Nationalise the railways!

[PJL]

The whole privatisation setup of the railways has become a joke, with essentially the UK government either subsidising privately run companies which end up in the pockets of shareholders as dividends, or foreign state run companies, essentially a transfer of funds from the British to the French & German governments.

Essentially, either make it 100% funded, or convert them into not for profit entities, run at arms length to the government, like Network Rail (which is probably the best part of the system, as they have done decent upgrades to the network over the last 10-15 years).

[Tamas]

The whole privatisation setup of the railways has become a joke, with essentially the UK government either subsidising privately run companies which end up in the pockets of shareholders as dividends, or foreign state run companies, essentially a transfer of funds from the British to the French & German governments.

Essentially, either make it 100% funded, or convert them into not for profit entities, run at arms length to the government, like Network Rail (which is probably the best part of the system, as they have done decent upgrades to the network over the last 10-15 years).

That is the thing though. How do you handle upgrades and modernisations in a non-profit environment? In other words, where is the "this is not profit" line is drawn? All these things are very arbitrary and a hotbed of inefficiency and corruption.

[Ed Anger]

I have travelled the forever-state owned Hungarian railways.

I'm shocked the trains and track haven't been stolen yet.

[Valmy]

I can see how your experiences in Hungary have made you suspicious of public endeavours, but I don't buy your slippery slope; and I don't think the Hungarian experience is a good baseline for judging human nature and political culture across the world.

I am not sure the Danish or Canadian one is either though.  Every statistic suggests they are a big outlier.

[Tamas]

The Danish National Railways are state owned, and are pretty decent and corruption free. Both Canada and Denmark have numerous examples of well functioning state-run enterprises and bodies that are not the locus of clientism and corruption, and are not treated as piggy banks to be raided by well-connected oligarchs.

I don't expect that it's a genetic difference; perhaps it is one of political and public culture? In any case, I don't think it's reasonable to apply the lessons from the apparent clusterfucks in Hungary to well functioning modern states.

Yes if the culture is not there, no matter what you do, there will be inefficiency and corruption. However, there is less of them if private actors are present, because in that case the financiers of the enterprise are interested in efficiency, and are operating with limited resources. Neither of those two things are true when you have a state owned enterprise.

And yes if the political culture is advanced enough then you might be able to operate them efficiently regardless, but worldwide that is a very tiny minority of countries. And if a given method has more danger of turning into an ineffective sink of money (as state ran enterprises have proved to be on countless occasions worldwide in the past 50 years and more), than the other, then why force it?

Now of course having something privately owned but heavily state-subsidised also runs the great risk of having the worst of both worlds, so it is certainly suspect.
But if I understand correctly, the reservation is that state money is given to private individuals to be disposed of at their leisure. Now, I ask you, how is that different from if the disposing-people were state employees? Nobody is made inherently more unselfish just because they work for the almighty State. That is, in general, a seriously flawed pretext.

[Tamas]

I have travelled the forever-state owned Hungarian railways.

I'm shocked the trains and track haven't been stolen yet.

Gypsies specialized in scrap metal "scavenging" regularly destroy signal equipment and such when they "scavenge" the cabling. 

[Ed Anger]

I have travelled the forever-state owned Hungarian railways.

I'm shocked the trains and track haven't been stolen yet.

Gypsies specialized in scrap metal "scavenging" regularly destroy signal equipment and such when they "scavenge" the cabling. 

Oh, the white trash wreck houses here to get 50 bucks worth of copper. Pisses me off when it is a house my company is rehabbing to rent out.

[Josquius]

Yes if the culture is not there, no matter what you do, there will be inefficiency and corruption. However, there is less of them if private actors are present, because in that case the financiers of the enterprise are interested in efficiency, and are operating with limited resources. Neither of those two things are true when you have a state owned enterprise.

err...what?
Its the complete opposite.
Private enterprise is looking to wring as much money out of the government as they can. They make a point of being as inefficient as possible. Limited resoures and what is best for the big picture means nothing to them, they just want as big a slice of the possible resources as they can get.
With the government however you have awareness of the limited resources they're working with and efficiency and customer satisfaction is the only driving force.

But if I understand correctly, the reservation is that state money is given to private individuals to be disposed of at their leisure. Now, I ask you, how is that different from if the disposing-people were state employees? Nobody is made inherently more unselfish just because they work for the almighty State. That is, in general, a seriously flawed pretext.

You really think the minister of transport would see profits (which he isn't going to get a slice of) as his primary motivation?
As for the low level workers- it generally isn't going to affect their bottom line either way. Working for The Railways will however be much more of a motivator than working for generic railway company number 5 (who you are only guarantied to be with for a few years until the next round of franchise bidding)

[Tamas]

With the government however you have awareness of the limited resources they're working with and efficiency and customer satisfaction is the only driving force.

I am sorry Tyr but that has to be the most naïve out-of-touch stuff I have read in a while.

Yes what you wrote about wringing out government money is true, but it is at least as much true for a 100% state-ran enterprise, probably more because they then have no real accountability. They just need to produce papers on those costs being necessary and they get their budget raised.

[Admiral Yi]

Well, that's obviously how it worked in the nationalized coal mines.

[Josquius]

With the government however you have awareness of the limited resources they're working with and efficiency and customer satisfaction is the only driving force.

I am sorry Tyr but that has to be the most naïve out-of-touch stuff I have read in a while.

Yes what you wrote about wringing out government money is true, but it is at least as much true for a 100% state-ran enterprise, probably more because they then have no real accountability. They just need to produce papers on those costs being necessary and they get their budget raised.

How?
Even if you assume they're not in politics to make the country a better place (which these days is most of them) they still want to get re-elected, and making the trains run on time is a way to gain a fair few votes.
Why would they lie to get their budget raised? They don't get any of the money either way, this is the UK we're talking about, not some corrupt African quasi-democracy.

[Valmy]

Well, that's obviously how it worked in the nationalized coal mines.

[Tamas]

With the government however you have awareness of the limited resources they're working with and efficiency and customer satisfaction is the only driving force.

I am sorry Tyr but that has to be the most naïve out-of-touch stuff I have read in a while.

Yes what you wrote about wringing out government money is true, but it is at least as much true for a 100% state-ran enterprise, probably more because they then have no real accountability. They just need to produce papers on those costs being necessary and they get their budget raised.

How?
Even if you assume they're not in politics to make the country a better place (which these days is most of them) they still want to get re-elected, and making the trains run on time is a way to gain a fair few votes.
Why would they lie to get their budget raised? They don't get any of the money either way, this is the UK we're talking about, not some corrupt African quasi-democracy.

1) I understand the UK has had it's share of corrupt MPs

2) It would not be the MPs doing the company leadership and bookkeeping now would they?

[Josquius]

Well, that's obviously how it worked in the nationalized coal mines.

I don't understand this troll.

1) I understand the UK has had it's share of corrupt MPs

2) It would not be the MPs doing the company leadership and bookkeeping now would they?

1: Not to the extent you're talking about. Not in the current generation at least. To get close I have to think back to the 50s/60s, a totally different world.
2: They're the ones controlling its budget and having the final say on major decisions.

[Admiral Yi]

I don't understand this troll.

It would appear to this casual observer that the coal industry was not a paragon of customer service and efficiency.