a state entity does a company
stop being "really a commercial operator"?

50% +1 share. At that point the government shareholding is a
controlling interest, and the private shareholders combined can not
vote down any measure imposed by the controlling shareholder.

* *Do you really believe this idiotic nonsense?

The courts and parliament do.

* *What about the Rothaus brewery, just to cite one little example?

Definitely.

Commerzbank?

Northern Rock? RBS? Yes to all of them.

Robin

On 05/01/12 14:37, Lüko Willms wrote:
Am 05.01.2012 15:22, schrieb The Real Doctor:
You are proving again that you are not an honest opponent in any debate.

Says the man who accuses anyone who disagrees with him of being a Hitler
apologist

You are slandering again ...

Says the man who accuses anyone who disagrees with him of being a Hitler
apologist

and yet consistently declines to state his own opinion on the
murderous proclivities of the Third Reich.

We are in uk.railway and the Subject of this thread deals with "Berlin
Train System".

You introduced the Third Reich, the Falklands and so on as topics.

It seems that you see this as the usual show trial scene for you?

No, I'm wholly opposed to show trials

------ quote ---------
I just pointed out the fact that Herr Schnell is upset about the Berlin
railway workers still enjoying labor standards which they had acquired
during GDR times.
--------- unquote --------

You claim that the subway workers ought to be happy with ("enjoying" is
the key word) DDR labour standards. I'm still not clear whether you
think that should enjoy shooting them if they want to move west.

Again, who in above sentence is said to be upset?

I didn't make any claims about anyone being upset. What I wrote was "And
there you go, judging what people should or should not be happy with." I
was referring to the railway workers.

Ian