Member Info for sean989

“The parties agree that Royal Mail's name and brand should be protected, and Royal Mail should remain headquartered and tax resident in the United Kingdom.”

Great Royal Mail, the unprofitable part of IDS will remain in the uk for tax. So the rest of the company though will be listing in Ireland or some other tax haven. This board is full of crap.

Or if they go for 75% majority using the scheme of arrangement. . . Still don’t think he’ll get there

But I’ll take the 10p dividend.

Well he needs 90% of shares to take my shares off me. Don’t think he’ll get there I’m afraid so maybe I’ll keep my oar in.

If 320p was derisory/ opportunistic then how is 360p being recommended by the board. Told they can keep their jobs with larger bonuses one suspects. 360p is a poor offer. The 10p dividends don’t count as that is money the company already has.

Why would the shares be suspended following a new offer? I’ve not seen shares suspended for this reason before

Saturday deliveries to Saturday collections? Let them go to their local post offices to collect their mail if it means that much to them. Seems like the a compromise which gets the govt off the hook. And if they are unable to travel, then they can have it on Monday. Boohoo!

If you e ever worked for any company which wants to improve in future then you would understand that worker ants are paid to think; do you think workers don’t put forward ideas which can improve a company’s fortunes? Do you think workers aren’t a valuable source of knowledge?

Simx, thanks for the recommended book, I'll add it to my list.

If you are saying that the system of distribution that is communism is discredited because of the actions of authoritarian regimes, should capitalism also be discredited because of the actions of authoritarian regimes or do we pull the wool over our eyes and say those regimes are exceptions? A capitalist regime is currently accused of genocide and apartheid in the middle east. Can the world wars and all the associated deaths be considered attributable to capitalism and attempts to expand the resources available?

Should we abandon capitalism due to these records? If not, why do you conceive that Marxism can only be considered from the perspective of murderous regimes but capitalism gets a free pass?

"You could argue that the libertarian rightwing who believe in free market economics believe in a non democratic and in-humane form of capitalism."

I would go further than this. If you look at all the countries currently starving and the amount of food in the world, nobody should be starving. There isn't a communist country in Africa now (is there?) and yet people are starving (800 million according to UN, around 9 million deaths a year) That's not to say people wouldn't starve under communism however it seems there's an idea that starvation is only bad when it occurs under communism, or that starvation under capitalism is survival of the fittest.

Imagine the number of deaths that would attributed to communism were Russia currently communist and attacking grain supplies in Ukraine.

Yes capitalism is inhumane. But it extends further than to the neo-liberal right. Let's not cover our eyes with wool. When it comes to starvation could capitalism have worse numbers than communism?

Who needs an education when you can just read the book.

"I don’t need to provide a single quote because it’s a worldwide, global piece of literature available to the masses that won the Nobel prize for literature"

Yes that's right Derek. Why question anything when you can read one book and get all the answers. You sound like a religious fanatic old boy.

Ultimately, my point is, historians have different views on the number of deaths caused by communism and the extent to which those in power (Stalin) can be held criminally responsible for those deaths. You decided to quote the higher estimates for the deaths, while seemingly you're willing to close your eyes to the crimes of capitalism. The fact that 9 million people die of starvation while 40% of food produced in the USA is wasted, a stat you seem willing to ignore, suggests you don't really care about the people who starved under communism or under capitalism. You don't care about any of it as long as number one is looked after.

Christ, it gets worse. You're part of the generation that had socialism partially implemented and then shat on everyone else by privatising everything, albeit you won't let the NHS be privatised, not until you've raped it of everything you can get. That's the baby boomers, take everything they can get and leave nothing for anyone else. Selfish twerps that grew up on the backs of their parents hard graft.

You've yet to quote a singal stat from this nobel prize winner and tell me how it was obtained.

Ghandi won the nobel peace prize. How many people starved in India due to capitalism?

Given you speak like a disciple of Thatcher and Reagan, 50ish.

"30 years of first hand experience". Christ, he witnessed 100 million deaths first hand? That's a hell of alot of research.

You are right I am grateful not to be jumping out of a boat on the beaches of Dover or drowning while crossing the high seas due to starvation caused by capitalism.

I see you now want to extend the discussion into other areas because you are losing on the starvation stats.

And yet it's your generation that introduced equality legislation, it's your generation that introduced the American system of no win no fee for injury claims. It's your generation that gets offended by the slogan "not my king". Absolutely pathetic.

Did you take the statistics from these books then? What research did the authors undertake to establish whether the figures were accurate? What are the low levels and high level estimates of deaths caused by communism and can you explain why you've decided to go with the high level estimates rather than the low level ones?

What do you mean by be more specific? If there are 9 million deaths annually in a world where communism exists only in North Korea and Cuba and the rest of the world ascribes to capitalism, then clearly the vile capitalist policies have caused the starvation. The same way you ascribed all deaths by starvation under communist rule to communism, I am using your logic to ascribe all deaths by starvation under capitalism to vile capitalism.

Also getting back to the global warming, nearly everyone in the scientific community agrees global warming is being increased by human activity. Therefore to continue emitting greenhouse gases while knowing that deaths will be caused by it, is somewhat Stalinesque of capitalist societies. It's almost like deaths only provide evidence of a poor system of economic distribution when they are calculated as a result of communism, but for some reason people don't want to attribute any deaths caused by capitalism to capitalism. Head in the sand.

Thanks. You've got to stop presuming that people who ask questions are left wing nuts, it makes you sound like a conspiracy theorist.

Shall we say you've pulled those figures out of the air?

If we've got 9 million deaths caused by starvation annually, let's say 8.8 million are attributed to capitalism. Are you comfortable with those figures? Because that would be worse that Stalin.