Disaster Capitalism

[JimSh]

Covid, Oil and gas and now food.
Can somebody explain to me why there are always some evil bar stewards making obscene profits from the misfortunes of others.

(Actually it is a rhetorical question)

[Westy36]

New energy strategy devised by Scottish Power being discussed on Radio4 this eve. Freezing bills, but paying it back over 10/20 yrs with gov backed loans. Not a bad idea to get over what we hope is a blip in prices, but what bugs me is that no mention has been made of it being on a non-profit basis. So in effect, gov uk back loans for a private business to make obscene profits and pay its CEO millions!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-62645441

Not a problem for our French neighbours though, their state owns their own energy. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/aug/23/cost-of-living-french-popular-resistance-living-standards-uk

https://www.mirror.co.uk/money/edf-bills-france-less-half-27728887

We should nationalise all utilites immediately. Privatisation has been a total and utter failure to all of us. Just take a look at the hopeless management of our water companies for example.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/23/water-companies-in-england-expecting-sewers-to-last-2000-years

[embee]

Trouble is that historically nationalised industries in this country have been a disaster too.

Privatised company not performing well, here's a good idea, let's get the Government to run it instead. Ermmm, no thanks.
Decent regulation by bodies who have a clue and have some clout would be a good place to start. Unfortunately the regulatory bodies are set up by Governments, so a bit of a dog's breakfast recipe.
De-regulation, light touch, quasi-monopolies/cartels take the piddle.

[peteo48]

I wonder if the relative success of state run industries in other countries might provide some clues. My understanding, and I am no expert, is that they are run at "arms length" from the government. In the case of the UK there was extensive political involvement. I often think the poor performance of the NHS in many areas is due to clueless politicians re-organising and meddling.

I have a particular thing about water. It is a basic essential. Nobody should make a profit from providing it. In any event the current situation where foreigners own our water companies and repatriate profits to France and the like is bonkers. It's also a monopoly, I can't change my provider as I can with, say, Telecoms or energy.

[Kremmen]

I have a fair number of relatives and friends who work for the NHS and they all say the same :

Too many managers, managerial levels, and too much associated waste.

or in my non pc language, too many chiefs and not enough indians.

[Jocko]

I worked in the NHS and waste was incredible. Mind you NHS Scotland cracked down big time, not long before I retired, but a bit too late. I worked in Estates (Maintenance) and having come from the private industry I was shocked at how things were run. Temporary fixes week in and week out instead of doing the job right the first or at least the second time.

[Westy36]

Three minutes research and it's worse than I realsied.

Railways: "70% of UK rail routes now wholly or partly owned by foreign ‎states"
https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/70-of-uk-rail-routes-now-owned-by-foreign-states/

Water: "More than 70% of England's water industry owned by foreign companies"
https://www.gmb.org.uk/news/more-70-englands-water-industry-owned-foreign-companies

Energy:
E.ON is a German-owned
EDF Energy is a subsidiary of the French Government
Npower is a subsidiary of German energy company RWE Group
ScottishPower is a subsidiary of Spanish company Iberdrola
https://www.lovemoney.com/guides/22318/who-owns-british-gas-sse-npower-and-the-rest-of-the-uks-big-energy-companies

And we've EDF building nuclear plants over here.

Makes for grim reading and begs the question of just why aren't they back in state ownership?

[Kremmen]

Same with all the bus companies

Mostly foreign owned with profits going overseas

Not to mention steel and car production

Should never have been allowed

I do seem to recall the highly profitable ARM phone and computer chips staying UK owned after a Gov block of a hostile takeover ?

[Kremmen]

Similar to Thatchers cheap council house sell off.

Big bucks from the sell-off but all that rent now going elsewhere whereas councils could now do with it to balance the books.


Short sighted isn't the word.

[peteo48]

I have a fair number of relatives and friends who work for the NHS and they all say the same :

Too many managers, managerial levels, and too much associated waste.

or in my non pc language, too many chiefs and not enough indians.

I thought this until I read an article which made the opposite case and argued that there were far too few administrators in the NHS. This, apparently, led to clinicians having to do extra admin work and took staff away from clinical duties. I gather admin overheads in the NHS are about 6% - contrast that to a private system like the USA where there is a whole insurance infrastructure on top of the health care system itself sucking profits and commission away from healthcare.

So what's the truth? At 6% for admin overheads, the NHS seems reasonably efficient but, like Kremmen I have a few relatives who work or worked in the NHS. The argument often put forward to me is that many managers in the NHS are "worse than useless" and have the "temerity" with an MBA from a crap university, to order clinicians about and demand all sorts of useless information from them. My cousin is a top ophthalmologist. He is scathing about "cretinous" kids trying to run things and boss experts about. He left, took his 2/3 final salary pension and now earns £250k per annum doing consultancy work.

There's something very wrong but the impression I get is it it not quite as simple as spending too much on admin. It may be they don't spend enough on admin but far too much on "managers" who have little or no expertise.

[madasafish]

The UK has run a Balance of Payments deficit for 30 years.
There are two ways to pay for it: devalue the pound 40%, make imports a lot more expensive, teh UK poorer and increase exports,
or
Do nothing but sell assets abroad so foreign currency reserves are kept up. Eventually we will run out of assets and have to do the first course..but be even poorer.

This is the fault of ALL political parties.

[MartinJG]

I have a fair number of relatives and friends who work for the NHS and they all say the same :

Too many managers, managerial levels, and too much associated waste.

or in my non pc language, too many chiefs and not enough indians.

I thought this until I read an article which made the opposite case and argued that there were far too few administrators in the NHS. This, apparently, led to clinicians having to do extra admin work and took staff away from clinical duties. I gather admin overheads in the NHS are about 6% - contrast that to a private system like the USA where there is a whole insurance infrastructure on top of the health care system itself sucking profits and commission away from healthcare.

So what's the truth? At 6% for admin overheads, the NHS seems reasonably efficient but, like Kremmen I have a few relatives who work or worked in the NHS. The argument often put forward to me is that many managers in the NHS are "worse than useless" and have the "temerity" with an MBA from a crap university, to order clinicians about and demand all sorts of useless information from them. My cousin is a top ophthalmologist. He is scathing about "cretinous" kids trying to run things and boss experts about. He left, took his 2/3 final salary pension and now earns £250k per annum doing consultancy work.

There's something very wrong but the impression I get is it it not quite as simple as spending too much on admin. It may be they don't spend enough on admin but far too much on "managers" who have little or no expertise.

Personally, I think it is simpler than this. The organisation and 'chain of command' from top to bottom is bordering on shambolic in too many cases. It was a huge mistake when they did away with the old ward sister who was the equivalent of the NCO sergeant and cracked the whip. A good few years ago, I watched a series on TV featuring Gerry Robinson (business consultant) who visited and interviewed staff in several hospitals. He came to the conclusion that there was a lack of cohesion from top to bottom with 'old school consultants' playing God and refusing to adhere to systems, hospital managers (overpaid for largely admin work) with budgets and personal agendas to match and nurses at the bottom of the food chain who struggled with the English language and fundamental knowledge where communication is vital. Talk to anyone who has been administered the incorrect medication or treatment and you begin to get the picture. In short, it was rather depressing. The frustration lies in the general consensus that overall standards of professional training in the UK are generally well regarded but the execution and practice is badly let down by the administration and bureacratic burden of 'paperwork' and jobsworthy compliance. So, nothing new there when it comes to government.

[MartinJG]

The UK has run a Balance of Payments deficit for 30 years.
There are two ways to pay for it: devalue the pound 40%, make imports a lot more expensive, teh UK poorer and increase exports,
or
Do nothing but sell assets abroad so foreign currency reserves are kept up. Eventually we will run out of assets and have to do the first course..but be even poorer.

This is the fault of ALL political parties.

More than 30 years, sad to say. I believe the last surplus was in the eighties (1984?) under Thatcher. The UK is largely propped up by financial services (invisibles) and the property market which is really nothing more than a financial services debt for equity game.


PS - Surplus in 1985 and 1997. That's it folks...

[embee]

I have always had reservations about the running of any public institution which doesn't have to "earn" the money. I don't mean the frontline workers or even the general management, but the institution as a whole. This includes things like the NHS, Police, Military etc. They bid and get awarded annual budgets and then set about spending it, but no-one is held to account personally for delivering value for money to the public, who are the ones funding it. If the institution fails to perform, they claim it needs more funding.

I know someone who is a very experienced industrial purchaser. He did some contract work at a county Constabulary and was horrified at the ineptitude and inefficiency, suppliers were used pretty much unquestioned. When he asked why he was told that they always used those suppliers and continued to do so. They were paying far more for consumables than if you or I went down to the local retail shop.

I also have a bugbear about the apparent design of hospitals. Look at industry and the amount of walking about is purposely minimised, while someone is walking about they aren't doing anything useful. Hospitals seem to be designed to require a maximum amount of walking about by the staff.

[Toptek]

I have always had reservations about the running of any public institution which doesn't have to "earn" the money. I don't mean the frontline workers or even the general management, but the institution as a whole. This includes things like the NHS, Police, Military etc. They bid and get awarded annual budgets and then set about spending it, but no-one is held to account personally for delivering value for money to the public, who are the ones funding it. If the institution fails to perform, they claim it needs more funding.

I know someone who is a very experienced industrial purchaser. He did some contract work at a county Constabulary and was horrified at the ineptitude and inefficiency, suppliers were used pretty much unquestioned. When he asked why he was told that they always used those suppliers and continued to do so. They were paying far more for consumables than if you or I went down to the local retail shop.

I also have a bugbear about the apparent design of hospitals. Look at industry and the amount of walking about is purposely minimised, while someone is walking about they aren't doing anything useful. Hospitals seem to be designed to require a maximum amount of walking about by the staff.

Quite a few of the hospitals I have encountered have outgrown their original footprint due to service expansion, leading to several buildings with services dotted around. For example, the labs will be in one building but most wards and departments require some of their varied services (blood tests, specimens from surgery, bloods for transfusion,  the list goes on). Similarly, Radiology services travelling to perform x-rays or patients being wheeled there for scans etc.