What can be done about the avaricious and selfish

Don't think avarice is purely the realm of Conservative politicians and bosses of privatised utilities. There was a Labout MP where I lived who had numerous consultancies and directorships and retired a very rich man. Typically he would go on about Tory greed and sleaze and was just as bad. Later on, he was exposed when he went to the House of Lords for demanding £12,000 a month to work for a lobbyist.

Last week the boss of a failing water company was on TV saying there wasn't enough storage for water. The last 2 new reservoirs in England were built just as privatisation was happening, but 35 reservoirs have been sold off since.

A few weeks before that the director of water something from our local water company was saying how we should reduce our personal use of water, giving exactly the same advice as was given in 1976. We've not moved on at all

Water is a singular and particular case as it is necessary for survival and underpins public health.

However, in general the 'inequality' narrative is framed and politicised to serve the ends of those who would manipulate public opinion. The tax system has never been as designed to equalise pay and income as it is now.

The politics of envy are pernicious and soul destroying. Those of us who enjoy unprecedented freedom and wealth compared with the majority in the past and, indeed, elsewhere in the world, should be grateful, not jealous.

One man's avarice is another man's prudence. And as for selfishness, it is in everyone's interest for individuals to be as self reliant as they can be. Unnecessary dependence is a depressing state to suffer compared with liberty and resilience which engender dignity and agency.

Polnan- I challenge you also: How could Andy Burnham could meet and sit next to King Charles at the opening on the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow at 8pm - into late night- after meeting with the Welsh Prime Minister before that, after making a policy announcement in an Essex Pub before flying to Glasgow and being in Westminster in the morning before that? Then after a very late finish at the Commonwealth Games on Thursday night then magically be in Manchester the following morning to publicly open No 10 North, meet various people there, be available to be filmed symbolically opening No 10 North, answer journalists' questions and be available to film a face to face interview with Laura Kuensburg for a BBC TV interview?

Do you not accept that being the UK PM to represent the country, and government on the domestic and world stage, meeting face to face with people, being face to face with a variety of press representatives be scrutinised, doing TV interviews, meeting foreign dignitaries ( e/g symbolically yesterday with Zelensky)? All from early morning to late at night- often.

there were no trains to accommodate his schedule and pack all that in. The last train leaving from Glasgow to Manchester on Thursday evening left shortly after the Commonwealth Games began at 8pm!

All country premiers are seen out and about on the world and national stage. Cloud cuckoo land to think a PM can sit behind a desk in Westminster all the time conducting the entire role via Zoom or Microsoft teams. There absolutely is a need for a PM of any country to travel.

i understood that when this technology started off that it would enable ,for example, meetings could/would take place without the need for all this travelling?

greyfur

eazybee

Selfishness:Prime Ministers who use a Government Jet to fly from London to Glasgow, then Glasgow to Manchester the following day.
Trips could have been made via train or standard air transport well within the time available.
No wonder Burnham said it was the 'happiest day of his life.'
Not for taxpayers.

Labour (Rachel Reeves) criticised Tories for Sunak's 'private jet habit'
and said Labour would seek to save taxpayers millions of pounds.
Ministerial Code: private planes should only be used when no other alternative is available.

Never miss an opportunity.

Being selfish and greedy cuts across all politics.

My belief is that Margerat Thatcher changed the collective mentality and the rise of social media put petrol on the fire.

This response to easzybee's post was made on Saturday:

"You tell me the actual time trains AB could have caught and still fitted in all his scheduled dairy commitments, to timescale in London, Harlow, Glasgow and then Manchester on Friday morning?"

There were no scheduled trains that would have allowed AB to fit in all his diary commitments. at that time- not selfish at all- just a very busy man.

I do not disagree with performance bonuses per se. What I object to is the lack of investment that makes profit based bonuses possible.

eazybee

Selfishness:Prime Ministers who use a Government Jet to fly from London to Glasgow, then Glasgow to Manchester the following day.
Trips could have been made via train or standard air transport well within the time available.
No wonder Burnham said it was the 'happiest day of his life.'
Not for taxpayers.

Labour (Rachel Reeves) criticised Tories for Sunak's 'private jet habit'
and said Labour would seek to save taxpayers millions of pounds.
Ministerial Code: private planes should only be used when no other alternative is available.

Never miss an opportunity.

Being selfish and greedy cuts across all politics.

My belief is that Margerat Thatcher changed the collective mentality and the rise of social media put petrol on the fire.

We are now being asked to help to save water as much as possible. Given frequent and sometimes lengthy outages when the taps run dry, regular information about leakages and a failing infrastructure, I am not sure how helpful local people feel.
High salaries and bonuses rather than the updating of infrastructure in one of the most population dense areas of the UK is a disgrace.

we are a corrupt country.. so very sad.

Surely it is reasonable to expect the salary of the people at the top of the company to reflect a multiple of the salary of their workers at a sensible rate - ten times sounds good to me , one hundred and thirty times seems ridiculous.
I thought ( perhaps misled!) that there was such a rule in the armed forces,that the Admirals, Wing Commanders et al may only receive ten times what the privates earn ?

We should not be surprised by the failure of the water industry. This is the outcome of neoliberalism which has dominated our economy for over 40 years, and it has benefitted the few, at the expense of the many.

The main aims of neoliberalism are promoting free markets, reducing government intervention and encouraging private intervention through deregulation. Moving public services and state owned assets into private hands. Letting supply and demand set prices. Cutting public spending on social programmes and welfare.

Has this improved the lives of the majority in this country?
The housing market is broken. Many young people can’t get a job and face an uncertain future. There is rising poverty, and inequality, failing health and social services. To mention just a few failings. Wealth does not trickle down - it cascades upwards and there are inevitably casualties.

I love this country but feel sad that it is failing so many of its citizens.

Whitewavemark2

The EA is more than willing to proceed, it’s the government who constrains them.

I can give examples, but have no wish to “out” the officers.

The government through OFWAT has not allowed water companies to upgrade the system to keep costs down, fines are not the answer, it's money either from bills or government grants to upgrade the infrastructure

Raising investment from the finance market is always going to be unsatisfactory because they want a return on investment. They wanted to borrow more, but we're prevented from doing that, if we want higher standards for water we have to pay for them, will this government allow what is needed ? Nationalize it ideally but the money has still got to be found, it's our waste that is the problem we need to pay a lot more to treat it.

I have posted this previously. When theme Water was privatised. the bosses got enormous rises-- x10 on previous salary . there was then nothing left for the workers so they didn't get any pay rises. The gap has continued to diverge.
I am thankful that our own water is supplied from a spring so we don't have any water rates or shareholders but have to pay for pump servicing and filters. but still only about half of the general water rates friends seem to pay. We just have to worry about the spring drying up in the heat waves. I have even resorted to using the water from the de-humidifier to water the tomatoes. Getting ingenious at saving water.

Let’s not forget the Labour minster, the Tory MP and the low life who worked in the environment agency.

inews.co.uk/news/water-industry-ties-labour-mps-revealed-sewage-3442802?srsltid=AfmBOoqyiu3q2Rk8mFWmJaZVWCPrIBJqsArTRb1rvNavNdmAOc8WANmf

My hope is that they all drown in effluent 🤬

The EA is more than willing to proceed, it’s the government who constrains them.

I can give examples, but have no wish to “out” the officers.

knspol

If it would cost too much to tax payers for privatising the water industry then why not impose really hefty fines on companies that are failing to provide uninterrupted supplies, illegally discharging waste into rivers, failing to repair leaks etc. This would affect company profits and consequently the money available for increased wages and dividends to shareholders.

All the laws are there to prosecute them.
It’s just the will to proceed that is missing. 🤬

Yes, just not at the moment!

That’s all the rain 😊

Nannan2

Having recently moved home i find that my waste water is handled from a different company to my clean water provider- a company based in Wales- i'm in England- so i have no idea why this company(whom ive never heard of!) would have even wanted to bid on and control a little few houses water up in the north! However,also,i dont know why united utilities(who handle almost all of North wests water,fresh AND waste) are insisting on charging me almost the same monthly cost as they were for BOTH in old house,just for wastewater services.!! I cannot change to one or other for both, ìt must stay as it is apparently,so wheres our right to choose?- on subject of water companies there is NO choice as there is in fuel.I am so angry about this- lets all lobby Andy Burnham to make it public company again.(But without it costing us for the 'priveledge')

Welsh water is not under Andy Burnham’s control, it is managed by Welsh Government. Wales supplies a huge quantity of water to western parts of England, under licence to other companies.

monami

Start with footballers and actors

As far as I am concerned, it has to be all or none.

Most people want to cherry pick.

JenniRen - even Michael Heseltine couldn't see the justification in privatisation of the water industry because it would never increase competition within it. Perhaps nationalisation without compensation would give greedy speculators food for thought.

Having recently moved home i find that my waste water is handled from a different company to my clean water provider- a company based in Wales- i'm in England- so i have no idea why this company(whom ive never heard of!) would have even wanted to bid on and control a little few houses water up in the north! However,also,i dont know why united utilities(who handle almost all of North wests water,fresh AND waste) are insisting on charging me almost the same monthly cost as they were for BOTH in old house,just for wastewater services.!! I cannot change to one or other for both, ìt must stay as it is apparently,so wheres our right to choose?- on subject of water companies there is NO choice as there is in fuel.I am so angry about this- lets all lobby Andy Burnham to make it public company again.(But without it costing us for the 'priveledge')

Whitewavemark - yes! like others, i agree totally. Apparently when water was privatised many people predicted exactly the problems which we now face. Water is a necessity and it is shocking that this has happened. And there are studies which show that when there is a big gap between rich and poor EVERYONE is less happy, including the rich. We need compassion, fairness, and not to be driven by greed. No one needs £ millions and millions - they can buy more and more material things but they mistake getting things they like for true happiness. Soon the lift they get from the new luxury or indulgence wears off and they look for more. The most impressive rich people give most of their away to help others - and they are surely the happiest of those who have lots of money.

Start with footballers and actors