<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5f17b5a2-d3cd-11ed-b5c3-54651fc826e9?shareToken=b32ffae17496f10563b46d3185e4c0ea>

In message <u0ne42$gl53$5@dont-email.me>, at 21:38:10 on Thu, 6 Apr
2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
><https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5f17b5a2-d3cd-11ed-b5c3-54651fc826e9
>?shareToken=b32ffae17496f10563b46d3185e4c0ea>

What people forget when moaning about huge profits for companies like
Shell (most made outside the UK) is that may of the shareholders are
themselves (via pension funds). Similarly other big bad companies which
are accused of exploiting the public in different ways.

I complain a lot about Vodafone's business practices, but in years gone
by my pension provider was a big investor.
--
Roland Perry

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> <https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5f17b5a2-d3cd-11ed-b5c3-54651fc826e9?shareToken=b32ffae17496f10563b46d3185e4c0ea>
>

Shocking , a union often deemed a bastion of socialism following principles
long established as good practise by the Tory right in putting profit
before principles.
And for good reason , relying on the state to provide a pension that can
provide beyond basic existence is not an option.
Apart from Boltar who appears to be the groups whippersnapper I suppose
most on here can be grateful for having worked through the years when
decent company schemes were around and investments got a reasonable return.

GH
GH

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <u0ne42$gl53$5@dont-email.me>, at 21:38:10 on Thu, 6 Apr
> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> <https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5f17b5a2-d3cd-11ed-b5c3-54651fc826e9
>> ?shareToken=b32ffae17496f10563b46d3185e4c0ea>
>
> What people forget when moaning about huge profits for companies like
> Shell (most made outside the UK) is that may of the shareholders are
> themselves (via pension funds). Similarly other big bad companies which
> are accused of exploiting the public in different ways.
>
> I complain a lot about Vodafone's business practices, but in years gone
> by my pension provider was a big investor.

However, I believe that, of late, UK pension funds are now more likely to
invest outside the UK, as the returns are generally better. It's one of the
reasons for the declining importance of the LSE.

In message <u0oqkm$pge4$6@dont-email.me>, at 10:17:59 on Fri, 7 Apr
2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <u0ne42$gl53$5@dont-email.me>, at 21:38:10 on Thu, 6 Apr
>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> <https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5f17b5a2-d3cd-11ed-b5c3-54651fc826e9
>>> ?shareToken=b32ffae17496f10563b46d3185e4c0ea>
>>
>> What people forget when moaning about huge profits for companies like
>> Shell (most made outside the UK) is that may of the shareholders are
>> themselves (via pension funds). Similarly other big bad companies which
>> are accused of exploiting the public in different ways.
>>
>> I complain a lot about Vodafone's business practices, but in years gone
>> by my pension provider was a big investor.
>
>However, I believe that, of late, UK pension funds are now more likely to
>invest outside the UK, as the returns are generally better. It's one of the
>reasons for the declining importance of the LSE.

If they invest in Shell, they are in effect investing "outside the UK",
if we believe their protestation that most of their profits come from
outside the UK (rather than from fleecing long-suffering UK motorists).

Vodafone has substantial overseas interests too.
--
Roland Perry

On Fri, 7 Apr 2023 13:07:22 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

>In message <u0oqkm$pge4$6@dont-email.me>, at 10:17:59 on Fri, 7 Apr
>2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <u0ne42$gl53$5@dont-email.me>, at 21:38:10 on Thu, 6 Apr
>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> <https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5f17b5a2-d3cd-11ed-b5c3-54651fc826e9
>>>> ?shareToken=b32ffae17496f10563b46d3185e4c0ea>
>>>
>>> What people forget when moaning about huge profits for companies like
>>> Shell (most made outside the UK) is that may of the shareholders are
>>> themselves (via pension funds). Similarly other big bad companies which
>>> are accused of exploiting the public in different ways.
>>>
>>> I complain a lot about Vodafone's business practices, but in years gone
>>> by my pension provider was a big investor.
>>
>>However, I believe that, of late, UK pension funds are now more likely to
>>invest outside the UK, as the returns are generally better. It's one of the
>>reasons for the declining importance of the LSE.
>
>If they invest in Shell, they are in effect investing "outside the UK",
>if we believe their protestation that most of their profits come from
>outside the UK (rather than from fleecing long-suffering UK motorists).
>
>Vodafone has substantial overseas interests too.

True, but I think they also invest directly in foreign companies on foreign stock markets.

In message <1u403i5ssip7shp8gsnhci3e681u9390ci@4ax.com>, at 14:00:13 on
Fri, 7 Apr 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>On Fri, 7 Apr 2023 13:07:22 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>
>>In message <u0oqkm$pge4$6@dont-email.me>, at 10:17:59 on Fri, 7 Apr
>>2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <u0ne42$gl53$5@dont-email.me>, at 21:38:10 on Thu, 6 Apr
>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> <https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5f17b5a2-d3cd-11ed-b5c3-54651fc826e9
>>>>> ?shareToken=b32ffae17496f10563b46d3185e4c0ea>
>>>>
>>>> What people forget when moaning about huge profits for companies like
>>>> Shell (most made outside the UK) is that may of the shareholders are
>>>> themselves (via pension funds). Similarly other big bad companies which
>>>> are accused of exploiting the public in different ways.
>>>>
>>>> I complain a lot about Vodafone's business practices, but in years gone
>>>> by my pension provider was a big investor.
>>>
>>>However, I believe that, of late, UK pension funds are now more likely to
>>>invest outside the UK, as the returns are generally better. It's one of the
>>>reasons for the declining importance of the LSE.
>>
>>If they invest in Shell, they are in effect investing "outside the UK",
>>if we believe their protestation that most of their profits come from
>>outside the UK (rather than from fleecing long-suffering UK motorists).
>>
>>Vodafone has substantial overseas interests too.
>
>True, but I think they also invest directly in foreign companies on
>foreign stock markets.

Yes, of course they will. Maybe even more in future thanks to Nigel
Farage.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <1u403i5ssip7shp8gsnhci3e681u9390ci@4ax.com>, at 14:00:13 on
> Fri, 7 Apr 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> On Fri, 7 Apr 2023 13:07:22 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <u0oqkm$pge4$6@dont-email.me>, at 10:17:59 on Fri, 7 Apr
>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <u0ne42$gl53$5@dont-email.me>, at 21:38:10 on Thu, 6 Apr
>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> <https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5f17b5a2-d3cd-11ed-b5c3-54651fc826e9
>>>>>> ?shareToken=b32ffae17496f10563b46d3185e4c0ea>
>>>>>
>>>>> What people forget when moaning about huge profits for companies like
>>>>> Shell (most made outside the UK) is that may of the shareholders are
>>>>> themselves (via pension funds). Similarly other big bad companies which
>>>>> are accused of exploiting the public in different ways.
>>>>>
>>>>> I complain a lot about Vodafone's business practices, but in years gone
>>>>> by my pension provider was a big investor.
>>>>
>>>> However, I believe that, of late, UK pension funds are now more likely to
>>>> invest outside the UK, as the returns are generally better. It's one of the
>>>> reasons for the declining importance of the LSE.
>>>
>>> If they invest in Shell, they are in effect investing "outside the UK",
>>> if we believe their protestation that most of their profits come from
>>> outside the UK (rather than from fleecing long-suffering UK motorists).
>>>
>>> Vodafone has substantial overseas interests too.
>>
>> True, but I think they also invest directly in foreign companies on
>> foreign stock markets.
>
> Yes, of course they will. Maybe even more in future thanks to Nigel
> Farage.

Sadly, there's long been a steady loss of high tech industries from the UK.
It long predates Brexit. Most industries of the future just aren't
represented on the LSE.

Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> <https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5f17b5a2-d3cd-11ed-b5c3-54651fc826e9?shareToken=b32ffae17496f10563b46d3185e4c0ea>
>>
>
> Shocking , a union often deemed a bastion of socialism following principles
> long established as good practise by the Tory right in putting profit
> before principles.
>

The Railway Pension Fund is not a trade union.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

In message <u0pfqh$sgin$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:19:30 on Fri, 7 Apr
2023, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>><https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5f17b5a2-d3cd-11ed-b5c3-54651fc826
>>>e9?shareToken=b32ffae17496f10563b46d3185e4c0ea>
>>>
>>
>> Shocking , a union often deemed a bastion of socialism following principles
>> long established as good practise by the Tory right in putting profit
>> before principles.
>
>The Railway Pension Fund is not a trade union.

"Its board also includes Mick Cash, the former secretary general of
the RMT union, and Gerry Doherty, former general secretary of the
Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association (TSSA)."

Is probably what got people's attention.
--
Roland Perry

In message <u0pb28$rqq5$5@dont-email.me>, at 14:58:16 on Fri, 7 Apr
2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <1u403i5ssip7shp8gsnhci3e681u9390ci@4ax.com>, at 14:00:13 on
>> Fri, 7 Apr 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> On Fri, 7 Apr 2023 13:07:22 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In message <u0oqkm$pge4$6@dont-email.me>, at 10:17:59 on Fri, 7 Apr
>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <u0ne42$gl53$5@dont-email.me>, at 21:38:10 on Thu, 6 Apr
>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>> <https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5f17b5a2-d3cd-11ed-b5c3-54651fc826e9
>>>>>>> ?shareToken=b32ffae17496f10563b46d3185e4c0ea>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What people forget when moaning about huge profits for companies like
>>>>>> Shell (most made outside the UK) is that may of the shareholders are
>>>>>> themselves (via pension funds). Similarly other big bad companies which
>>>>>> are accused of exploiting the public in different ways.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I complain a lot about Vodafone's business practices, but in years gone
>>>>>> by my pension provider was a big investor.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, I believe that, of late, UK pension funds are now more likely to
>>>>> invest outside the UK, as the returns are generally better. It's
>>>>>one of the
>>>>> reasons for the declining importance of the LSE.
>>>>
>>>> If they invest in Shell, they are in effect investing "outside the UK",
>>>> if we believe their protestation that most of their profits come from
>>>> outside the UK (rather than from fleecing long-suffering UK motorists).
>>>>
>>>> Vodafone has substantial overseas interests too.
>>>
>>> True, but I think they also invest directly in foreign companies on
>>> foreign stock markets.
>>
>> Yes, of course they will. Maybe even more in future thanks to Nigel
>> Farage.
>
>Sadly, there's long been a steady loss of high tech industries from the UK.
>It long predates Brexit.

That's true, but Brexit has put several more nails in the coffin,
despite the promises to 'make UK great again', to channel Trump.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <u0pfqh$sgin$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:19:30 on Fri, 7 Apr
> 2023, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
> >Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
> >> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>><https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5f17b5a2-d3cd-11ed-b5c3-54651fc826
> >>>e9?shareToken=b32ffae17496f10563b46d3185e4c0ea>
> >>>
> >>
> >> Shocking , a union often deemed a bastion of socialism following principles
> >> long established as good practise by the Tory right in putting profit
> >> before principles.
> >
> >The Railway Pension Fund is not a trade union.
>
> "Its board also includes Mick Cash, the former secretary general of
> the RMT union, and Gerry Doherty, former general secretary of the
> Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association (TSSA)."
>
> Is probably what got people's attention.

Those are ex-officio positions, given the fund has:
11 directors on the board (trustees, non-execs etc)
9 directors representing employers (NR/TOCs/FOCs/etc)
10 directors representing employees (nominated by unions)
https://cdn.rpmi.co.uk/mp-sitefinity-prod/docs/default-source/report-accounts/report-accounts-2021.pdf

which is an unremarkable setup for an industry pension fund.

Pretty shoddy journalism in other words. Even if the unions decided to run
the fund along socialist principles they couldn't, because they don't have a
majority on the board.

Theo

On Fri, 7 Apr 2023 16:19:30 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
><https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5f17b5a2-d3cd-11ed-b5c3-54651fc826e9?shareT
>oken=b32ffae17496f10563b46d3185e4c0ea>
>>>
>>
>> Shocking , a union often deemed a bastion of socialism following principles
>> long established as good practise by the Tory right in putting profit
>> before principles.
>>
>
>The Railway Pension Fund is not a trade union.

One of the trustees is Mick Marx Cash.

In message <Icq*a9edz@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, at 11:08:02 on Sat,
8 Apr 2023, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <u0pfqh$sgin$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:19:30 on Fri, 7 Apr
>> 2023, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>> >Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>> >> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>><https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5f17b5a2-d3cd-11ed-b5c3-54651fc826
>> >>>e9?shareToken=b32ffae17496f10563b46d3185e4c0ea>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Shocking , a union often deemed a bastion of socialism following
>> >>principles
>> >> long established as good practise by the Tory right in putting profit
>> >> before principles.
>> >
>> >The Railway Pension Fund is not a trade union.
>>
>> "Its board also includes Mick Cash, the former secretary general of
>> the RMT union, and Gerry Doherty, former general secretary of the
>> Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association (TSSA)."
>>
>> Is probably what got people's attention.
>
>Those are ex-officio positions, given the fund has:
>11 directors on the board (trustees, non-execs etc)
>9 directors representing employers (NR/TOCs/FOCs/etc)
>10 directors representing employees (nominated by unions)
>https://cdn.rpmi.co.uk/mp-sitefinity-prod/docs/default-source/report-acc
>ounts/report-accounts-2021.pdf
>
>which is an unremarkable setup for an industry pension fund.
>
>Pretty shoddy journalism in other words.

Rupert Murdoch is quaking in his boots.

>Even if the unions decided to run the fund along socialist principles
>they couldn't, because they don't have a majority on the board.

I remember the Miners' Pension Fund was one of the first to get called
out for making suspect investments (back in the 70's). They were
allegedly speculating on works of art - rather than perhaps something
which might create work for working men to do (modulo Banksy I suppose,
this Century).
--
Roland Perry

On 08/04/2023 11:08, Theo wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <u0pfqh$sgin$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:19:30 on Fri, 7 Apr
>> 2023, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>> Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5f17b5a2-d3cd-11ed-b5c3-54651fc826
>>>>> e9?shareToken=b32ffae17496f10563b46d3185e4c0ea>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Shocking , a union often deemed a bastion of socialism following principles
>>>> long established as good practise by the Tory right in putting profit
>>>> before principles.
>>>
>>> The Railway Pension Fund is not a trade union.
>>
>> "Its board also includes Mick Cash, the former secretary general of
>> the RMT union, and Gerry Doherty, former general secretary of the
>> Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association (TSSA)."
>>
>> Is probably what got people's attention.
>
> Those are ex-officio positions, given the fund has:
> 11 directors on the board (trustees, non-execs etc)
> 9 directors representing employers (NR/TOCs/FOCs/etc)
> 10 directors representing employees (nominated by unions)
> https://cdn.rpmi.co.uk/mp-sitefinity-prod/docs/default-source/report-accounts/report-accounts-2021.pdf
>
> which is an unremarkable setup for an industry pension fund.
>
> Pretty shoddy journalism in other words. Even if the unions decided to run
> the fund along socialist principles they couldn't, because they don't have a
> majority on the board.
>

It's the Times, so shoddy journalism is a given, especially with the
council elections looming.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On Sat, 8 Apr 2023 10:29:06 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
wrote:

>On Fri, 7 Apr 2023 16:19:30 -0000 (UTC)
>Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>><https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5f17b5a2-d3cd-11ed-b5c3-54651fc826e9?shareT
>>oken=b32ffae17496f10563b46d3185e4c0ea>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Shocking , a union often deemed a bastion of socialism following principles
>>> long established as good practise by the Tory right in putting profit
>>> before principles.
>>>
>>
>>The Railway Pension Fund is not a trade union.
>
>One of the trustees is Mick Marx Cash.
>
Pension funds commonly include persons representing employees on their
boards. One of the members of my pension fund board works for Deloitte
but that doesn't make it a provider of various financial services;
others also represent the employer, employees and current pensioners.

On Sat, 8 Apr 2023 04:58:42 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

