" snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com" wrote in
news: snipped-for-privacy@o11g2000yql.googlegroups.com:
Which is a bloody shame as he can be very helpful when he's in his humanity
compatability mode - see the thread on chassis building for an example.
I have to agree with Jerry's comments on REMPLOY.
The removal of their funding was, to my mind, very short sighted.
( come the revolution I will have ALL accounts shot ).
Many of you may be surprised to learn what REMPLOY does :-
Remploy Automotive
Remploy Building Products
Remploy e-cycle ( go into many charity shops selling electrical goods
like 2nd hard TV' s; washers etc. and they will probably have been
repaired and / or tested by REMPLOY )
Remploy Frontline ( protective clothing for military and civil use )
Remploy Healthcare
Remploy Offiscope
Remploy Packaging
Remploy Workscope
Going back to Ontracks I am still unclear if these undelivered items
have been paid for ?
I know from experience larger companies like to 'hold on' to suppliers
or sub contractors money as long as possible, even 'pay when paid'
and that the government has put in place legislation to try and
prevent this. I am sure intentionally or unintentionally Internet
companies do the same to the general public.
Chris
Dragon Heart wrote in
news: snipped-for-privacy@j1g2000yqi.googlegroups.com:
Nope, i quite agree with you - for all sorts of reasons and yes I was
fully aware of what remploy does/did ...
... but ...
... it was never a business, it was a service. Recognise it as that,
fund it as that and don't expect it to make a profit.
Why was it not a business, one of Websters definition of noun business is :-
A commercial or industrial enterprise and the people who constitute it;
I cannot see how funding or making a profit affect the definition.
Cheers,
Simon
:
: ... it was never a business, it was a service. Recognise it as that,
: fund it as that and don't expect it to make a profit.
:
You seem to be arguing over semantics...
REMPLOY was NEVER intended to be a commercial profit orientated
business. It purpose was / is " to significantly increase the
employment opportunities of disabled people and those who experience
complex barriers to work "
Some may find this interesting regarding their factory closures :-
formatting link
Just because some faceless civil servant decided to cut their funding
the REMPLOY management decided to restructure and will continue to
support people. This regrouping has cost them time and money that
would have been better spent on their 'employees' but .....
Chris
Dragon Heart wrote in
news: snipped-for-privacy@u13g2000yqg.googlegroups.com:
I confess I misremembered, what stuck in my mind was that commercial
factors were over-riding the main purpose of the organisation. Still as teh
socialists have bankrupted or closed everything they've ever touched I
don't suppose that I should have been that surprised.
"simon" wrote in
news: snipped-for-privacy@bt.com:
snipped-for-privacy@j1g2000yqi.googlegroups.com:
(a) What Dragon said
(b) Websters FFS not even an English dictionary let alone on that was
ever intended to impart anything more than superfical knowlage
"Jerry" wrote in news:gni2f8$jld
$ snipped-for-privacy@reader.motzarella.org:
Not really, we were arguing about purpose - commercial business is there
to make money for the owners. Service "industry" is there to provide a
service.
Two different things entirely and that it is a basic failing of
socialist economics to confuse the two to the detriment of the economy.
By running the nationalised industries as job creation schemes money
that could and should have been spent on development and investment in
new technology was pissed away. Consequently all the nationalised
industries went to the wall, consequently the manufacturing base of the
economy was wiped out and we?re in the position we are today where an
ever diminishing number of businesses are funding an ever expanding
number of government run service industries which in turn is causing yet
more real business to close as they can?t afford the tax burden. Nasty
spiral downward trend.
BTW it was reported today that tax income compared to the same period
last year is already 7 billion down from last year ... and with all
those PFI and job creation schemes to pay for as well ...
"Jerry" wrote in news:gnkg8k$t9f
$ snipped-for-privacy@reader.motzarella.org:
Actually Keynes and his forbears
And as I've suggested, stick to model railways, you know what you're
talking about there and at times it can be an education to read what you
have to say.
(a) Think you need to check the thread as to who said what cos not sure
Dragon said anything about it not being a business.
(b) How about from Cambridge University Press :
the activity of buying and selling goods and services, or a particular
company that does this, or work you do to earn money:
NB goods and services.
and that 'or' is very important.
Still no mention of funding or profit....
Cheers,
Simon
Pardon me Chris, but as far as the definition of business is concerned, I
agree with Jerry and support his right to an opinion (well would do that
even if didnt agree).
Cheers,
Simon
"simon" wrote in
news: snipped-for-privacy@bt.com:
Oh certainly I support both of you in your right to hold opinions,
indeed I would fight for your right to hold said opinions. Doesn't mean
that i accept your opinions as being correct though.
Anyway, back to trains?
OK, so in my dreams I have this beautiful mistress whose Dad always wanted a
Railway Modelling shop. So I set up in this nice shop, good location but hes
forever cutting prices for his mates and theres no chance of ever making a
profit - not losing too much so can easily continue funding it for my
lifetime.
Shes happy so keeps me happy, and her Dads in heaven with his .....er....
Cheers,
Simon
:
:
:
: Time to go back to trains methinks ;-)
:
Yes, best you do, as this is all way over your head - Many utilities
are services, are you suggesting that Thatcher should not have sold
the public utilities into private ownership?!
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.