Public Owned Authorities ?
Just posted this as a reply over on the QOTW board )
seems a shame to waste it...
public owned authorities trading as private corporations (ie. revenue collection agencies with private share holders run for profit) on Dunn & Bradstreet ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dun_and_Bradstreet) and Companies House (most local councils, police authorities, Bank of England (trading as "old lady of thread Needle Street"), House of Lords etc)
screen grabs: supposedly public authorities trading as private companies on Dunn & Bradstreet website listings
go to
1 minute 35 seconds for dunn & bradstreet listings into this link
www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7jtxpp4rQo
1min 10 seconds and 10 min 02 seconds for dunn & bradstreet listings into this link
www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4b0n3W0B6E
Investigation into Lancashire County Council, the Blues and Twos Credit Union Ltd and Lancashire Police.
www.tpuc.org/node/588
(, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 12:23, Reply)
and did you take a photo of your screen
instead of use prntscrn?
pffffft
(
moohalaa, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 12:30,
Reply)
that's just what they want you to do...
(
IHaveABadFeelingAboutThis most likely working from home on, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 13:39,
Reply)
..
(
The Great Architect is still waiting for his account to be deleted on, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 12:33,
Reply)
CATARACTS?
(
The Great Architect is still waiting for his account to be deleted on, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 12:31,
Reply)
EAR CATARACTS?
(
vigilante_18 WHO SENT ALL THESE BABIES TO FIGHT?!?!, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 14:14,
Reply)
OK -
I think I know the difference between you and me.
Take it as a given that we both begin in a position of ignorance. The difference is this: I want evidence before I believe a claim (and the more serious the claim, the more evidence I want). You want evidence before you stop believing it.
Does that seem about right? Because I'll bet you the price of a doughnut that my mind's less cluttered.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 12:34,
Reply)
*Applauds*
If you specify one of those fancy doughnuts you'll get more!
(, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 12:39, Reply)
evidence like
showing them listed on D&B website you mean, trading as private corporations?
like I said the type of ignorance and indifference born of supreme arrogance and egotism
;)
(, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 12:43, Reply)
That's evidence that their names appear.
Nothing more.
It's a bit like showing someone a photo of themselves walking down the street and saying "SEE! THIS PROVES THAT YOU WALKED DOWN THE STREET" - at which they'd quite properly shrug and look bemused.
See my reply to the sub-thread above.
EDIT: Ahhh... so we're on to ad hominem attacks already. That was quick...
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 12:45,
Reply)
That's a point
They may well just be listed by law to prove that they don't conduct private buisiness.
Registering yourself with a different name but same address doesn't seem like a very clandestine way of going about things.
(, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 12:55, Reply)
Investigation into Lancashire Police., Lancashire County Council and the Blues and Twos
www.tpuc.org/node/588
(, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 12:57, Reply)
Slightly off topic..
Why do they make a big deal of the 666 thing when 666 being the number of the beast is a mistranslation?
It's an interesting read but it's not evidence. It's someone asking questions and then telling people they've asked questions but not yet got an answer (complete with typo's). It's not quite the same as getting evidence and definate answers.
Not saying I'm not interested in what the answer would be but also, even if what has happened is wrong it only provides evidence that *1* company on the list has done anything wrong.
(, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 13:07, Reply)
evidence that there names
appear on a website that lists corporations trading as private companies
this is what Dunn & Bradstreet do , its why they list them - and for no other reason
(information accessed only for a fee by the way - Edit: John Harris or someone he knew paid it and accessed the info - see links)
get it?
ok to use your analogy : a photo of a person walking down the street shows that they were "walking down the street" but it also shows that they were in that street at that time - the listed names show by virtue of them being listed on that website,which only lists tarding for profit private corporations with private shareholders, that they are private corporations
pfffft
christ this is tedious
I really am going to have to go now
(, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 12:55, Reply)
"(information accessed only for a fee by the way)"
Is that why I can't find the same list on the website? Or have I just missed the link?
(, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 12:58, Reply)
...
and for no other reason
Citation required. Again - I don't know enough about corportate law to say whether this is true or not. But I don't see any reason simply to accept that it is. The same objection a applies to your second point.
Moreover, even if local authorities are acting as private businesses, so what? We know that certain local authorities had investments in Icelandic banks. Presumably, this was because that it was decided that a good way to use their income was to generate further income in future through interest - that is, bung, say, a million there and use it to generate a hundred thousand a year into the future. (The figures are made up - but you get the picture.)
None of this looks all that dodgy to me. It might even be a reasonable idea, all else being equal. Now, if this means that the authority is acting as a company, then it's proper that it should have to register as one, and be regulated as such.
This strikes me as a quirk of accountancy.
It does not lead me to your paranoid conclusions.
I repeat that I'm arguing from a position of ignorance. My rebuilding of the picture, though, seems fairly down-to-earth. If I'm wrong, then fine: but you need to bring more to the table to make me see things your way.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 13:05,
Reply)
"Moreover, even if local authorities are acting as private businesses, so what? We know that certain local authorities had investments in Icelandic banks. Presumably, this was because that it was decided that a good way to use their income was to generate further income in future through interest - that is, bung, say, a million there and use it to generate a hundred thousand a year into the future. (The figures are made up - but you get the picture.)"
nope, there is a big difference from investing public money for further growth on BEHALF of the people to put back into public services etc
this is revenue and investments creating a RETURN FOR PRIVATE SHAREHOLDERS BENEFIT not public
"None of this looks all that dodgy to me. It might even be a reasonable idea, all else being equal. Now, if this means that the authority is acting as a company, then it's proper that it should have to register as one, and be regulated as such"
let's break it down
if it's acting as a private company it's a run for profit corporation who's priority is to raise profits for shareholders - not to create a greater public service
i.e. say a local authority creates a speed camera - if it's operating as a private company it will be doing so to increase revenue ... it's priority will be to put that revenue into private share holders accounts NOT as it says, to put back into public services to make safer roads etc
money which could be used for public services is instead going to private shareholders - and these are authorities we pay taxes to (or more accurately, you do)expecting a return
you see?
"I repeat that I'm arguing from a position of ignorance."
that's pretty obvious from the above, stick to obscure philosophical musings and buttering up your acolytes on the QOTW board
;P
(, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 13:13, Reply)
At the risk of actually knowing something...
I used to work in a revenue generating role, in the revenue generating arm of a public body. It's not uncommon.
The private company is wholly owned by the public body, and all revenues go into their income, rather than to shareholders.
Put it this way, I'm rather proud that my slick sales skills subsidised YOU THE TAXPAYER to the sums of about £1.75m per year. And that's money that didn't have to be found from central government.
(
prince-igor si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 14:49,
Reply)
that's great
as I said above, public bodies using public money for investments into private companies for a return made transparent and fully accessible for public scrutiny to be ploughed back into services is one thing
having actual public bodies listed themselves as profit making corporations without knowing the fuill transparency of their accounts shareholders etc out of public scrutiny is quite another
personally I would like to know when they create a new statute and fine structure (as they are in vast numbers each year) - such as £80 fine for putting your bin out early if there's for a good reason for it and not as a new revenue stream for private shareholders - who I'd imagine would bid on new proposed statutes as they are created and loan on a proposed expected return
how do you feel knowing Brown just bailed out a privately owned corporation (bank of england) with millionaire shareholders with public money?
also in the US the Fed reserve is also a privately owned company run for profit for shareholders (JP Morgan (strong Vatican connections hence Princess Tony Blair connection) etc, alot of Crown banks too ) IRS taxation is to pay off the interest on the loan... not for public services
btw - not My tax money ;)
(, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 15:04, Reply)
You remind me of this guy.....
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr_Logic
(
Brandy_Bumwinkle, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 13:45,
Reply)
I tried to watch that (honest)
but that bloke is about as articulate as Marsellus Wallace when he first meets the Gimp.
(
Blackdogmanguitar is out with Fat Larry's Jazz Band on, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 12:52,
Reply)
Wouldn't your life be happier
if you weren't so paranoid and stopped imagining demons where there are none? Jesus, just let it go and go and do something more fun instead.
(
Just Juan Cornetto will take you to the lo-rider show n' flaunt ya on, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 13:06,
Reply)
oh trust me I am
life is a so much more wonderful thing when you see what's behind that green curtain and quit playing their game
(, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 13:27, Reply)
You need to redo this so it makes more sense
Try stating your case with more proof/facts. Here's a suggested list of what you need:
1) Proof (link on an offical website preferably) proving these companies are registered as Public Owned Authorities.
2) Give official links to the laws these companies are breaking.
3) Link proof that these companies are breaking the above mentioned laws (which you;ve just about done)
Without proof this is just looks like a tin foil hat fueled rant.
(
Crap Little Monkey Deathstar, so good they built it twice, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 13:11,
Reply)
Interesting
I know my local council had over 60 million of council tax money squirreled away in various accounts where the interest was then fed back into their own budget to spend on nice cars, offices and jollys.
(
Brandy_Bumwinkle, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 13:14,
Reply)
"... to spend on nice cars, offices and jollys"
Evidence that this is what happens?
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 15:25,
Reply)
Er, my friend who sits on the council board and found out.
A free mind walking into an incestuous cabal was not a pleasant experience for her.
(
Brandy_Bumwinkle, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 15:30,
Reply)
It's funny because councils being greedy and corrupt is something that definitely happens
But Goat makes it sound like such an idea is crazy.
I think him and Dekionplexis work for the government.
(, Wed 25 Mar 2009, 15:44, Reply)
