UK government to sell Eurostar stake before general election
Discussion
kwit Brown used to sell off gold reserves at a lowHackney said:
No evidence? The banks are private businesses are they not?
Just because (part of) their business involves the money of the general public that doesn't mean they're not private companies.
There's plenty of evidence that the government does bail out, and has bailed out, private companies
Private banks are completely different to private companies. Do you genuinely believe that the government would step in to save Eurostar if it went bust? If so, why did they not bail out Woolworths?Just because (part of) their business involves the money of the general public that doesn't mean they're not private companies.
There's plenty of evidence that the government does bail out, and has bailed out, private companies
CamMoreRon said:
AyBee said:
Hackney said:
AyBee said:
Hackney said:
If it's publicly owned the taxpayer covers the loss and the taxpayer benefits from profits
If it's privately owned the taxpayer covers the loss and..... oh wait.
Your evidence being?If it's privately owned the taxpayer covers the loss and..... oh wait.
Which while not evidence is certainly of the opinion that "the same people" would bail out the private sector as the public.
Think of any major "bail out" that has happened recently, then who bailed it out.
From the Mail in Feb this year. "Royal Bank of Scotland is 82 per cent owned by taxpayers. Bank received a £46billion bail-out in 2008 and 2009"
From the Guardian in Sept this year. "Government has kicked off the sale of its stake in Lloyds, five years after it pumped £20bn into the bank"
From the BBC in Oct 2008. "The government is to pump billions of pounds of taxpayers money into three UK banks in one of the UK's biggest nationalisations. Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS), Lloyds TSB and HBOS will have a total of £37bn injected into them."
The government doesn't bail out private companies; if Eurostar goes bust whilst in private ownership, the assets are sold off and another private company will buy them.
Actually the majority of bank money doesn't belong to Joe Public at all and never did. SOURCE.
Yes, I missed it completely 
And where did I post that the majority of bank money belonged to joe public? Joe public would have lost money if the banks went bust so the government stepped in - end of. There's no way that would happen in to Eurostar!vonuber said:
Funny thing is, the most likely buyers are the State owned rail companies of Europe.
Quite correct.Naturally, EU rules prevent the UK 'buying' UK assets but nothing stopping UK govt from bidding for German, Dutch or French railways.
Well, bar having no incentive, will or cash.
Btw, two of the uK's biggest freight operating companies are owned by the Germans and French - a middle-east consortium owns another large FOC - they're employing UK staff but profits (substantial in some cases) aren't staying in the UK.
Bluebarge said:
Chaps, the stake the govt is selling is in Eurostar, the train company, not the company that owns the tunnel. If the train company goes bust - someone will buy the assets for a song and start again.
In which case, I've misunderstood what was being sold, and I couldn't give a monkeys. I'm just against them selling off the tunnel itself.AyBee said:
Hackney said:
No evidence? The banks are private businesses are they not?
Just because (part of) their business involves the money of the general public that doesn't mean they're not private companies.
There's plenty of evidence that the government does bail out, and has bailed out, private companies
Private banks are completely different to private companies. Do you genuinely believe that the government would step in to save Eurostar if it went bust? If so, why did they not bail out Woolworths?Just because (part of) their business involves the money of the general public that doesn't mean they're not private companies.
There's plenty of evidence that the government does bail out, and has bailed out, private companies
They're privately owned. That's the main and only important difference. They are not state owned, public owned or run in the interests of the public.
Yes, I do think that if a privately owned Eurostar hit difficulty it would be bailed out by the government.
I don't know why Woolworths wasn't bailed out, perhaps because it wasn't owned by any of the govt's mates? Or that there wasn't enough pressure / vested interest in keeping it going.
Why could Co-op bank bail itself out yet RBS etc couldn't / didn't?
Wyvern971 said:
In which case, I've misunderstood what was being sold, and I couldn't give a monkeys. I'm just against them selling off the tunnel itself.
The debt is huge and there was a massive refinancing deal not too long ago - I'm not sure many private companies would be interested in taking on that kind of bargain.Hackney said:
In what way are they different? Other than they don't make widgets, but deal in making money from money.
They're privately owned. That's the main and only important difference. They are not state owned, public owned or run in the interests of the public.
Yes, I do think that if a privately owned Eurostar hit difficulty it would be bailed out by the government.
I don't know why Woolworths wasn't bailed out, perhaps because it wasn't owned by any of the govt's mates? Or that there wasn't enough pressure / vested interest in keeping it going.
Why could Co-op bank bail itself out yet RBS etc couldn't / didn't?
Banks are the cornerstone of our economic system. If a large one goes bust then businesses shut down because they run out of cash, people don't get paid because the bank sits on cash until the liquidators work out who owns what, the effect is far greater than on any other sort of business. RBS was one of the biggest around - the Co-Op is tiny. RBS could only be saved by govt. intervention - the potential losses were too big for anyone else to take on.They're privately owned. That's the main and only important difference. They are not state owned, public owned or run in the interests of the public.
Yes, I do think that if a privately owned Eurostar hit difficulty it would be bailed out by the government.
I don't know why Woolworths wasn't bailed out, perhaps because it wasn't owned by any of the govt's mates? Or that there wasn't enough pressure / vested interest in keeping it going.
Why could Co-op bank bail itself out yet RBS etc couldn't / didn't?
Woolworths didn't have the same importance to the economy - a few suppliers got singed, some employees were laid off, but otherwise it barely made a ripple. Eurostar would be the same - a couple of weeks of no trains, then someone else would take on the rolling stock and the staff and leave the debts behind.
Govt. intervention in business has nothing to do with who your mates are - that's a rather naive way of looking at it. When big banks go bust, they can take whole economies with them - look at Iceland at the same time as RBS went tits.
Wyvern971 said:
Bluebarge said:
Chaps, the stake the govt is selling is in Eurostar, the train company, not the company that owns the tunnel. If the train company goes bust - someone will buy the assets for a song and start again.
In which case, I've misunderstood what was being sold, and I couldn't give a monkeys. I'm just against them selling off the tunnel itself.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff