West Coast Franchise Fiasco

[sasguru]

The word "arguably" is neither a fact, evidence or an argument

Subsidies 4 times as much after privatisation. Fare rate rises much higher.
HTH

[DodgyAgent]

Beeching closed down branch lines which didn't bring in much revenue.
But those lines aren't the important ones.
The ones that matter are e.g. London-Brighton, Brum-London, Heathrow Express etc. - the popular mass used lines.
How do you set up competition with those?

so these lines would still be running without a subsidy would they?

[sasguru]

so these lines would still be running without a subsidy would they?

FFS. You and Robinho are too thick to discuss things with. There's a really good, efficient, public sector organisation that can help thickos like you improve your thinking. It's called the Open University. I suggest you try it.

[DodgyAgent]

FFS. You and Robinho are too thick to discuss things with. There's a really good, efficient, public sector organisation that can help thickos like you improve your thinking. It's called the Open University. I suggest you try it.

it is a fantastic facility for people with nothing better to do. Just dont expect employers to count it as a proper degree

[Robinho]

I'm not interested in responding to your every minor point.

I don't think you can really privatise the trains well. But i blame that on the fact that they were a state monopoly for so long and thus the network, operations as well as the nature of the country has grown around this subsidised monopoly. Even though it is in your nature to disagree with everything i say out of principal i'm sure and would hope you secretly appreciate that argument.

The only country with a mass private rail network is the US. And whilst there are basically no passenger trains (largely because passenger rail transport is not particularly cost effective) they do have a very efficient freight network with a lot of good innovations such as double stack container trains.

Comparatively, the UK has a piss-poor rail freight network.

[sasguru]

I'm not interested in responding to your every minor point.
.

Like when you said the US got rich on free market policies rather than having massive protectionism in place until 1945.

You're just a prize moron. I say that as a matter of fact, not as an insult.

[DodgyAgent]

You're just a prize moron. I say that as a matter of fact, not as an insult.

It's the way you say it

[Robinho]

Again more insults, no intelligent debate.

[Robinho]

Why would protectionism make a country rich anyway? The US was full of immigrants and exported and imported a lot of tulipe from/to Europe.

The USSR was protectionist, and that never go too rich did it.

[sasguru]

Again more insults, no intelligent debate.

How can you debate someone wwho ignores the massive flaws in his arguments?
Whose arguments are so factually incorrect?
I've given you an example above.
Therefore it's logical to call you a moron. Like I said it's a statement of fact not an insult.