UK Politics
General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both [email protected] and [email protected] .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
[email protected] appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(
view the rest of the comments
I'm an accountant and auditor, while it's incredibly misleading, not fraud. They would have to demonstrate to the auditor that the value is correct, it does appear that dividends are being issued so it would probably pass the bar required for valuation.
I'm not an accountant or auditor, but if this was a person rather than a business, they'd be going to jail
It’s as if the rules are different if you’re rich.
When you're rich, you make your own rules. Laws are to protect the rich from the dirty poors, not the other way around!
Forgot about that. As a poor I should know that we are awful.
Not disagreeing with your point.
But when you take the idea into consideration.
This is a business creating a valueless business, then applying artificial value to increase assets So fraud.
Now your version. A person creates a person. Well not uncommon. But well, everything from there really sounds dodgy.
It really is not possible to remove the business and be talking about the same thing. And its hard to argue it would not be worse.
But yeah, I'm sorta having fun with the words. If a poor/working class human tried to increase assets via fraud. They would be spending time at his majesty pleasure.
Something being technically legal doesn't make it technically OK.
If I had just started a new job and my CV was found to be "incredibly misleading", I'd expect to be kicked out the door, not because I'd broken the law or commited gross misconduct, but because I'd been found to be unsuitable for the expectations of the company/customers.
This story is just another straw on the camels back of the privatised water industry that have been using the British tax payer as an ATM for fat cat shareholders for decades, with debts so huge that our children and our children's children will be burdened.
I didn't say it was ok, only that it was probably technically fine
That's semantics. I take it you understood the message I was trying to convey.