Where do you draw the line?
If a 'government company' has 50% of its income from a government
allocation and the rest from elsewhere (e.g. contracts with private
companies/individuals) is it 'government' or not?
On 04/11/18 20:19, Allan Mustard wrote:
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 operates.
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!"
apm-wa
On 11/4/2018 1:29 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
sent from a phone
On 4. Nov 2018, at 05:54, Allan Mustard<al...@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
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
