[Tagging] tagging for an office of the local representative to parliament
allan at mustard.net
Sun Nov 4 09:19:06 UTC 2018
If it is a profitable company that adds to the government's coffers,
such as the Budvar brewery in the Czech Republic, which is government
owned, I'd say no. It should be tagged as a brewery. Same logic would
apply to Rosoboronexport, which is Russia's second-largest revenue
earner as an arms exporter. Petronas, the Malaysian government gas and
oil company, should be tagged as a gas and oil company. Same for Pemex,
Petroleo Mexicano, as well as the grocery stores the Bangladeshi army
If it is a budget-dependent company/corporation, such as the Commodity
Credit Corporation of the U.S. government, which generates no revenue of
its own and relies wholly on appropriations from the U.S. Congress, yes,
it should be tagged government. As Deep Throat said, "Follow the money!"
On 11/4/2018 1:29 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> sent from a phone
>> On 4. Nov 2018, at 05:54, Allan Mustard <allan at mustard.net> wrote:
>> Paul, as Deep Throat told Bob Woodward, "Follow the money." Who pays the rent on the office and who pays the salary of the occupant? If the filthy lucre comes out of the government budget, and the office is used by someone drawing a government salary (as all executives, legislators, and judges do, or are supposed to, at least) then it is a government office.
> what about government owned companies? Should they get a government tag?
> Cheers, Martin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging