Maurice Picarda
Actually, might as well flounce.
Well, yes, but that will be baked into the price they get for the assets. Infrastructure with fixed revenue fetches quite a bit when paper of various kinds is looking shaky.
massive state sell off of assets including the canals, announced, 10.09.09
- Thread starter durruti02
- Start date
Well, yes, but that will be baked into the price they get for the assets. Infrastructure with fixed revenue fetches quite a bit when paper of various kinds is looking shaky.
agricola
a genuine importer of owls
Perhaps, though I have absolutely no faith that they will get any kind of value for them and the case for selling this kind of stuff off is nowhere near made, especially when they are continuing with various PFI deals, continuing with ID Cards, continuing with the Olympics and continuing to pay large numbers of consultants.
If they have to sell something off, why not start with the bank shares we own?
Zabo
Well-Known Member
A Conservative Party spokesman said: "As any family knows selling off things helps in the short-term and, given the state the country is in, is probably necessary but it is no substitute for a long-term plan to get the country to live within its means."
Well fancy that! Just like the old days.
Well fancy that! Just like the old days.
agricola
a genuine importer of owls
Because noone is stupid enough to lease these items when the Government are obviously so desperate for money that they will consider selling these things. Urenco, for instance, appears to be very profitable (at least according to this Reuters report). The Student Loans Company has more than £25 billion worth of loans on its books, according to its last set of accounts, and one would think the quality of those loans are markedly better than the loan book of HBOS, or Lloyds, or RBS.
These are not bad assets.
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
The only explanation that makes sense, as far as I am concerned, is that the government deliberately and ideologically wants to sell off assets to private concerns and give them more economic influence, since it is utterly insane that they would do so if they were interested even purely in profit, let alone maintaining state control over (and even a tiny degree of accountability for) infrastructure.
Oh, so, the same as the past decade or two then.
Oh, so, the same as the past decade or two then.
London_Calling
Pleasant and unpatronising
I'm surprised Gordon Brown didn't include his wife in the list.
This can't happen before an election so it's the usual New Labour spin and bullshit. Latest poll says he's 19% behind the Etonians.
This can't happen before an election so it's the usual New Labour spin and bullshit. Latest poll says he's 19% behind the Etonians.
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
That's not what the government is for.
weltweit
Well-Known Member
Thing is, selling off assets only helps in the year when you sell them. They can pay interest on the debt or pay off part of the debt.
However next year they will still be looking for money to pay off the interest on the deficit again but they won't have these assets anymore.
However next year they will still be looking for money to pay off the interest on the deficit again but they won't have these assets anymore.
ethel
Well-Known Member
SpookyFrank
Don't swallow the cap
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
The thing is, the state is really likely to go under at any time so has to take this sort of urgent asset-selling action. There's no possible way it could continue if it didn't. It'd just vanish or something.
London_Calling
Pleasant and unpatronising
A good point just made on The Politics Show was that, to sell anytime soon, would be to sell at the bottom of the market - most of these assets have more than halved in value since Our Great Leader led the world into the banking colllapse.
They might double in value in 3-4 years, but Gordon Brown is all about today's spin and bullshit. The public - especially the poor - end up paying the price for party political expediency.
They might double in value in 3-4 years, but Gordon Brown is all about today's spin and bullshit. The public - especially the poor - end up paying the price for party political expediency.
lewislewis
Lumumba Cymru
If you sell these off then the buyer will want a return on their investment, by which they introduce charges where before they didnt exist, or hike up existing charges.
In the case of Defence Storage and possibly Oil Pipes +Royal Mint (not sure) the main customer is the state,which only means that the state will end up having to pay more to use the service they had on the books already, and so cancelling out the saving.
of course this is true of all the PFI privitisations - they have ended up costing the state more. Railways being the classic example - according to train expert Christian Wolmar the state pays four timese more than it ever did under British Rail (factoring in inflation) - and customers pay so much more too. (£10 for a travelcard? scum)
Dont these fuckers learn? Shit, theyll be consolidating their debt into one easy payment at this rate
The Royal Mint at Llantrisant (Pontypridd constituency) (Currently state-owned) is in profit at the moment and set to make even more money and create a further 55 jobs in order to deal with a new order associated with making commemorative coins for the Olympics.
So whilst being publicly owned they have managed to make profits and stay afloat, but the government still wants to sell them! It's scandalous. Plaid Cymru resisted the privatisation plans, but the local Labour MP Kim Howells refused to condemn the government.
It's so true that they say things get privatised when they're doing well not when they're doing badly.
Combustible
Well-Known Member
How is it possible for any private company to make any money on the student loans if the interest rate is kept in line with inflation? Even if they upped the interest rate for new students I very much doubt they could easily raise it retroactively for those already with loans.
fractionMan
Custom Title
They'll sell it for less than the amount owing. Then whoever buys it makes a profit when they collect it all back.
marty21
One on one? You're crazy.
question, how much did the government pump into the banks? something like £175bn? and presumably when the share prices rise, as they are doing, they can sell these shares at a profit, once the share prices exceed the price they bought them for, or wait for a while and sell at a fatter profit?
Combustible
Well-Known Member
So the government it is essentially borrowing from the private sector then. Just another way of keeping borrowing off the balance books.
London_Calling
Pleasant and unpatronising
Yep, that's the situation; essentially 'we' borrowed money quite cheaply to buy into banks. It'll be a judgment call as to when to sell. Whether it's a party political call or one made on sound financial grounds is another matter.
marty21
One on one? You're crazy.
a lot of this debt is tied up in shares in nationalised banks, so no real need to sell off assets, at the moment, when the economy picks up, as it appears to be slowly doing, share prices go back up, then it's a matter of timing, and we can assume that any government will sell at the wrong time and could have made more money if they'd held on
gosub
~#
liquidity!
London_Calling
Pleasant and unpatronising
'We' do, of course, pay interest on the money borrowed to pay for the investment in the banks - that's a drag on all government expenditure for the duration of the ownership.
Fwiw, last time I looked those investments were some way from reaching the level we bought at.
Fwiw, last time I looked those investments were some way from reaching the level we bought at.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
Student Loan Company being sold off as well.
Say bye bye to cheap loans, kids.
Say bye bye to cheap loans, kids.
free spirit
more tea vicar?
mines currently on -0.5% interest.
IIRC as well, I'm sure they sold my debt to natwest ages ago, but now my letters are back to coming from the student loans company
could be something to do with me being in dispute with them since 1999 though I guess...
Combustible
Well-Known Member
I imagine that would be very difficult to do politically. Maybe if it was means tested but then they might as well bring in a graduate tax.
agricola
a genuine importer of owls
If they do sell the Royal Mint off the WAG should definately take it off HMG's hands, as well as buy their stake in Uranco whilst they are at it.
Brainaddict
slight system overdrive
I read it as them taking desperate measures to avoid having to raise taxes close to an election. Isn't that a plausible explanation?
The canals sell-off strikes me as insane. They can't be profit-making so whoever runs the canals would surely have to get a subsidy - cue railways-style milking of the government cash cow...
Similar threads
- Poll
