Thatcher's Politicial Legacy.

[Ed Anger]

Weirdo English.

Like your boy Bashir pronouncing 'migrane' as meegrane. What a  Fucking Michael Jackson cocksucking idiot.

[CountDeMoney]

You hate him because he's smarter than you.

[Ed Anger]

You hate him because he's smarter than you.

I hate him because he is a twit and a Limey. He can get back on the banana boat.

[Sheilbh]

You hate him because he's smarter than you.

I hate him because he is a twit and a Limey. He can get back on the banana boat.

I'd have him back if you keep Piers Morgan...

[Admiral Yi]

Handout is morally loaded. You get it not because of what you've done but because you're in need ('they need a hand-up, not a handout'). If you're working, regardless of who it's for you're not getting a handout you're getting paid for your work.

The state-owned company may be getting a handout, the employees aren't.

This is ridiculous Shelf.  Listen to yourself for a second.

[Ed Anger]

You hate him because he's smarter than you.

I hate him because he is a twit and a Limey. He can get back on the banana boat.

I'd have him back if you keep Piers Morgan...

It is a package deal.

[Josquius]

Why? 

Why not?
It does a lot of good in employing people and earning money. Where's the negative?

How do money losing companies help the country come out ahead?

If by removing 500 loss making jobs you destroy 5,000 profit making jobs then it's probally worth considering taking the hit on those 500.

[Razgovory]

See, this is why I'm still a Capitalist.

[dps]

You hate him because he's smarter than you.

But he hates everybody. 

Oh.  OK. 

[Jacob]

You hate him because he's smarter than you.

But he hates everybody. 

Oh.  OK.

[Jacob]

Of course not.  But a handout received while peforming work, at a state-owned company or anywhere else, is still a handout.

How do you differentiate a "handout while performing work" from "wages earned"?

Is it if a company is making a loss, all wages paid are a handout? (so by bringing the company into profitability, no handouts are given out)

Or is it if a company is state owned, all wages paid are a handout? (so all public service employees are receiving handouts, as are employees of crown corporations, scientists at say NASA and the FDA, as well as anyone employed at say a state owned oil company)

Is it a combination - state owned and non-profitable? (so most public service employees again)

Or is it people working for state-owned enterprises which you don't approve of?

[Josquius]

I'd say its irrelevant to the worker and whether their job is real or a handout if their company is state owned or private, making a loss or a profit.
To the average man on the factory floor the job is the same. Its only once you get up to the higher management levels that the job becomes less real and more of a handout.

[mongers]

Of course not.  But a handout received while peforming work, at a state-owned company or anywhere else, is still a handout.

How do you differentiate a "handout while performing work" from "wages earned"?

Is it if a company is making a loss, all wages paid are a handout? (so by bringing the company into profitability, no handouts are given out)

Or is it if a company is state owned, all wages paid are a handout? (so all public service employees are receiving handouts, as are employees of crown corporations, scientists at say NASA and the FDA, as well as anyone employed at say a state owned oil company)

Is it a combination - state owned and non-profitable? (so most public service employees again)

Or is it people working for state-owned enterprises which you don't approve of?

I think Yi means anyone he doesn't approve of.

But if it's a firefighter who saves him from an electrical fire, caused by an untested, grey imported inadequately made heater, then that guy isn't working for a handout.

But obviously the laid off woman who used to work at the government 'trading standards'/public safety body, was in receipt of a hand-out and so had to be let go, to make a leaner fitter government.   

[Admiral Yi]

Why not?
It does a lot of good in employing people and earning money. Where's the negative?

The negative is the money you take from somebody else to give to the profitable company.

If by removing 500 loss making jobs you destroy 5,000 profit making jobs then it's probally worth considering taking the hit on those 500.

Not sure how you get a situation where 500 money losing jobs are supporting 5,000 money making jobs. 

[Admiral Yi]

How do you differentiate a "handout while performing work" from "wages earned"?

Is it if a company is making a loss, all wages paid are a handout? (so by bringing the company into profitability, no handouts are given out)

Or is it if a company is state owned, all wages paid are a handout? (so all public service employees are receiving handouts, as are employees of crown corporations, scientists at say NASA and the FDA, as well as anyone employed at say a state owned oil company)

Is it a combination - state owned and non-profitable? (so most public service employees again)

Or is it people working for state-owned enterprises which you don't approve of?

If the employer is private, and not receiving any money from the government, there is no handout.

If the employer is private and receiving money from the government, it's a handout.  If the condition of the money is continued employment of X workers, the workers are getting a handout.  If the the condition is about production (i.e. a production subsidy), it's a handout to the consumers of the company's product.  If there are no strings attached, it's a handout to the owners.

If the employer is the state and the enterprise is one that generates a product or service for private consumption (such as coal), and it is operating at a loss, the above applies.

If the employer si the state and the enterprise is one that generates a public good (such as NASA) there is not necessarily a handout, but it might be wasted spending depending on how you view the desirability of the public good.