The problem is you’re predominantly subsidising the middle classes. You’re subsidising those who don’t need it. Good luck explaining to Workington man that my mates earning six figures commuting from Herts, Beds and Bucks deserve their train tickets being subsidised. Even I don’t want to and I know and like them. Due to the nature of my job I can’t commute by train. Why should I subsidise others when I have no option to use public transport?Sandydragon wrote:Renationalisation would scare investors and make them wary about investing in other areas. I’d prefer to make the railways more efficient and user friendly by other means, such as subsidies. I get that many tax payers don’t want to pay for someone else’s travel, but equally I don’t want to pay for someone else’s police response. That’s just the way it works.Digby wrote:I'd again like to note a lot of the problems with a lack of state investment in companies now privatised stemmed from investment levels that were low 'cause the government doesn't have the money to invest, but also 'cause the Tories intentionally under invested to make the various bodies cheaper to buy, and whilst there has been a lot of private investment a lot of that is actually just based on borrowing. So you could get very similar investment levels if you simply allowed public bodies to borrow, whether that's a good thing is open to debate, but private investment does tend to push up debt held in the country rather than see new money coming in, whether that's a good or bad thing is also open to debate.
I'm of the view there tends to be good and bad in things run by the state and done privately, a plague on both their houses. But I lean towards state run organisations when it's national infrastructure with natural monopolies, and I'm amenable to not for profits sitting slightly outside the state.
I'm also of the view however if you want to renationalise you need a really clear idea where the money is coming from, to understand debt isn't free, and that you cannot nationalise in the cheap without risking a lot of investment beyond those previously private firms. So maybe now it's done I'd choose to work with what there is than launch into some massive public purchasing projects, it rather feels like there's already enough to be getting on with
Cheaper public transport would make it more cost efficient to work further from home and for those whose incomes can’t sustain significant transport costs. It would also ease traffic on the roads.
The UK rail subsidies are 6p per passenger per mile. Give me that and I’ll buy an electric car as part of the deal. Why should the green subsidy argument only apply to trains.
Police, fire service etc is universal coverage, we all might need them and we have no choice when/whether to use them. That isn’t true of trains.