Nationalisation good or bad ? (ex cheerful 2015 thread)

Oh dear.

 

In relation to the "missing documents" argument, in 2007 the Local Authority that I worked for was put in an embarrassing and expensive position because it had no documentary proof of an intention that I and others clearly remembered from around 1976. The reason was that in the late 1980s, faced with an acute lack of storage room, someone had decided to destroy all files that had lain unused for 10 years. Knowing that some of the information would be duplicated in files held by the Government we approached the DCLG only to find that they had done the same. Those files had not gone missing, they were consciously destroyed but for the most mundane of reasons. This is what happens in the public service; years later a tiny proportion of the destroyed material turns out to have been likely to contain vital information but the attitude always seemed to be "hard luck - the space saved makes it worth it". I would add that certain types of documents where there was a required for permanent records were microfilmed; that could have been done to all but cost ruled it out. Nowadays they are digitised as a matter of course.

 

Next thing is we'll be told there is an Alien loco at 51A after finding it's support coach at Ruswarp.

 

Well, this is a 'different' thread; I've just read through it in its entirety. Some of the claims therein are 'interesting', to say the least...

 

Who's sneering, we are just trying to show you that there are alternative views to yours which, in the scheme of things appear to have more credibility.
You recently said, "ATOC recommended it for reopening but the financial crisis intervened, otherwise it would have happened by now". Yet although requested we have seen no links to sources to back up this statement, verbal testaments are just about useless.

Then you said, "Permission was given some considerable time earlier, giving time for local protests and an ill-fated preservation attempt to be developed", again what could be a significant statement if it were backed up with sources, 'A mate told me' does not count.

 

Knowing how much documentation is produced by the public sector (even the small part that I worked for), I can understand the regular purges. We produced masses which went nowhere, because what we were working on at the time went in a different direction. We archived huge amounts and very VERY rarely needed any of it ever again.

Also it is easy to underestimate how the 'political climate' does alter decisions made. In my eight years with that organisation I saw money begin to flow, flow more rapidly then dry up again, and the changes were eye-opening. I could well understand how the proud career railwaymen who spent their early years on the big four ended up working out how to close big parts of the network even if it went against the grain.

 

Actually the statement that ATOC recommended reopening is true. However the TOCs werent offering any money to fund the reopening, but one of their members would have received a subsidy for operating the service.

http://www.atoc.org/media-centre/pr...unities-keen-to-see-rail-links-return-100053/

 

Actually it's a hospital - but you only get in if you've put someone else in one first.

 

I was always under the impression that Carstairs was the Scottish equivalent of Broadmoor...

 

I understand it to be a "secure mental institution". There is quite a severe speed restriction on the curve fro Edinburgh.
http://www.tsh.scot.nhs.uk/

 

Of course though, Britain's railways are not fully privatised. In a few days time it'll be a new year and once again, the Government will tell the companies how much to put up fares by.
Please note; the Government instructs, not suggests the ticket price increase therefore the companies must obey and are not fully privatised. Oddly enough the privatised utility companies decide for themselves when to put up their prices and by how much. Why the difference?

 

Because there is supposedly competition in the energy market and the energy market is not dependant on state subsidies.

 

Unless it's a wind farm.

 

That is the equivalent of a sub to network rail not to a TOC.

 

You are of course correct. It is a gerry-rigged market, because there is no natural market when the costs of entry are so high. some would argue that is a good reason to have the railways as a national asset, others merely that by holding an auction every ten years or so, at least private companies get the opportunity to use initiative to undercut rivals and therefore it is worth having this heavily regulated privatisation. There isn't a right answer here, much of one's position is down to faith. I personally believe there is no reason why nationalised industries cannot be well run and therefore tend to prefer public ownership in cases of monopoly, where the public benefits are so large that subsidy is appropriate or where there is a major conflict between social benefit and private profit. Others believe that the profit motive drives up standards and drives down costs by enough to offset the loss of profit from the loop and some feel that government and business make poor bedfellows.

 

I think there are very few examples where it is possible to directly compare public vs private. You also struggle to separate them from the time in which they exist if you are comparing historical examples.