isn't the situation with southern cross care homes a perfect example of just why the profit motive can't work when it comes to basic care of people?
meanwhile the 'evening standard' reveals that some commuters into london face fares approaching £10,000 a year. philip hammond, transport secretary (and someone who gets free transport and claimed almost the maximum amount possible for his second home, even though he lived in the commuter belt - hey it is a good way to help pay for those rail fares. he has said he would pay any profits he made on his second home into the public purse. oh in case you are wondering mr. hammond is minted) defends what could be double digit rises for some fares because they are needed to fund key improvements to the rail network.
so where are the benefits of privatisation? for years there has been subsidies to most of the rail companies, but prices have risen, services have declined (or been restructured so that they appear to be on target). now that there are to be 'key improvements' (with less government money) the rail companies use that entreprenurial know-how, that can-do approach, that efficiency driven method that we need in public services and ... oh they just put the prices up.
fuck me ragged with a railway siding, but if that is all that is needed to be seen as some gung-ho cheif executive where do i sign up.
after all how hard can it be to solve your problems with a simple 'raise the fares'. see i did it just there.
look i will do it again 'raise the fares'. simple.
in a way we should be happy that cameron has had a serious rethink on he national health service (showing for once that he is a serious politician - not that i think the nhs is safe in his hands if he gets a mandate for a second term), at least we won't be subjected to having to see prices escalate in hospitals just because the only way to make them profitable will be to squeeze the patien... sorry the customer dry.
meanwhile the 'evening standard' reveals that some commuters into london face fares approaching £10,000 a year. philip hammond, transport secretary (and someone who gets free transport and claimed almost the maximum amount possible for his second home, even though he lived in the commuter belt - hey it is a good way to help pay for those rail fares. he has said he would pay any profits he made on his second home into the public purse. oh in case you are wondering mr. hammond is minted) defends what could be double digit rises for some fares because they are needed to fund key improvements to the rail network.
so where are the benefits of privatisation? for years there has been subsidies to most of the rail companies, but prices have risen, services have declined (or been restructured so that they appear to be on target). now that there are to be 'key improvements' (with less government money) the rail companies use that entreprenurial know-how, that can-do approach, that efficiency driven method that we need in public services and ... oh they just put the prices up.
fuck me ragged with a railway siding, but if that is all that is needed to be seen as some gung-ho cheif executive where do i sign up.
after all how hard can it be to solve your problems with a simple 'raise the fares'. see i did it just there.
look i will do it again 'raise the fares'. simple.
in a way we should be happy that cameron has had a serious rethink on he national health service (showing for once that he is a serious politician - not that i think the nhs is safe in his hands if he gets a mandate for a second term), at least we won't be subjected to having to see prices escalate in hospitals just because the only way to make them profitable will be to squeeze the patien... sorry the customer dry.
No comments:
Post a Comment