CXRAndy
Veteran
I refer you to today's Supreme court decision.
Anyone who ever believed that males with a piece of paper could be classed as a woman, are as you describe
Starmer's vision quest
- Thread starter mjr
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Anyone who ever believed that males with a piece of paper could be classed as a woman, are as you describe
Re: British Steel @Scunthorpe
One aspect to what UK Gov. is doing that I don't quite understand is how UK Government has taken over management and not ownership. If I own an asset then I can chose to eg sell that asset. If the Government has reduced the value of that asset (eg by taking control) then I can sell for the lower price and sue them for the difference. Bit like selling a house with or without "vacant possession". An asset over which the owner has no control and the new owner would have no control must be worth less than an asset over which the owner does have control.
The Chinese owners were proposing to shut down one of the furnaces using a Salamander method which would allow them to be restarted in the future, thus retaining the value of the asset, keeping the other furnace operating. Given the losses seems to me closing down one of the furnaces in a way allowing it to be restarted and keeping the other operating is not the "irresponsible sabotage" many incl. some politicians have been presenting.
My impression is that taking over management and operation will be impacting the value of the asset, it will be using what materials there are on-site, it will be causing further wear on the furnaces (that don't have that much more life anyway given they are now very old), etc. and I assume UK taxpayer is liable for such losses and I assume UK Government must be paying the Chinese owners for use of that asset (rent, lease or something).
Genuine my not understanding not my making a point through a question.
Ian
One aspect to what UK Gov. is doing that I don't quite understand is how UK Government has taken over management and not ownership. If I own an asset then I can chose to eg sell that asset. If the Government has reduced the value of that asset (eg by taking control) then I can sell for the lower price and sue them for the difference. Bit like selling a house with or without "vacant possession". An asset over which the owner has no control and the new owner would have no control must be worth less than an asset over which the owner does have control.
The Chinese owners were proposing to shut down one of the furnaces using a Salamander method which would allow them to be restarted in the future, thus retaining the value of the asset, keeping the other furnace operating. Given the losses seems to me closing down one of the furnaces in a way allowing it to be restarted and keeping the other operating is not the "irresponsible sabotage" many incl. some politicians have been presenting.
My impression is that taking over management and operation will be impacting the value of the asset, it will be using what materials there are on-site, it will be causing further wear on the furnaces (that don't have that much more life anyway given they are now very old), etc. and I assume UK taxpayer is liable for such losses and I assume UK Government must be paying the Chinese owners for use of that asset (rent, lease or something).
Genuine my not understanding not my making a point through a question.
Ian
BoldonLad
Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
- Location
- South Tyneside
Yes, it is confusing. I think you may be labouring under the mistaken premise that our Politicians have a viable plan. 😂
CXRAndy
Veteran
I don't know there are some posts on YouTube and X suggesting something has happened very recently
Rusty Nails
Country Member
7 speed
Must be true then, but without the authenticity of a meme I don't believe it.
Is that the Jim Davidson, the comedians' comedian who sadly is no longer on our screens?
Must be true then, but without the authenticity of a meme I don't believe it.
Is that the Jim Davidson, the comedians' comedian who sadly is no longer on our screens?
bobzmyunkle
Über Member
It's all a conspiracy to make Starmer appear vaguely interesting. Jim Davidson, dupe or Labour mole?
CXRAndy
Veteran
I didn't say it was true, I was asking those , some of which will toady the left so much information flows like diarrhea
Rusty Nails
Country Member
Could you repeat that in English please?
Ian H
Legendary Member
He's literally talking sh!t.
AuroraSaab
Shaman
Sounds like an AI spoof. Davidson sent it as a WhatsApp message to someone and then it ended up in wider circulation apparently.
Social media is rife with stuff like that about politicians and celebrities of all persuasion (the Zuckerberg one of him looking down a woman's cleavage stands out) and until there's proof it was anything other than an AI fake outlets are right to kick it off.
Social media is rife with stuff like that about politicians and celebrities of all persuasion (the Zuckerberg one of him looking down a woman's cleavage stands out) and until there's proof it was anything other than an AI fake outlets are right to kick it off.