>In message <u0pb28$rqq5$5@dont-email.me>, at 14:58:16 on Fri, 7 Apr
>2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <1u403i5ssip7shp8gsnhci3e681u9390ci@4ax.com>, at 14:00:13 on
>>> Fri, 7 Apr 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> On Fri, 7 Apr 2023 13:07:22 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In message <u0oqkm$pge4$6@dont-email.me>, at 10:17:59 on Fri, 7 Apr
>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <u0ne42$gl53$5@dont-email.me>, at 21:38:10 on Thu, 6 Apr
>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> <https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5f17b5a2-d3cd-11ed-b5c3-54651fc826e9
>>>>>>>> ?shareToken=b32ffae17496f10563b46d3185e4c0ea>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What people forget when moaning about huge profits for companies like
>>>>>>> Shell (most made outside the UK) is that may of the shareholders are
>>>>>>> themselves (via pension funds). Similarly other big bad companies which
>>>>>>> are accused of exploiting the public in different ways.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I complain a lot about Vodafone's business practices, but in years gone
>>>>>>> by my pension provider was a big investor.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, I believe that, of late, UK pension funds are now more likely to
>>>>>> invest outside the UK, as the returns are generally better. It's
>>>>>>one of the
>>>>>> reasons for the declining importance of the LSE.
>>>>>
>>>>> If they invest in Shell, they are in effect investing "outside the UK",
>>>>> if we believe their protestation that most of their profits come from
>>>>> outside the UK (rather than from fleecing long-suffering UK motorists).
>>>>>
>>>>> Vodafone has substantial overseas interests too.
>>>>
>>>> True, but I think they also invest directly in foreign companies on
>>>> foreign stock markets.
>>>
>>> Yes, of course they will. Maybe even more in future thanks to Nigel
>>> Farage.
>>
>>Sadly, there's long been a steady loss of high tech industries from the UK.
>>It long predates Brexit.
>
>That's true, but Brexit has put several more nails in the coffin,
>despite the promises to 'make UK great again', to channel Trump.

I'm a Remainer like you, but if I weren't, I would point out that nearly all this decline occurred while we were full EU
members, before the 2016 referendum. It's probably continued post-Brexit, but there wasn't much left to lose by then.

So, while it's nice to blame everything on Brexit, in this case, the problems are at home.

In message <a2d53il02caeguqqiuhkfvnhmckanmcgm0@4ax.com>, at 13:52:10 on
Sun, 9 Apr 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>On Sat, 8 Apr 2023 04:58:42 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>
>>In message <u0pb28$rqq5$5@dont-email.me>, at 14:58:16 on Fri, 7 Apr
>>2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <1u403i5ssip7shp8gsnhci3e681u9390ci@4ax.com>, at 14:00:13 on
>>>> Fri, 7 Apr 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> On Fri, 7 Apr 2023 13:07:22 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In message <u0oqkm$pge4$6@dont-email.me>, at 10:17:59 on Fri, 7 Apr
>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <u0ne42$gl53$5@dont-email.me>, at 21:38:10 on Thu, 6 Apr
>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>><https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5f17b5a2-d3cd-11ed-b5c3-54651fc826e9
>>>>>>>>> ?shareToken=b32ffae17496f10563b46d3185e4c0ea>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What people forget when moaning about huge profits for companies like
>>>>>>>> Shell (most made outside the UK) is that may of the shareholders are
>>>>>>>> themselves (via pension funds). Similarly other big bad companies which
>>>>>>>> are accused of exploiting the public in different ways.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I complain a lot about Vodafone's business practices, but in years gone
>>>>>>>> by my pension provider was a big investor.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However, I believe that, of late, UK pension funds are now more
>>>>>>>likely to
>>>>>>> invest outside the UK, as the returns are generally better. It's
>>>>>>>one of the
>>>>>>> reasons for the declining importance of the LSE.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If they invest in Shell, they are in effect investing "outside the UK",
>>>>>> if we believe their protestation that most of their profits come from
>>>>>> outside the UK (rather than from fleecing long-suffering UK motorists).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Vodafone has substantial overseas interests too.
>>>>>
>>>>> True, but I think they also invest directly in foreign companies on
>>>>> foreign stock markets.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, of course they will. Maybe even more in future thanks to Nigel
>>>> Farage.
>>>
>>>Sadly, there's long been a steady loss of high tech industries from the UK.
>>>It long predates Brexit.
>>
>>That's true, but Brexit has put several more nails in the coffin,
>>despite the promises to 'make UK great again', to channel Trump.
>
>I'm a Remainer like you, but if I weren't, I would point out that
>nearly all this decline occurred while we were full EU
>members, before the 2016 referendum. It's probably continued
>post-Brexit, but there wasn't much left to lose by then.
>
>So, while it's nice to blame everything on Brexit, in this case, the
>problems are at home.

The latest economic analysis says we are permanently 4% worse off due to
Brexit (having factored out all the other reasons we are worse off this
week).

That's in marked contrast to the Brexiteers who said it would make us
*better* off.

4% might not sound much to some, but it's 4x the amount we used to pay
to the EU (and once upon a time, written on the side of bus, as if that
1% would save the NHS, if it hadn't already been earmarked to replace
lost grants from the EU).
--
Roland Perry

On Sun, 9 Apr 2023 14:11:54 +0100
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>In message <a2d53il02caeguqqiuhkfvnhmckanmcgm0@4ax.com>, at 13:52:10 on
>Sun, 9 Apr 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>On Sat, 8 Apr 2023 04:58:42 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>So, while it's nice to blame everything on Brexit, in this case, the
>>problems are at home.
>
>The latest economic analysis says we are permanently 4% worse off due to
>Brexit (having factored out all the other reasons we are worse off this
>week).
>
>That's in marked contrast to the Brexiteers who said it would make us
>*better* off.
>
>4% might not sound much to some, but it's 4x the amount we used to pay
>to the EU (and once upon a time, written on the side of bus, as if that
>1% would save the NHS, if it hadn't already been earmarked to replace
>lost grants from the EU).

Those grants were simply some of our money coming back to us.

Shame the EUi/EEC couldn't have remained a trading block with the federalist
nonsense confined to an obscure bunch of obsessives in brussels.

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Apr 2023 14:11:54 +0100
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <a2d53il02caeguqqiuhkfvnhmckanmcgm0@4ax.com>, at 13:52:10 on
>> Sun, 9 Apr 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> On Sat, 8 Apr 2023 04:58:42 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> So, while it's nice to blame everything on Brexit, in this case, the
>>> problems are at home.
>>
>> The latest economic analysis says we are permanently 4% worse off due to
>> Brexit (having factored out all the other reasons we are worse off this
>> week).
>>
>> That's in marked contrast to the Brexiteers who said it would make us
>> *better* off.
>>
>> 4% might not sound much to some, but it's 4x the amount we used to pay
>> to the EU (and once upon a time, written on the side of bus, as if that
>> 1% would save the NHS, if it hadn't already been earmarked to replace
>> lost grants from the EU).
>
> Those grants were simply some of our money coming back to us.
>
> Shame the EUi/EEC couldn't have remained a trading block with the federalist
> nonsense confined to an obscure bunch of obsessives in brussels.
>
>

But our government won’t even countenance the trading block idea, thus we
remain outside of the EEA.

On Sun, 9 Apr 2023 15:19:56 -0000 (UTC)
Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
><Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 9 Apr 2023 14:11:54 +0100
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <a2d53il02caeguqqiuhkfvnhmckanmcgm0@4ax.com>, at 13:52:10 on
>>> Sun, 9 Apr 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> On Sat, 8 Apr 2023 04:58:42 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> So, while it's nice to blame everything on Brexit, in this case, the
>>>> problems are at home.
>>>
>>> The latest economic analysis says we are permanently 4% worse off due to
>>> Brexit (having factored out all the other reasons we are worse off this
>>> week).
>>>
>>> That's in marked contrast to the Brexiteers who said it would make us
>>> *better* off.
>>>
>>> 4% might not sound much to some, but it's 4x the amount we used to pay
>>> to the EU (and once upon a time, written on the side of bus, as if that
>>> 1% would save the NHS, if it hadn't already been earmarked to replace
>>> lost grants from the EU).
>>
>> Those grants were simply some of our money coming back to us.
>>
>> Shame the EUi/EEC couldn't have remained a trading block with the federalist
>> nonsense confined to an obscure bunch of obsessives in brussels.
>>
>>
>
>But our government won’t even countenance the trading block idea, thus we
>remain outside of the EEA.

The EEA is essentially paying to be in the EU but without a vote on any of the
rules. Its the worst of both worlds.

