Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: Charles Lindbergh <spirit@stlouis.invalid>
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.e-book.technical
Subject: Re: Tories resent the poor.
Message-ID: <33bb3ah9id3qqnotsigd36s9u1sa56vulm@4ax.com>
References: <s8a33ah9ta5b2fqqf0bmfjar7fb4foj03c@4ax.com> <dyzYv.453471$KL.183@fx19.am4> <h2j53ahfgo3809imgec2mped2shruscj2e@4ax.com> <UNCYv.638611$ZX5.95131@fx32.am4> <6c063ap75dsegvuuh7mido4183hp8ip5lq@4ax.com> <3sXYv.399841$J62.116903@fx03.am4> <3jh83adohak4u2kjfnnnii0lakprd38jjr@4ax.com> <HgdZv.310843$8M5.26382@fx09.fr7> <hbpa3aplaas1nt7e2l8lh58r8jht5ilg78@4ax.com> <E8fZv.457385$KL.13953@fx19.am4> <894b3ah0ttnes5h5bqgp9g6h553lee4vib@4ax.com> <gygZv.513172$9I4.248042@fx35.am4>
User-Agent: ForteAgent/7.10.32.1212
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 77
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Easynews - www.easynews.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2014 21:31:28 +0000
X-Received-Body-CRC: 1723416137
X-Received-Bytes: 4279
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.binaries.e-book.technical:451
On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 20:48:35 +0100, "Ian Field" <gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com>
wrote:
>
>
>"Charles Lindbergh" <spirit@stlouis.invalid> wrote in message
>news:894b3ah0ttnes5h5bqgp9g6h553lee4vib@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 19:12:59 +0100, "Ian Field"
>> <gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"Charles Lindbergh" <spirit@stlouis.invalid> wrote in message
>>>news:hbpa3aplaas1nt7e2l8lh58r8jht5ilg78@4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 08 Oct 2014 16:04:55 GMT, Moi <moi@here.now> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 07 Oct 2014 20:05:29 +0000, Charles Lindbergh wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can appreciate your frustration, but do you really believe your
>>>>>> government could run things any better? Right now, you are not
>>>>>> subsidizing these industries with your taxes. If they were still
>>>>>> under
>>>>>> government control, don't you think they would operate at a loss and
>>>>>> require taxpayer subsidy? If you never took the train, wouldn't you
>>>>>> resent having to subsidize those who do use them?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Honestly, I can't think of anything that any government runs better
>>>>>> than
>>>>>> private industry, can you?
>>>>>
>>>>>The British Government still subsidizes the privatized rail service.
>>>>>
>>>>>In 2013 the rail companies received UKP 4 billion, and paid out 200
>>>>>million UK pounds to shareholders.
>>>>>
>>>>>Part of the UK rail system (Northern rail) is part-owned by the a
>>>>>subsidiary of the Dutch state-owned company Abellio. It's been announced
>>>>>today that theycompany has won the contract to run Scots Rail from next
>>>>>April.
>>>>
>>>> And yet, with all this government involvement the rail system still runs
>>>> like
>>>> crap.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>The mail service is an example of a government running a better industry
>>>>>that a private company. As are the armed forces, police service & a
>>>>>national health service.
>>>>
>>>> In the USA, FedEx and UPS operate far more efficiently then our US
>>>> postal
>>>> service which is on the verge of insolvency. We have an outstanding
>>>> armed
>>>> forces, which is the governments main responsibility. Unfortunately,
>>>> our
>>>> armed
>>>> forces are a source of tremendous waste and financial inefficiency. I am
>>>> just
>>>> not sure how one can truly privatize the military of a nation state.
>>>
>>>Hiring mercenaries (euphemistically called "contractors") - seems to be
>>>well
>>>underway.
>>
>> Let me know when the United States Navy hires mercenaries to operate our
>> fleet
>> ballistic missile submarines or our Nimitz or Gerald R. Ford class
>> aircraft
>> carriers.
>
>Dunno about mercenaries, but civilian "contractors" aren't exactly rare.
There is a very big difference between a civilian contractor maintaining
equipment on a carrier and a naval aviator / war fighter providing CAS for
United States Marines on the ground in Afghanistan.
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 |
| 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 |
|