Trains, Banks and Public/Private Ownership - Prev.Predict UK Gen.Election Result

[Jacob]

Uncuck yourself, Manlet

Sure thing, Chiclet

[Jacob]

But it runs like a well-oiled machine!

That could only be possible if we allow it to be fully and robustly penetrated by markets.

It better be well oiled if it's going to be penetrated like that.

[The Brain]

I don't get it.

[Jacob]

I don't get it.

There's an app for that.

[Zanza]

The Germans national railway is organised as a private company. It'd just that 100% of its shares are owned by the federal government. They wanted to do an IPO but that never happened due to the financial crisis of 2008.

The Province of Alberta owns its own bank - ATB Financial (formerly Alberta Treasury Branch).  It's run as a Crown Corporation, is generally profitable and well regarded by its customers.  It's the last vestige of the Social Credit governments that ran Alberta from the 1930s through to the 1960s.

But it was also the center of huge scandals back in the 1980s, when it would make very large loans for political purposes at the direction of government (and shockingly those loans wouldn't be repaid).

It's not that it is impossible for government to run a successful business.  But the temptation is always there for governments to interfere.

Germany has a rather big national bank called KfW that is a leftover of the Marshall Plan to support various government programs (e.g. I got part of my mortgage from them as my appartment is particularly energy efficient) and provide investment capital start-ups and import/export finance for foreign trade. The bank is apparently considered the safest bank in the world because the government with its AAA rating is guaranteeing its debt by statute. That bank is generally seen as a big success model (despite a rather silly money transfer to Lehman on the day of bankruptcy) .
https://www.gfmag.com/media/press-releases/The-Worlds-50-Safest-Banks-2016

I think misusing such indirect government institutions and state-owned enterprises is possible. But then countries where misusing government institutions like that are probably also those with a higher likelihood of private sector corruption...

[dps]

Nationalisation isn't the end goal in itself here. That's the stuff of doctrinal warriors. What we want is better service. And more state regulation in transport (busses aren't as sexy as trains though perhaps even worse at current) is the way to get this.

Well, as someone else pointed out, trains are pretty much a natural monopoly, so having them closely regulated or even nationalized makes sense.  But not all forms of transport are natural monopolies;  buses certainly aren't.

And state regulation only leads to better service if providing better service is important to the regulators, and the regulators are competent.

[OttoVonBismarck]

The Germans national railway is organised as a private company. It'd just that 100% of its shares are owned by the federal government. They wanted to do an IPO but that never happened due to the financial crisis of 2008.

That's basically how Amtrak works, it's organized as a "company" that loses about $1-1.5bn/yr, and Congress writes checks for the difference every year.

[Josquius]

Nationalisation isn't the end goal in itself here. That's the stuff of doctrinal warriors. What we want is better service. And more state regulation in transport (busses aren't as sexy as trains though perhaps even worse at current) is the way to get this.

Well, as someone else pointed out, trains are pretty much a natural monopoly, so having them closely regulated or even nationalized makes sense.  But not all forms of transport are natural monopolies;  buses certainly aren't.

And state regulation only leads to better service if providing better service is important to the regulators, and the regulators are competent.

IMO trains should be nationalised and busses regulated down from their current free for all to a situation like today's trains.
The trouble with free for all bus services is popular routes get clogged and over served, competition with rail introduced, small communities under served and a lack of integrated ticketing

[Valmy]

The Germans national railway is organised as a private company. It'd just that 100% of its shares are owned by the federal government. They wanted to do an IPO but that never happened due to the financial crisis of 2008.

That's basically how Amtrak works, it's organized as a "company" that loses about $1-1.5bn/yr, and Congress writes checks for the difference every year.

Man that is nothing. Cities regularly run much bigger losses for similar projects. The New York MTA I think regularly loses that amount of money every MONTH.

I am actually impressed that Amtrak can run a nationwide rail system and only lose that amount of money considering its reputation.

[Tonitrus]

Amtrak has two main problems.  One is that they are forced to keep sparsely used, uneconomical lines open because of Congressional pressure.  If it were operating as a private company it would shut down everything outside the NE corridor. The other is that it doesn't own most (all?) of the tracks it runs on.  So it's hard to upgrade to the level to reach Accela's maximum speed.

I think the first part of those two main problems is exacerbated significantly by the second.  It makes it hard to keep a decent timetable when CSX is cock-blocking your routes.

And it is also not likely a private passenger rail company (maybe if it was an arm of something like BNSF...but as well know, Amtrak exists because they all jettisoned passenger rail) would be able to make the necessary capital investments for new rail lines.  Not to mention, our government(s) system, unlike most European countries, make it nearly impossible to develop a consistent rail line across multiple state boundaries.  It is hard enough for Amtrak...it would be impossible for a purely private company.

The only way passenger rail could potentially make a comeback, would be to have the backing of an federal/executive push, and (to compete effectively with air travel) to be able to develop dedicated lines for super-high speed rail (maglev would be nice...hyperloop is probably too over-hyped).

[Ed Anger]

Ugh public transport. I might catch a disease!

[Tonitrus]

When we develop automated flying cars/pods (cause we know people already drive shitty enough...imagine them plummeting to the ground all of the time), we can ditch all of this train/bus nonsense.

[11B4V]

Ugh public transport. I might catch a disease!

It's for the poors.

[dps]

Nationalisation isn't the end goal in itself here. That's the stuff of doctrinal warriors. What we want is better service. And more state regulation in transport (busses aren't as sexy as trains though perhaps even worse at current) is the way to get this.

Well, as someone else pointed out, trains are pretty much a natural monopoly, so having them closely regulated or even nationalized makes sense.  But not all forms of transport are natural monopolies;  buses certainly aren't.

And state regulation only leads to better service if providing better service is important to the regulators, and the regulators are competent.

IMO trains should be nationalised and busses regulated down from their current free for all to a situation like today's trains.
The trouble with free for all bus services is popular routes get clogged and over served, competition with rail introduced, small communities under served and a lack of integrated ticketing

What, exactly, is integrated ticketing and why is a lack of it a problem?

[Fate]

Ugh public transport. I might catch a disease!

It's for the poors.

The poor people I know take Megabus or Boltbus. Ain't got no cash for a $200 Acela Express ticket. Those trains are all full of yuppies.