Teandw
The whole post boils down to "The founders of Reform have multiple companies."
1) It's hard for any business to keep selling a product at 10% profit margin when you know you can sell it for 200% profit margin with the price increase not affecting sales.
2) In the rare situation that a business would accept low margins 'just to be nice to the customer' - they'll just get bought out. It's hard to not accept 10 years of profit for a business when it's being offered to you.
How else do you think people and companies get away with doing a lot of bad things.
In business, last years profits are often irrelevant. This is a good example. It's a constant treadmill of trying to stay profitable - which isn't as easy as it sounds.
More so when businesses of this size are usually built on owing large sums of money.
"Normal companies can't go bankrupt in one day" - They didn't go bankrupt. They went into liquidation. Massively different thing. You can have a company with billions of quid saved up in the bank that goes into liquidation.
Liquidation is quite common and happens daily in the UK to 'normal' companies. Companies that were profitable last week and no longer can operate as they're not profitable enough to pay their debts/what they owe.
I think your issue here is you don't understand what liquidation is/means and basic principles of business profits. The most important part is that while a company may be profitable at the 'end of year' -- They have to first get to the end of the year.
The company has gone insolvent because it's no longer profitable.
So one company may bid saying they want to acquire X parts of the company but can not take on the advertising arm or the quality assurance part of the company; which means jobs losses etc. Another company may say we'll acquire all of the company but not the freehold properties the business owns.
The liquidation team then have to decide which bid offers the best likely outcome for the creditors/business. The £1 isn't technically what they're paying for the company, as they're taking on debt, leaseholds, pension funds etc. Their bid is technically tens or hundreds of millions depending on the situation.
With medical breakthroughs increasing the age of life too, this is only likely to increase with time
Can't argue against the anonymous part of it but when the transaction is between me, the seller and the bank, I'm not sure why it would need to be anonymous.
Doesn't make sense unless you've worded what happened incorrectly by accident.
Those $5 and $10 bills getting laundered started from a $50K transaction getting laundered.
You're simply prolonging the death with no benefit of doing so other than to pat yourself on the back.
Removing rights can be a good thing.
Shall we bring back the right to have slaves? Shall we bring back the right to murder those we don't like? Removing those rights from people has only made the world a better place.
As you say, rights are rights.
It's akin to me saying that if you eat one cheeseburger every day for your whole life, you'll not get dementia. Then when you don't get dementia in the next 10 years, say that it shows what I'm saying must have had some validity behind it.
Because that has a more direct emotional affect on those around them, it gives people a stronger desire to want to eradicate it.
It would be like asking me to prove that not many people have done the calculation of 15435 divided by 12.5 in their life. I can just tell you from basic logical thinking, that it's not likely that many people have.
Unfortunately when you don't move with the times, it ultimately catches up with you and forces your hand eventually. No matter how hard you try.
As in, if you tried to buy a house, you'd still need to go through money laundering checks. You'd always be limited to small value transactions if you never wanted to pass some sort of KYC/money laundering check at some point.