Discussion in 'UK politics, current affairs and news' started by Maggot, Mar 20, 2013.
BandWagon are you saying 90,000 pages because I said that or did you see it somewhere?
I can't remember, did you see it or just make it up?
I think I heard it on the radio but now I can't find any evidence for it..
Hinkley Point: Government’s decision to put contract on hold is bewildering, unions say
This refers to it.
Yes, 90,000 pages apparently. I believe it's all here divided into 1,028 documents
I am going to resist the temptation to peek in to that ....
Theresa May has 'general prejudice' against Chinese funding and objected to Hinkley plans, Vince Cable says
vince cable's a proven liar who I wouldn't trust as far as I could kick him tho
Think I would probably say thanks but no thanks if somebody turned up offering to build me a nuclear reactor much more cheaply than China could manage.
It's not the Chinese who are building it, they're justing financing it. It's EDF that's building it. In fact the 2 Chinese ERP reactors are being provided by the Japanese, I think.
With the yen so strong against the pound, now would be a good time for Japanese reactor builders to agree to build some cheaper, more established designs.
For reasons of historical sensitivity, it's generally referred to as tactical withdrawal
proper nationalist stuff.
china wont give a shit.
Oh, bugger off and take a joke, lighten up.
Chinas not building or supplying the reactors, EDF is, and by all accounts they are totally Shyte,
Buggerniell, never thought I would support a Tory led decision, bur on this occasion they are spot on.
However, being Tories, one wonders at what they are actually up to! Genuine fear that consumers are going to be hammered! or squeezing the most money out of the deal for their city chums?
Financialised capital does not take kindly to its consolidator client states needlessly indebting themselves to other states, when they could be deepening their debt to fin corps via the bond markets. Where's the profit in borrowing from the 'communists'?
Do you mean south Korea rather than north?
That's why so many companies were queuing up to finance the project I suppose.
Last week's UK Bond auction was 5 times over-subscribed, so yes...they are/would be if the state decided to finance the work in that way.
There's a bit of a difference in risk there.
Capitalists are not stupid.
Well first you claimed they don't "take kindly to its consolidator client states needlessly indebting themselves to other states" and then you're saying they are happy about this because the risk are too great for them.
No, I think you mis-understand me. Fincap want to maximise any opportunity to indebt consoldiator states, replacing the (corp) tax component of revenue with their profitable usury. If the UK state borrows from other states, there's no profit or leverage for fincap.
The Hinkley deal was a shrewd move by Cameron and Obsorne then, sticking two fingers up the capitalists and getting France and China to shoulder the considerable risk for a possible steady profit in order to satisfy their political desires to build their own nuclear industries.
Depends from who's perspective you're viewing the deal. From the perspective of the nationalist vermin (now more powerful in the party) it looks like compromising national security & conceding sovereignty; not in vogue atm. For taxpayers & customers it appears that we will pay hugely expensive bills for Cam's "shredness". And lastly, as I've said, for fincap the whole thing looks like a lost opportunity.
Looks like that from where I'm standing too. May done right on this issue if you ask me.
Saved in the 'Nick’ of time from the world’s most expensive power station?
I'd hold your plaudits if I were you; we don't yet know what she's done or why.
Separate names with a comma.