British Rail should it be brought back?

[crookedspire]

If the railways were state owned it could be a nice little earner for the government the profits could be used to put towards the NHS. I hear a lot about the ' bad old days' but no one really knows how it would progress a lot has changed since 1997.

[Robin-H]

If the railways were state owned it could be a nice little earner for the government the profits could be used to put towards the NHS. I hear a lot about the ' bad old days' but no one really knows how it would progress a lot has changed since 1997.

 

That's not how it would work. Any profits would have to go into maintaining and improving the railways. That is after they paid off the debt for buying all the rolling stock.

[I1L2T3]

The main issue is they'll fall back into their old habits, lazy late trains, no improvements, no real drive to do anything or look after the passenger.

All the staff will take a huge pay increase, just because they can, they'll take on loads of people to sit around pushing paper about and 'managing' things.

 

It'll be the same old same old, there needs to be some kind of competition in the market, some push to 'do better'.

 

Problem with that is competition has not improved the service. And you are also suggesting that not for profit companies can't deliver good service which is patent crap.

 

Lose the dogma.

[unbeliever]

Problem with that is competition has not improved the service. And you are also suggesting that not for profit companies can't deliver good service which is patent crap.

 

Lose the dogma.

 

There's no reason in principle why non-profits can't be well run.

In practise they aren't.

[I1L2T3]

There's no reason in principle why non-profits can't be well run.

In practise they aren't.

 

People don't trust private ownership. They didn't trust state ownership.

 

East coast ran along similar lines and it worked well.

[ukdobby]

If the railways were state owned it could be a nice little earner for the government the profits could be used to put towards the NHS. I hear a lot about the ' bad old days' but no one really knows how it would progress a lot has changed since 1997.

 

Why or why must we plough more money into the NHS when all they do is give it someone who can't do their job by creating a job for her or paying for a course for someone with 8 kids to come From France and study so the government have to fork out even more money to house and keep them,and that's only 2 instances.

[I1L2T3]

Why or why must we plough more money into the NHS when all they do is give it someone who can't do their job by creating a job for her or paying for a course for someone with 8 kids to come From France and study so the government have to fork out even more money to house and keep them,and that's only 2 instances.

 

Beacuse despite the flaws and rough edges one day it's gong to save your life most probably.

[unbeliever]

People don't trust private ownership. They didn't trust state ownership.

 

East coast ran along similar lines and it worked well.

 

East coast was a special case. This has already been explained on the thread. Unlike the private operators they were not required to invest, which gave them an enormous advantage. A drunken monkey could have run it and turned a profit.

 

You shouldn't trust private ownership, but if there's competition you don't have to as they perform or die. You shouldn't trust public ownership either, but the mechanisms for keeping them honest and efficient are far weaker.

[geared]

Problem with that is competition has not improved the service.

 

Most rail operators would beg to differ, perhaps you could show the figures that demonstrate service has not improved?

[unbeliever]

Beacuse despite the flaws and rough edges one day it's gong to save your life most probably.

 

What's wrong with copying one of the continental universal healthcare systems?

Nobody wants to end up with the US state of affairs but the purely state-funded model never seems to be able to get enough money into the system.