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Apr 2023 15:19:56 -0000 (UTC)
> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 9 Apr 2023 14:11:54 +0100
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <a2d53il02caeguqqiuhkfvnhmckanmcgm0@4ax.com>, at 13:52:10 on
>>>> Sun, 9 Apr 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> On Sat, 8 Apr 2023 04:58:42 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>> So, while it's nice to blame everything on Brexit, in this case, the
>>>>> problems are at home.
>>>>
>>>> The latest economic analysis says we are permanently 4% worse off due to
>>>> Brexit (having factored out all the other reasons we are worse off this
>>>> week).
>>>>
>>>> That's in marked contrast to the Brexiteers who said it would make us
>>>> *better* off.
>>>>
>>>> 4% might not sound much to some, but it's 4x the amount we used to pay
>>>> to the EU (and once upon a time, written on the side of bus, as if that
>>>> 1% would save the NHS, if it hadn't already been earmarked to replace
>>>> lost grants from the EU).
>>>
>>> Those grants were simply some of our money coming back to us.
>>>
>>> Shame the EUi/EEC couldn't have remained a trading block with the federalist
>>> nonsense confined to an obscure bunch of obsessives in brussels.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> But our government won’t even countenance the trading block idea, thus we
>> remain outside of the EEA.
>
> The EEA is essentially paying to be in the EU but without a vote on any of the
> rules. Its the worst of both worlds.
>
>
>

But the brexiteers wanted out of the rule making process….

On 09/04/2023 15:59, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Apr 2023 14:11:54 +0100
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <a2d53il02caeguqqiuhkfvnhmckanmcgm0@4ax.com>, at 13:52:10 on
>> Sun, 9 Apr 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> On Sat, 8 Apr 2023 04:58:42 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> So, while it's nice to blame everything on Brexit, in this case, the
>>> problems are at home.
>>
>> The latest economic analysis says we are permanently 4% worse off due to
>> Brexit (having factored out all the other reasons we are worse off this
>> week).
>>
>> That's in marked contrast to the Brexiteers who said it would make us
>> *better* off.
>>
>> 4% might not sound much to some, but it's 4x the amount we used to pay
>> to the EU (and once upon a time, written on the side of bus, as if that
>> 1% would save the NHS, if it hadn't already been earmarked to replace
>> lost grants from the EU).
>
> Those grants were simply some of our money coming back to us.
>
> Shame the EUi/EEC couldn't have remained a trading block with the federalist
> nonsense confined to an obscure bunch of obsessives in brussels.

I like the thought experiment where we imagine what California or Texas
would have been like if they had not been part of the USA.

Powerful independent nations?

But whenever we suggest a break up the federalist USA, the US "powers
that be" resist. This is despite the obvious advantages of being a
loosely related trading bloc with full control of their borders,
independent currencies (why should NY and Wyoming share the same
monetary policy?), a points scheme for immigration that is equally open
to the rest of the world as to adjoining states, and each state having
its own independent trading standards, medicine authority, import
tariffs, legal system, defense forces, supreme court... so that they no
longer spread the costs over 50 states.

Seriously though - why does the USA resist the idea of evolution to a
set of independent sovereign states?

The US government seemed quite keen for the UK to leave the EU, even
though it has possibly hastened the more integrated "United States of
Europe". In a second mad thought experiment, this U.S.E. could become
another world power. For example, a closer integration of defense
research and procurement across the EU looks to be happening now that
the UK has left, even before the Ukraine invasion.

This tighter integration of the EU would never have suited the UK, which
prefers a looser model, where we cease to be a set of "vassal states"
under the yolk of London/Brussels, but can freely consider the
advantages for first movers such as Scotland and N Ireland taking back
control of their laws, their borders, and their currencies. They could
be powerful independent sovereign global trading states, with favourable
tax regimes, independent government debt, local regulations etc, able to
make their own bilateral agreements with China, USA, even India or
Russia. The advantages are clear, and London has made all the arguments
for such independence during the leave campaign. Why is it not
supporting such policies? What has London got to lose? Seriously, how
could it possibly hurt London if the UK evolved to a set of sovereign
states?

Oops, that's possibly a third thought experiment. Quota reached.

Cheers.

On 09/04/2023 19:36, Alan Jones wrote:
> prefers a looser model, where we cease to be a set of "vassal states"
> under the yolk of London/Brussels, but can freely consider the ...

Oops, Pimms talking: s/yolk/yoke/

Happy Easter!

On 09/04/2023 19:50, Alan Jones wrote:
> On 09/04/2023 19:36, Alan Jones wrote:
>> prefers a looser model, where we cease to be a set of "vassal states"
>> under the yolk of London/Brussels, but can freely consider the ...
>
> Oops, Pimms talking: s/yolk/yoke/
>
> Happy Easter!
>

That's left egg on your face!
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.