...it works for things like telecommunications where the medium can be carved up and there is a genuine market...but not so good with things like trains where as soon as contracts are won they have you by the balls.
(, Thu 24 Sep 2015, 14:09, Reply)
and always thought that nationalising the railways would be a good idea.
But just because the Tories ballsed up the privatisation in the 90s doesn't mean that the theory isn't sound. If we can actually get true competition on routes (such is slowly beginning to emerge) then the benefits in terms of better trains and somewhat lower fares will start to emerge.
(, Thu 24 Sep 2015, 14:49, Reply)
I'm not that convinced.
(, Thu 24 Sep 2015, 15:13, Reply)
As opposed to the subsidies *everyone* paid when it was in national hands...?
The whole mess is Thatcher's legacy, coupled with the Beeching Axe under a Labour government
(, Thu 24 Sep 2015, 15:29, Reply)
oops. :D 250 million. :D
(, Fri 25 Sep 2015, 17:05, Reply)
*said like Mister Burns*
(, Thu 24 Sep 2015, 22:18, Reply)
If I arrive at the train station, I will get on the next fastest train to where I want to go, regardless of who runs it.
If there is one in 5 minutes time, I'm on it, because no-one else can compete with that. There will be no other train going to where I want to go in 5 minutes time. If there were two trains going there at that time, I might have a choice, but the system would be woefully inefficient and the infrastructure which exists wouldn't be able to cope with that.
So nationalisation makes total sense.
(, Thu 24 Sep 2015, 17:23, Reply)
I work for the biggest TOC in Europe, yet to see any evidence for this.
They've had nineteen years to emerge it at any speed they choose, it hasn't.
(, Fri 25 Sep 2015, 0:34, Reply)