Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

British Steel taken into public ownership to protect 'vital' UK supply

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 314 posts

Re: British Steel taken into public ownership to protect 'vital' UK supply

#301

Post by psd1 »

pjc50 wrote: post #107
0x3f wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only if you assume it's sustainable until you personally die. But that seems in constant question even now.

This is true, but .. for all retirement planning, you kind of have to assume no-collapse. It's also incoherent to say "the government pays too much attention to retirees" and "I expect to be defrauded by the government when I retire, along with my entire generation, and to be powerless to stop this" at the same time.

Your paradox is easily resolved thus: the government pays too much attention to _current_ retirees

Re: British Steel taken into public ownership to protect 'vital' UK supply

#302

Post by wolvoleo »

somenameforme wrote: post #211
solumunus wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that land worth the costs Russia has endured? Very obviously not, that’s why it’s not “winning”. If they could turn back the clocks they would.

The benefit of war is almost never worth the cost. It just tends to scale up from repeated mutual miscalculations. For instance WW1 started from a Bosnian Serb assassinating the Austro-Hungarian heir and the next thing you know Brits are killing Germans over it. Everybody would have certainly turned back the clock there if they could, even moreso given that "The War to End All Wars" directly set the stage for WW2. Bu…

That guy wasn't important at all. The other countries were just looking for an excuse to start a war. Until then wars were kinda glorified, governed by pretty strict rules and not much attention was paid to the destruction.

WW1 changed all that with the tank, the machine guns, the toxic gas, the trench, the air warfare.

Re: British Steel taken into public ownership to protect 'vital' UK supply

#303

Post by wolvoleo »

fsuts wrote: post #250
tonyedgecombe wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK car industry had been doing quite well until Brexit.

Uk based but foreign owned UK car industry…

Yeah I was going to say what brands are actually still British?

Re: British Steel taken into public ownership to protect 'vital' UK supply

#304

Post by wqaatwt »

t0mpr1c3 wrote: post #261
jarym wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, same can be said of manufacturing capability in general. If you don't have a manufacturing base then inevitably when there's a war you may find yourself unable to build defense components.

Supply chains are so diversified that self sufficiency is only feasible for countries the size of US and China. Russia has been forced to cannibalize jet planes because sanctions have starved it of spare parts. Even the US Navy gets its ships built in South Korea now. Britain's remaining industries are very niche. With a small domestic market, you can't get economies of scale. You have to specialize.

[dead]

Re: British Steel taken into public ownership to protect 'vital' UK supply

#305

Post by wqaatwt »

onlypassingthru wrote: post #192
8note wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

russia is currently holding just about all the land it wants in Ukraine They might not be taking Kiev for a hundred years, but the fortress belt is well within reach in the next couple of years If they were to negotiate an end tomorrow, Russia certainly wouldnt be giving up territory in ukraine. i dont see how thats not winning

Russia is not only on the precipice of giving up territory in Ukraine, it's likely to give up so much more because its ability to function as a country is being systematically destroyed. The only barrier between Russians and anarchy is the last nine meals they’ve had. How's the summer harvest coming along?

[dead]

Re: British Steel taken into public ownership to protect 'vital' UK supply

#306

Post by t0bia_s »

jarym wrote: post #52
Deukhoofd wrote: post #22

It's probably not a bad idea. Steel is one of the things that an industrialized country needs to produce to protect its own sovereignty. Letting it shut down and just hope you'll always be able to import enough steel from other countries is a bad long-term strategy. You'd be left unable to fend for yourself.

Yep, same can be said of manufacturing capability in general. If you don't have a manufacturing base then inevitably when there's a war you may find yourself unable to build defense components.

Thats what comrades tried many times in history, allways with deadly costs.

Re: British Steel taken into public ownership to protect 'vital' UK supply

#307

Post by tempfile »

philipallstar wrote: post #217
tempfile wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the spirit of fairness I have to note the untold deaths caused by non-socialist countries in Cambodia, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, pretty much every country in South America...

Agree - the world has horrible things happening, although not on the scale of socialism. The thing that comes close is WW2, but that was an actual war, and not just starving millions of people due to central planning. However, Cambodia: > Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge were supported for many years by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), led by Mao Zedong;[c] it is estimated that at least 90% of the foreign aid which the…

In Cambodia I was referring to [1]

[1]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Freedom_Deal#Cambodi...

Re: British Steel taken into public ownership to protect 'vital' UK supply

#308

Post by tempfile »

throw10920 wrote: post #198
tempfile wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the spirit of fairness I have to note the untold deaths caused by non-socialist countries in Cambodia, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, pretty much every country in South America...

Uh, the point was that a single ideology caused deaths due to socialism. Unless you think that there's a single ideology that caused all of the deaths in the countries you mentioned, then this isn't "in the spirit of fairness", it's just misrepresentation.

All the incidents I mentioned were acts of US imperialism.

Re: British Steel taken into public ownership to protect 'vital' UK supply

#309

Post by linksnapzz »

psd1 wrote: post #296
linksnapzz wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're pro-offshoring of any sort of industrial base. Line-goes-up!

It is candid about the negatives of off-shoring. It certainly does have its back foot in economic orthodoxy, but a mouthpiece for the Rothschilds? Read three editions and see if you still think so.

I've read plenty; even aside from their glazing of finance, the unsigned articles & snotty-brit house style are grating.

Re: British Steel taken into public ownership to protect 'vital' UK supply

#310

Post by timschmidt »

Hikikomori wrote: post #300
timschmidt wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't much care what the man does with his free time. I'm more interested in the veracity of his statements. On that front he supplies copious references to peer reviewed research by numerous others and primary sources. Character assassination is for folks who can't argue on the merits. You still haven't offered your own credentials.

I guess you can continue doing your own research then.

Same to you.
Post reply on HN