this post was submitted on 20 Apr 2024
56 points (98.3% liked)

United Kingdom

4108 readers
215 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
tom
GreatAlbatross
frankPodmore@slrpnk.net
56
Thames Water nationalisation plan could move bulk of £15bn debt to state (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 7 months ago by GreatAlbatross to c/unitedkingdom
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 21 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Why not let it collapse. Let them claim bankruptcy. It might mean lenders in the future require better governance. Or it might lead to pushes to reclaim monies inappropriately siphoned off.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 28 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Yep, bankruptcy and let the state or a cooperative buy the assets, not the liabilities.

[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 18 points 7 months ago

Exactly. Let the investors and banks that allowed them, eat the losses. That's what privatization is. Risk.

Unfortunately, commercial interests in the governments ear will try to say that it will cost them as they will get less for future provatisations. Good. If they are not commercially viable, don't do them. They forget in that argument that they may get more but they would be on the hook for more later to clean up similar messes.

[–] HumanPenguin 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Yep. The UK in the past has had the military distribute water. 1976 when heat caused shortage issues. But other times as well when communities have had issues.

Same thing can be done in 2024 while the company struggles to survive. I'd much rather money spent on that. Then paying of investors who made loans based on bad company investment.

Why tf teach lenders that the UK will bail out companies that fail to invest in the inferstructure they manage.