Am 03.01.2012 15:12, schrieb ian batten:
Instead they asked the GDR government to close the Berlin Wall
completly, and not let anybody cross the border unchecked.

So in your world, the DDR only shot escapers because the west told
them to? And you then talk about other people being free and easy
with the facts?

Mr. Batten is again gone ballistic with his Cold War hype. Take care
of your blood pressure! Your violent fantasies may cause a heart attack!

Couldn't someone talk to his doctor that he is gently barred from
consulting the Netnews? It may become a lethal treat to that old man.


L.W.

Am 03.01.2012 14:34, schrieb Recliner:
Am 03.01.2012 10:43, schrieb Neil Williams:
Have you ever looked up "nationalised" in a dictionary?

Tell me more about your ideas how trading shares at the stock
exchange changes the nature of a company, switching it from "real
commercial" to the opposite.

Who appoints the directors and senior managers in DB, and sets the
objectives, etc?

This is all well regulated in the law on Aktiengesellschaften (common
stock companies would that be in English, I presume).

So it is the "Aufsichtsrat" (advisory board?)

http://www.deutschebahn.com/site/bahn/en/group/ataglance/supervisory__board/supervisory__board.html
who recruits the CEO and other members of the "Vorstand" (board of
management).
members
http://www.deutschebahn.com/site/bahn/en/group/ataglance/board__managers/board__managers.html

Quoted from the first link above describing the supervisory board:

"Ten members are elected by the shareholders' General Meeting. Ten
members are elected by the employees. The Federal Republic of Germany,
as long as it is the majority shareholder, has the right to appoint
three members to the Supervisory Board."

So the shareholder has three out of 20 votes in the supervisory board.

Presuming it's the government, it's the government
that controls the company.

Only in a very very very indirect way. The federal government always
refuses to interfere in the commercial operatiosn of the company.

Just a few days ago, the govenment refused to interfere with the real
estate sales of DB AG, as the parliamentary group of the Partei Die
Linke had demanded.

There is, though, a yearly "Finanzierungs- und Leistungsvereinbarung"
between Deutsche Bahn AG and the federal governmant, which fixes what
performance the government expects from DB, and the subsidies it gives
for the network (track maintenance and new builds, not for rolling stock
and operations).


Cheers,
L.W.

Am 03.01.2012 17:28, schrieb Neil Williams:
On Tue, 03 Jan 2012 14:18:35 +0100, Lüko
wrote:
Tell me more about your ideas how trading shares at the stock
exchange changes the nature of a company, switching it from "real
commercial" to the opposite.

That wasn't the point.

YOU claimed this as YOUR point:

Am 01.01.2012 20:29, schrieb Neil Williams:
On Sun, 1 Jan 2012 16:16:43 +0100, Wolfgang Schwanke
wrote:
Re-nationalise it. A different commercial operator will squeeze it
for profit just like the current one.

DB isn't really a commercial operator; all their shares are owned
by the German Government, no?

Neil


That is, simply by selling and buying shares on the stock exchange,
the very nature of the company is being changed. Too strange, but YOUR
statement.


Cheers,
L.W.

Am 03.01.2012 14:58, schrieb Recliner:


What do you to about the monopolies of the little bakery or
agriculturer which has only one single owner? A horrible sight, or
what?

It's not a monopoly if there's other bakers or farmers. Ownership
doesn't make it a monopoly:

YOU wrote this:

If a company is dominated by one single shareholder, and
that shareholder has other interests, then you have a potential
conflict of interest. It's why monopolies are restricted in the
EU and other

It's OK that you do not want to defend that, but you can't deny that
you wrote this.


Cheers,
L.W.

Am 03.01.2012 16:19, schrieb Graeme Wall:
defining [my, LW's] personal approach to discussions.

which is: sticking to the facts.

I was.

No, you are always going ballistic with lots of Cold War propaganda
which has nothing to do with the issue under debate. And you are
slandering and lying, distorting and inventing what I said.

As Lenin already said: it is very difficult to find a honest opponent
in the debate.


L.W.

On 03/01/2012 17:14, Lüko Willms wrote:
Am 03.01.2012 16:19, schrieb Graeme Wall:
defining [my, LW's] personal approach to discussions.

which is: sticking to the facts.

I was.

No, you are always going ballistic with lots of Cold War propaganda
which has nothing to do with the issue under debate. And you are
slandering and lying, distorting and inventing what I said.

Liar

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

On 03/01/2012 17:11, Lüko Willms wrote:
Am 03.01.2012 14:58, schrieb Recliner:


What do you to about the monopolies of the little bakery or
agriculturer which has only one single owner? A horrible sight, or
what?

It's not a monopoly if there's other bakers or farmers. Ownership
doesn't make it a monopoly:

YOU wrote this:

If a company is dominated by one single shareholder, and
that shareholder has other interests, then you have a potential
conflict of interest. It's why monopolies are restricted in the
EU and other

It's OK that you do not want to defend that, but you can't deny that
you wrote this.

Why would Recliner want to deny writing that? It's an entirely reasonable
thing to have written in its context, which was discussion of a state-
owned railway company.

It is you who has sought to move the goal posts by introducing discussion
of one-person owned businesses, presumably so you can wriggle out of
answering Recliner's question to you: "Do you think workers' rights are
better protected in North than in South Korea?"

Well, do you?


--
Graham Nye
news(a)thenyes.org.uk

On Jan 3, 5:14*pm, Lüko Willms wrote:

* As Lenin already said: it is very difficult to find a honest opponent
in the debate.

He also said "Hang (hang without fail, so the people see) no fewer
than one hundred known kulaks, rich men, bloodsuckers." Oh, and
"It is necessary — secretly and urgently to prepare the terror. And on
Tuesday we will decide whether it will be through SNK or otherwise."


But presumably, given you deny the crimes of Stalin and blame the west
for the DDR's habit of shooting its citizens, the crimes of Lenin also
didn't happen?

ian

On 03/01/2012 17:14, Lüko Willms wrote:

As Lenin already said: it is very difficult to find a honest opponent
in the debate.

Why? Did he have them all shot?


--
Graham Nye
news(a)thenyes.org.uk

On 01/01/2012 17:58, Wolfgang Schwanke wrote:
Are you Lüko's twin? That's a silly question. I would say things were
best at the end of the 1990s when the system was reunified and new
extensions had been added, but the adverse effects of privatisation
hadn't had time to kick in yet. Things have gone downhill since.

Terminological issues alert: from a UK perspective, DB and its German
subsidiaries are not privatised (or, if it is privatised, so was British
Rail from 1962-ish).


--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK