British Rail Woes Due to Bureocracy, Not Privatization
Bono:
http://www.adamsmith.org/images/uploads/publications/railway.pdf
opebo:
What garbage, of course the opposite is the case.
afleitch:
Privatisation has been a success for Brtish railways to be honest. I will admit it was not privatised in the correct way, seperating thr track from the operator companies and fragmenting InterCity etc but 11 years on things run alot better. New trains, more frequent services and station improvements. In Glasgow we had trains pushing 40 years old until privatisation (which occured in Scotland in 1997) 1 and hour if we were lucky. Now the trains are less that 5 years old and there is one every 15 minutes, Now thats progress.
Filuwaúrdjan:
"Adam Smith" institute are a bunch of hacks; true BR wasn't very good and could have done with some serious reform but it was a hell of a lot better than what replaced it; the private train companies are bad enough (to be fair some aren't that bad from what I hear, but Virgin and Arriva are both dire) but the scandal was the privatisation of the actual railways... no amount of free-market rhetoric* can disguise the fact that Railtrack was a complete and utter disaster; the only reason for any improvement in services anywhere was due to the sheer amount of taxpayers money being poured into a private company. It was always going to collapse at some point...
*Not that a private monopoly can really be described as "free market" anyway...
freek:
Quote from: Senator Al on September 25, 2005, 03:46:29 AM
but Virgin and Arriva are both dire
Arriva also runs the bus service in the North of the Netherlands. And they do that probably just as bad as they run trains in England. :(
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page