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

[fromtia]

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.

[Tamas]

Let's get this thread back on track.

But it runs like a well-oiled machine!

It gives stability and certainty

[Valmy]

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.

We have a demand for publicly owned business talk and it is being supplied. Regulation by big mod government must be resisted.

[OttoVonBismarck]

I mean I don't mind certain things being nationalized, passenger rail I think can be ran well both ways with both outcomes possible. Hong Kong's passenger rail system is famously a private company, and one of the best run in the world. America's AmTrak is a nationalized passenger rail system, and is a colossal financial and transit failure on almost every line it runs other than the Northeast corridor and maybe the line between San Diego and Los Angeles. I'm not really a major proponent one way or the other on whether passenger rail should be public or private, either way it's a natural monopoly, and government has an important oversight role. If it's nationalized, it should be ran well by the government. If it's privatized, it should be regulated well by government. If those things are done I think either scenario can work, but when you have situations like we have in the United States, where Amtrak is a government owned corporation but is basically left to be ran terribly and then Congress just writes checks to cover their operating losses (to the tune of $1.5bn a year) you get pretty bad outcomes.

I'm not sure why the Royal Mail should be renationalized as I think that's a good privatization, if anything I'd like to see the  U.S. go that route with USPS, and Labour's manifesto argument that the energy industry should be nationalized is simply stupid.

[Duque de Bragança]

I've no idea about crossrail. I hope not. I was under the impression it was pretty much  to be ran like part of the underground.

On the overground acting like the tube though... That's the way good railway services operate. The UK with its idea that taking a train is a big deal like taking a plane is odd. In Japan and Switzerland trains pretty much do operate like nationwide metros.

German trains are pretty good and they aren't quite the same as taking a metro.

Anyway, let's not distract from the point where you noted London as how you wish trains would be run. The difference for London trains isn't that they are nationalized (as the services are indeed contracted out to private companies) but rather than TfL does a pretty decent job of regulating the services that fall under its purview.

When Try mentions "metros", he may be speaking of S-Bahn, operated by the Deutsche Bahn in Germany and CFF in Switzerland respectively, i.e railway company not rapid transit companies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-train

The S-train is a type of hybrid urban-suburban rail serving a metropolitan region. Some of the larger S-train systems provide service similar to rapid transit systems, while smaller ones often resemble commuter or even regional rail.

U-Bahn is the strict equivalent to metros.
S-Bahn look more like trains than city rapid transit.
Crossrail is supposed to bring the RER/S-Bahn concept to London, if that helps.

[CountDeMoney]

I'm not sure why the Royal Mail should be renationalized as I think that's a good privatization, if anything I'd like to see the  U.S. go that route with USPS,

Just when you lead people to believe you may have undouchebagged yourself, you redouchebag yourself.

[garbon]

I've no idea about crossrail. I hope not. I was under the impression it was pretty much  to be ran like part of the underground.

On the overground acting like the tube though... That's the way good railway services operate. The UK with its idea that taking a train is a big deal like taking a plane is odd. In Japan and Switzerland trains pretty much do operate like nationwide metros.

German trains are pretty good and they aren't quite the same as taking a metro.

Anyway, let's not distract from the point where you noted London as how you wish trains would be run. The difference for London trains isn't that they are nationalized (as the services are indeed contracted out to private companies) but rather than TfL does a pretty decent job of regulating the services that fall under its purview.

When Try mentions "metros", he may be speaking of S-Bahn, operated by the Deutsche Bahn in Germany and CFF in Switzerland respectively, i.e railway company not rapid transit companies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-train

The S-train is a type of hybrid urban-suburban rail serving a metropolitan region. Some of the larger S-train systems provide service similar to rapid transit systems, while smaller ones often resemble commuter or even regional rail.

U-Bahn is the strict equivalent to metros.
S-Bahn look more like trains than city rapid transit.
Crossrail is supposed to bring the RER/S-Bahn concept to London, if that helps.

Not really helpful as it is a side digression.

[Josquius]

When Try mentions "metros", he may be speaking of S-Bahn, operated by the Deutsche Bahn in Germany and CFF in Switzerland respectively, i.e railway company not rapid transit companies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-train

Yes.

German trains are pretty good and they aren't quite the same as taking a metro.

Anyway, let's not distract from the point where you noted London as how you wish trains would be run. The difference for London trains isn't that they are nationalized (as the services are indeed contracted out to private companies) but rather than TfL does a pretty decent job of regulating the services that fall under its purview.

OK, so its not 100% state ran in London.
As Gups says however they are far more nationalised than in the rest of the country.
They are also a lot better.

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.

[Tonitrus]

It would be nice if we had the freakin motivation/wherewithal  to look at things like the USPS, Amtrak, etc....and say "how could we make this government-run entity work decently" instead of just "oh well, it sucks, privatization must be the only answer".

The US military, in purely financial terms, is a gigantic clusterfuck.  We only tolerate it, because A: it's too important too neglect it, B: you cannot privatize the military, and C: see A & B.

[Barrister]

It would be nice if we had the freakin motivation/wherewithal  to look at things like the USPS, Amtrak, etc....and say "how could we make this government-run entity work decently" instead of just "oh well, it sucks, privatization must be the only answer".

The US military, in purely financial terms, is a gigantic clusterfuck.  We only tolerate it, because A: it's too important too neglect it, B: you cannot privatize the military, and C: see A & B.

It's because for a myriad of reasons, making substantive change in how governments work is really, really hard.  It's much easier to do as a private business.

[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.

[Duque de Bragança]

Not really helpful as it is a side digression.

It's Languish, so WAD. 

[Admiral Yi]

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.

[garbon]

When Try mentions "metros", he may be speaking of S-Bahn, operated by the Deutsche Bahn in Germany and CFF in Switzerland respectively, i.e railway company not rapid transit companies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-train

Yes.

German trains are pretty good and they aren't quite the same as taking a metro.

Anyway, let's not distract from the point where you noted London as how you wish trains would be run. The difference for London trains isn't that they are nationalized (as the services are indeed contracted out to private companies) but rather than TfL does a pretty decent job of regulating the services that fall under its purview.

OK, so its not 100% state ran in London.
As Gups says however they are far more nationalised than in the rest of the country.
They are also a lot better.

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.

But that is what I said. Issue is really not private vs nationalised but more of how effective the government regulators actually are.

[Barrister]

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.