Zimbabwe Governments 51% plan on Radio 4 this morning.. lol
Discussion
The Zimbabwe Government, is there nothing they cannot do.
51% of all companies (over 500k) are to be black owned.
All mining companies that 51% is only the above ground stuff (I think, i.e none of the mining equipment etc).
And the guy got slightly shirty when the interviewer implied that only a few of the 'corrupt' elite could afford it.
Honestly, they have some balls.
So, no new companies, will go in, but the corrupt few can buy cheap stakes in all the mining, nice.
51% of all companies (over 500k) are to be black owned.
All mining companies that 51% is only the above ground stuff (I think, i.e none of the mining equipment etc).
And the guy got slightly shirty when the interviewer implied that only a few of the 'corrupt' elite could afford it.
Honestly, they have some balls.
So, no new companies, will go in, but the corrupt few can buy cheap stakes in all the mining, nice.
In the UAE, all onshore companies (not those in freezones) are supposed to be 51% owned by a local partner. Not many are though - what you'll find is a local who has his name on the trade licences of 100+ companies and just takes a yearly fee rather than have any meaningful input to the company.
joe_90 said:
The Zimbabwe Government, is there nothing they cannot do.
51% of all companies (over 500k) are to be black owned.
All mining companies that 51% is only the above ground stuff (I think, i.e none of the mining equipment etc).
And the guy got slightly shirty when the interviewer implied that only a few of the 'corrupt' elite could afford it.
Honestly, they have some balls.
So, no new companies, will go in, but the corrupt few can buy cheap stakes in all the mining, nice.
Name me a West African country where things are different...particularly those with oil reserves.51% of all companies (over 500k) are to be black owned.
All mining companies that 51% is only the above ground stuff (I think, i.e none of the mining equipment etc).
And the guy got slightly shirty when the interviewer implied that only a few of the 'corrupt' elite could afford it.
Honestly, they have some balls.
So, no new companies, will go in, but the corrupt few can buy cheap stakes in all the mining, nice.
elster said:
ewenm said:
jimothy said:
South Africa are doing the same thing...
Are SA doing the same in terms of South African ownership or black ownership? There's a big difference in my eyes.ewenm said:
elster said:
ewenm said:
jimothy said:
South Africa are doing the same thing...
Are SA doing the same in terms of South African ownership or black ownership? There's a big difference in my eyes.But then, look at what people in Africa (anywhere actually) are happy to do to their neighbours.
It's pretty disgusting that in one part of a county, people are dying on their feet due to treatable illness, malnutrition etc whist their masters laud it up with stolen funds.
Bit like India with their space programme & Pakistan & their nuclear programme.
You've got to hand it to Mugabe though, he's got a far thicker skin than Abbott.
joe_90 said:
The Zimbabwe Government, is there nothing they cannot do.
51% of all companies (over 500k) are to be black owned.
All mining companies that 51% is only the above ground stuff (I think, i.e none of the mining equipment etc).
And the guy got slightly shirty when the interviewer implied that only a few of the 'corrupt' elite could afford it.
Honestly, they have some balls.
So, no new companies, will go in, but the corrupt few can buy cheap stakes in all the mining, nice.
And we get called racist. 51% of all companies (over 500k) are to be black owned.
All mining companies that 51% is only the above ground stuff (I think, i.e none of the mining equipment etc).
And the guy got slightly shirty when the interviewer implied that only a few of the 'corrupt' elite could afford it.
Honestly, they have some balls.
So, no new companies, will go in, but the corrupt few can buy cheap stakes in all the mining, nice.
I'd almost be tempted to say that all the white guys should get out and let them run the country whatever way E ba guM, TreboR want's to run it.
The thing is a lot of the white people over there have been there for a few generations, so aren't exactly immigrants, and you can't really ship them back to where they came from either.
The thing is a lot of the white people over there have been there for a few generations, so aren't exactly immigrants, and you can't really ship them back to where they came from either.
Gold said:
TheEnd said:
I'd almost be tempted to say that all the white guys should get out and let them run the country whatever way E ba guM, TreboR want's to run it.
What do you think most of them are doing? Nothing new,51% local ownership is common practice in much of the world, outside Europe. Before Norway joined the European economic aream you had advatages from being 'Norwegian' owned for Norwegian oil work, my Company was owned by my Norwegian wife with signed share transere certs to my benifit held by my Lawyer. In Malaysia not only do you need to be 51% Malaysian owned but the Malaysian's have to be ethnic Malays.
Berw said:
Nothing new,51% local ownership is common practice in much of the world, outside Europe. Before Norway joined the European economic aream you had advatages from being 'Norwegian' owned for Norwegian oil work, my Company was owned by my Norwegian wife with signed share transere certs to my benifit held by my Lawyer. In Malaysia not only do you need to be 51% Malaysian owned but the Malaysian's have to be ethnic Malays.
it appears everyone looks out for themselves except the "West"; we are too busy being apologists and giving it all away.Edited by Jimbeaux on Wednesday 15th September 13:53
Jimbeaux said:
Berw said:
Nothing new,51% local ownership is common practice in much of the world, outside Europe. Before Norway joined the European economic aream you had advatages from being 'Norwegian' owned for Norwegian oil work, my Company was owned by my Norwegian wife with signed share transere certs to my benifit held by my Lawyer. In Malaysia not only do you need to be 51% Malaysian owned but the Malaysian's have to be ethnic Malays.
it appears everyone looks out for themselves except the "West"; we are too busy being apologists and giving it all away.Edited by Jimbeaux on Wednesday 15th September 13:53
One of the reasons why the UAE has such strict company ownership and certain monopolistic laws is that the majority of local run companies would disappear thanks to more efficiently run businesses, if they were allowed to operate.
You want to buy a certain marque of car here, you have to buy from one company and if you don't like the levels of service etc... then tough - the only 'free' companies are allowed in the freezones and even they, to a degree, have been coerced into that position thanks to the Trade Licensing restrictions and they are unlikely to be a 'cornerstone' business such as telecomms, banking, transport, for example.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff