To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 12510
12509  |  12511
Subject: 
Re: British railway industry
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Mon, 10 Sep 2001 22:17:10 GMT
Viewed: 
1338 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Lindsay Frederick Braun writes:
I agree, inasmuch as we're talking about privatization in
  practice, not theoretical Libertarian privatization, which
  I would agree would function more effectively than the
  half-assed privatization Railtrack represents (but, I would
  also argue, would be inferior to public ownership in this
  case).

Except for, as I said, how do you incentivise the public sector to deliver
value for taxpayers money?  When BR knew it had the government to bail it
out it used to



Bit about what previous structure to return to:
Early 19thC.

Right, I shall get back to you to cite why this didn't work then (How Lewis
Carroll was able to joke in 'The Hunting of the Snark':  'They threatened
its life with a railway share'!

  I had totally forgotten about that line!  Brilliant.

Thanks.  Of course now I'm home I can't find anything relevant.  I guess
.debate has to move a little slower while we look to back stuff up.  I'll be
with you soon but suffice to say that the failure rate of railway
'start-ups' and the number of people who lost their shirts makes the dotcom
bubble look tame.


  It's also possible to create "virtual assets" that can be traded
  or used as a proxy in an industry like, say, gas and electric.
  While the actual power or pressure is given by a certain company's
  facility, they "sell" that asset at wholesale to your provider.
  Your provider does the same at plants they own.  And so on, and so
  forth--more b2b than actual doubling or trebling of infrastructure.
  Theoretically it works well, so long as everyone plays fair (and
  doesn't collude, or sign exclusionary regional contracts as has
  happened with some cable service providers in the Midwest).

Agreed but I think you are referring to generation.  I have no problem with
privatized power stations, it just the transmission pylon network that
should be state owned because we don't want two of those.

I think this boils down to: is it practical, affordable and environmentally
sustainable to have significantly more infrastructure capacity than you need
so that competition can happen.  In Cable transmission, maybe.  In
electricity transmission, no. In Railways (in Britain), no.

  I'd argue thus far that "Cable and electric, yes.  Railways, no."
  But that's only because I consider the kinks not to be worked out
  sufficiently for a system as important as the UK's rails to be
  tossed upon it.  Now, the control of actual *stock* would be another
  matter--isn't that analagous to the airlines being private
  while the airports (usually) aren't?  I'm on a limb on that last
  one, so let me know if I'm off base with thinking most large
  airports are publicly-owned.

Now Lawrence has pitched in, cheers Lawrence, does this change what you said
there as I was bit lost.  Coudl you explain a bit more?

  By the way (and especially Larry), have you seen the recent story
  about the push to build and maintain high-speed lines around the
  US?  Apparently Amtrak is miffed that they won't be given control
  but will be allowed to "bid fairly" to run the new system or a part
  thereof.  I haven't seen how they're going to maintain the track
  and associated assets, though.

I'm really interested in this.  Are the lines being built by a private firm
and then leased or sold to an operator to maintain and operate services or
is it a Design, Build, Maintain contract with a franchised operator?  If the
former the designer has no incentive, beyond the spec and Client management
to build in reliability as he doesn't incur the maintenance charge.  If the
latter you have a split of the wheel-rail interface with all the attendant
problems we have with that.  Either way it appears to be as crazy as PPP in
terms of securing a safe and reliable, customer-focused railway.

p.s. We're the only two discussing this, shall we knock it on the head, take
it to email, or do you expect Lindsay to come back?

  I'm here, and reading, but just really busy.

No problem, I'm just getting used to .debate  (and I'm enjoying it, though
feeling guilty that my Lego-related posts look pretty meagre in comparison!)

Psi



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: British railway industry (was Re: UK devolved government (was Harry Potter but who remembers that?)
 
(...) I agree, inasmuch as we're talking about privatization in practice, not theoretical Libertarian privatization, which I would agree would function more effectively than the half-assed privatization Railtrack represents (but, I would also argue, (...) (23 years ago, 10-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

42 Messages in This Thread:















Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR