Nationalise the railways

What do you guys think about nationalisation of the railways?

> The Daily Mirror is today throwing its weight behind growing calls to renationalise the railways.

> With passengers facing yet another day of disruption, the measure is backed by union bosses, MPs and the public.

> Mick Cash, chief of the 80,000-strong RMT union, said: “Privatisation has amounted to two decades of the great train robbery.

> “The Tories love state ownership of the railways, as long as it is any state, but Britain. And passengers foot the bill with the highest fares in Europe for the worst services while profits are siphoned off to subsidise fares in France and Germany. It is time to end this madness.”

mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/great-train-robbery-mirror-backs-9452910

What about nationalisation of other services/industries? Thoughts?

Other urls found in this thread:

yougov.co.uk/news/2013/11/04/nationalise-energy-and-rail-companies-say-public/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

In the UK, the majority of people support nationalisation,:

> Supporters of nationalising the energy companies include 52% of Conservative voters, and 74% of UKIP voters. And again, 52% of Conservatives are pro-nationalisation of the rail companies, as are 72% of UKIP supporters.

yougov.co.uk/news/2013/11/04/nationalise-energy-and-rail-companies-say-public/

IMO all forms of public transport should be nationalized.
How can you have private ownership of infrasructure funded and paid for by the state?
The railyways don't build or maintain the rail networks, the government does. They have no impetus to upgrade tehir systems or provide a better service since there is no competition, what is a competitor going to do? Build more fucking railways? Of course not.

Anything that has solid infrastructure should be nationalized. Busses, rail, subways, etc.

Normally I'd be against it because no one fucks up quite like the government, but the private companies haven't done a god job at all.

Why the fuck were they sold off in the first place?

In a word, neoliberalism.

But how could their business friends have a nice gravy train of constant unchecked tax income then?

Railways and highways are vital to the defense of the nation and for that reason should be handled by the govt.

Corruption, nepotism, etc.

Pls don't kick our semi nationalized railway company that operates beyond our borders out
Also please don't kick out our semi nationalized mail carrier that manages your national mail service infrastructure

>Unions supporting nationalisation

Because government will cave into their demands more easily. More expenses to piss away the national budget on

DON'T DO IT

WE GOT IT AND IT DOES NOT WORK

postnl rules

The UK has the highest train fares in Europe!

Private sector has really fucked up it can't really get much worse. OR it can but we don't know because it's really fucking bad right now.

What
Don't you just fucking love arriva trains
Man I fucking love having that German dick up my ass
I'd pay even more for that

WTF
no we privatised our railway, service went down and prices surged because of it.

It's fucking awful here and the unions need to all be blasted with fire.

Same with energy, postal services and the phone company

Why does the NMBS still use trains from fucking 30 years ago

Cause they can get away with it , belgians are dumb as fuck

Actually BT is the only thing in this country that is semi good that's privatised. The rest can go suck it though.

I am in favour.

The whole point of having privatised railways was to give the public a choice.

We have no choice. Southern Rail has a monopoly in the south east and it's the same elsewhere just with different companies. The service is beyond terrible (just look at the recent strikes) and the cost of tickets goes up every year.

Even the fucking govt could do a better job than these clowns.

>Private companies are running the railways badly
>Solution is state-ownership

If corruption and nepotism are prevalent amongst private enterprises then state-ownership will be FAR worse. Not to mention the fiscal health of the UK is worrying (thanks Labour) and we can't do with more increases in public expenditure, regardless of the plebeian logic of "We'll just tax the rich!"

Bottom line: Has privatisation been problematic? Yes
Is nationalisation the solution? Fuck no.

So how about we strap explosive dog collars to everyone that works in the train services? Like Battle Royale, if they step out of line *boom*. We should do that with our footballers. Fail to score a goal *boom*.

Demanding privatisation is literally how kikes destroy nations.

I am all for free market but all utilities must be government owned

We have a lot of money

You are believing aristocrats when they say they have nothing, I bet you believe in the housing crisis too....

You need to be woke like me

Partially re-nationalised, but not the whole hog like before because that just turned to shit and got us needing privatisation in the first place to get over the total clusterfuck our railways were by the 1990s.

But at the same time keep Network Rail and privatised freight operators in place. They've been a significant improvement on what they all replaced. Fully nationalised AND fully privatised infrastructure and maintenance was fucked up and either poorly managed or poorly maintained by either, having a private, but non-profit company run that has worked much better. Also freight has been far better and more efficiently managed under private operators than at any point under nationalisation. It was a poor loss maker under BR comparison.

But passenger rail nationalisation can work though. One of the worst mistakes in recent times was the ideologically-motivated sale of East Coast by Osborne, despite being both profitable and popular operator under state ownership. Not every franchise would be profitable under state ownership, but most would if they were run the same way.

Also means the return of aesthetic liveries again like pic related.

>thinking that privatising a service that costs a fuckton to maintain and takes up a monumental amount of land would lead to competition and choice

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHHA

You are in Australia, you don't even have a valid opinion

Private ownership will be worse than state ownership when there is no competition.
Railways will never have competition because of their mechanical construction specialties, this is a natural monopoly.

>travelling by train any distance in uk
>arrive at ticket barrier in station
>reach in my pocket to pull out 12 different tickets which are all identical but represent different train companies
>some say the time of departure, some dont
>none of them say which company service they are for
>half of them are just "reservation receipts"
>get on train
>it's a cross-country to darlington or some shithole
>it's delayed
>miss the next train
>it's a virgin train
>office is shut at the station
>no one to contact
>go to the west-coast ticket office
>sure we can get you on the next train but it will cost the full price today sir which is £175 for a standard class one way ticket
>finally somehow get on a train
>it's double booked so i have to stand at the doors for 2hrs
> all this fuckery has made me thirsty
>it costs £2 for a small bottle of water on the train

Public transport that has been nationalised cannot be privatised. It'll result in a price hike, a decrease in service and quality, and an immediate monopoly by whatever company formed in its wake.
I also cannot understand how infrastructure (the railways) are public, but the permission to use them (the actual trains riding them) is privatised.

Not much, I just know Jeremy Corbyn wants to do it for some reason.

But nationalising the railways will generate revenue for the govt

I'd rather my money goes to the govt than to some greedy jew boss.

Sounds good mate, these leeches already enjoy benefits off of my pound and have the audacity to complain further. The FA will be disbanded within a year if that were the case.

Oh please. Demanding NATIONALISATION is how kikes have destroyed countless nations. Have you not read Das Kapital by the überkike
himself?

Please enlighten me with respect to the fiscal realities that have been both manipulated and fabricated by the subversive Judeo-Masonic Menace, oh woke Sup Forumsack

we have cityrail (state owned) which allows for unlimited travel in a month for $30

get cucked t. choudhari

Don't do it. It's a mistake.

I'm from Portugal where there is a state owned railway system.

The service is decent when its working and often it is not because of... (wait for it) strikes. Awfully similar to southern rail right now.

It's also always unprofitable for some reason (likely corruption & inefficiency) and the tax payer pays to cover it.

If the rail service is nationalised you will just add on yet another expense that has to be covered by the tax payer.

Why not just loan money to Thameslink or some other railway company that has their shit together to take over the service from shit companies?

That was the fairytale they sold to the public, all parties involved knew exactly what the true results would be.

The state can pay & own the infrastructure but the actual service can/should be provided by privatised companies which the state can charge a fee for infrastructure maintenance from.

>privatised railways - more growth but costs more and have to deal with unions, some accuracy
>nationalised railways - accuracy in the bin, trains will turn up whenever, no growth but a lot cheaper, no unions so problems will be lack of funds to repair and replace rather than unions being twats

Build more fucking rail lines, get more trains, open up competition and most importantly build housing in height and not width (ie: less people need commuting)

What do you think the EU demands from it's member states?
And how do you think the IMF makes poor countries totally defenseless against corporations?

Privatisation of utilities is all about taking power away from the people under the disguise of economic benefit.

>the measure is backed by union bosses

DON'T FUCKING DO IT YOU KEK$

Hahaha, you think unions will go away?

Think again, they will stay and demand more and more shit.

Your only choice is to specifically outlaw them and good luck with that.

It's true that if the railways were to be completely nationalised, a greater amount of revenue will go to the government, but at the same time expenditure will also be completely drawn from the public through taxation. The status quo is far from desirable, especially when there's such blatant collusion between government and private interests, but at the same time putting things into state hands in its entirety isn't the solution and will simply allow for more corruption - as is typical of state monopolies.

At this rate i don't know why the UK even has trains outside of London, no one fucking uses them nearly as much as planes and driving, i'd be surprised if the London to Glasgow trains even make a profit desu

were fucked then. Whats the point nationalising railways then if unions will still exist? Theyre less likely to win a strike against a government budget and in the case of this strike on southern rail, itd be a lost cause since theyre striking for a legislation change aren't they?

This

They will just strike for longer and people will get on the government back to fix the issue.

This shit happened in portugal a few years ago.

Over here in reality, state controlled railway system, was cheaper, more on time, more train connections and even more important when something wasn't right transport minister could be held accountable.

You have to go back

Why would I want to pay for a mode of transport I don't use. Nationalizing the railways is retarded.

Force me, i'll be a British citizen in a few months.

Always worked hard & paid my taxes, never demanded or got anything from the state. It sickens me to see my fucking tax money being funnelled to stupid shit like benefits families that never had a fucking job in their lives.

I'm a better Brit than most of Brits are.

I would go back to Portugal if it wasn't such a socialist hell hole. If the UK becomes the same, i might just go to the USA.

Hence why I voted leave, and politico-economic unions exist solely to fuck over the man in the street and state sovereignty whilst enriching the political elite.

Poor countries would be at the mercy of multi-national corporations even if bodies such as the IMF didn't exist. It's unfair, it's disheartening but it's the reality unfortunately.

Private monopolies and state monopolies are both terrible and diminish individual freedom and power - the former being worse when there's substantial collusion with the state which is unfortunately the case in most parts of the world.

If you're not getting anything from the state, why are you so proud of the fact you're paying them? What are you paying them to do, exactly?

>BT
They're Internet is shit, and they're phone service is a straight up monopoly holding the public to ransom. Only good thing about them is they're public WiFi coverage, although its expensive, its far reaching and always on.

Here's an idea: Nationalise the railways, but replace all the drivers with robots.

When were you last at school? When did you last have a heart operation? When did you last serve time in prison? You pay for all of those, too.

You already pay for the railways. National Rail gets its money from the government. The rail franchisees are paid money to top up their profits by the government. Any compensation for disruption, strikes etc. that the rail companies claim is paid for by... yeah, the government. So really, it's just a way for private companies to be paid for running the railways by the taxpayer. We could cut out the middle man and do it centrally and arguably save money, but it would almost certainly improve service!!

who makes the robots?

It is nationalised here and it's corrupt as fuck.
They managed to waste around 300 million of EU money

This.

Having also been a victim of a state-owned railway system I can testify to this.

I meant it as relating to benefits

Services i expect from the state:
> External security (military & border controls)
> Internal security (police, firemen & rule of law)
> Infrastructure development

Everything else are things that are probably better off being privatized (Private pensions, unemployment insurance, etc)

Even at it's most basic services, it hasn't been great. (Affirmative action, muslim imigration, etc)

But i'll support it because it's my role as a citizen

Wouldn't brexit theoretically solve this problem?

> With passengers facing yet another day of disruption, the measure is backed by union bosses, MPs and the public.
The disruption is because of the Unions. Why would i support bending to the will of those doing it?

Your rail service is a joke now that it's privatized. It has become unsafe and expensive.

No

Why?

No. This is just incompetence and greed from the rail company bosses.

Private monopolies just are generally even worse than public monopolies. State or local government monopoly is lesser evil. Governments can generally use their monopoly to support other businesses, while private monopoly just seeks to maximize it's profit at cost to other businesses.

>Services i expect from the state:
>> External security (military & border controls)
>> Internal security (police, firemen & rule of law)
>> Infrastructure development
>Everything else are things that are probably better off being privatized

Why some arbitrarily defined limits to privatization? If everything else is better in private ownership why would those few things be better in hands of evil government? Why not privatize citizens to highest bidder to complete ancap utopia?

In favour of it. Should never have been Privatised in the first place, but now they are just a total disgrace. People are saying it would be a win for Labour and Unions. But if the Conservatives spin it correctly they could make it into an issue of taking our Industries back from Multi National EU backed corporations, while keeping some element's private.

In the US privatized railways handle millions of tons of valuable freight every year and make a profit, in the mean time Amtrak looses millions and is nationalized. That said, the situation is sort of unfair to Amtrak, they knew long distance passenger rail was dead in the US when they took over. I think allowing railways to be privately operated while recieving conditional grants for construction and maintenance vital to our infrastructure is the way to do it. It keeps the railways properly managed and efficiently operated at no cost to the tax payers while well spent subsidies benefit the tax payer directly with more reliable and available rail resources.

...

Nobody in the railway industry actually supports this. Privatization is the lesser of two evils. Just more spin from the Daily Mirror.

t. Train driver.

What about the RMT? They back nationalisation.

Your country is one of very few exceptions where that is apparently the case. Even if speaking purely theoretically, if a government does in fact wield their power benevolently then this would certainly be the case. However, usually corporations and governments act in their own self-interest and when the state also has the virtual monopoly of force and control over the legal system - if power were to be abused by the average state it would yield far more catastrophic consequences than that which could be enacted by the power of corporations operating without government support.

Explain

I bet EU regulations would've kept those crooked businesspeople in check. But as you know, little did Britons know. Easy to manage, say the name Farage!

Union members are either old men or cuckold liberals. The RMT is absolutely useless anyway, they only care about lining their pockets.

i'm in favor of state ownership of all natural monopolies, although not necessarily at the national level

When there is no competition why would you want a private company to deal with the railroads? Not saying the state would do a better job, but at least you can hold them accountable.

I don't consider government evil. I consider it inefficient at economic activities but really good and getting shit in order through violence if required.

Privatising military is called mercenaries companies, states can't run their armies on mercenaries only.

Privatising police is called Mafia.

Privatising law, well beats the purpose of law in the first place.

Privatising infrastructure is a weakness for both the Army & Police.

I'm in favour of it. Not for any ideological reasoning; I just think that you can't have true competition with railways, so the customer ends up getting screwed over.

Companies bid for the use of the rail network in different regions every few years and the government picks the most attractive bid. Unfortunately once a company has been chosen they essentially have a monopoly until the contract runs out, so they can do whatever they like, charge whatever they want, not provide adequate services and nobody can do anything about it because if you want to travel on a train in that region you HAVE to use that company.

Countries like the Netherlands and Switzerland prove that a nationalised railway works.

Why is it so hard to nationalise the railway infrastructure and open up laws & regulations to allow private companies to buy & operate their own train services?

> Government charges private rail companies for use of their infrastructure;
> Private companies compete with each other for customers;
> Private companies can't kick competitors out because the government owns the infrastructure and allows competition

Can someone please tell me what is wrong with this approach or how it would be inferior to full nationalization?

Specific examples of something don't prove anything because there are always different unique factors in play, and not to mention luck.

>mfw we had "railbuses" because British Rail was so short on money.

ITT: plebs who haven't experienced the efficiency of Japan's glorious private railways

Obviously Privatization means better wages in the industry so you would support it, but the service for the public is shit.

I can't wait to see the day get they get scrapped, I'm gonna enjoy watching that one.

>it's a British train thread

Are you guys ready to REEEEEEEEEE?

Okay. Then I'll begin:

The railways are already nationalised in a way. It's just that it's not the UK government that owns them.

>76% of MTR (Crossrail and half of London Overground) is owned by the Hong Kong government.

>Arriva UK Trains (the other half of the Overground as well as Alliance Rail Holdings, Arriva TrainCare, Arriva Trains Wales, Chiltern Railways, CrossCountry, Grand Central, Tyne & Wear Metro) is owned by Deutsche Bahn AG, which is owned by the German government.

>Keolis (owns 45% of First TransPennine Express and 35% of Govia, which runs Thameslink and Great Northern, London Midland, Southeastern, and Southern and Gatwick Express) is owned by French National Railways Corporation (70%) and the Quebec Deposit & Investment Fund (30%).

>Abellio (owns 50% of Serco-Abellio, which runs Merseyrail and Northern Rail, and runs Abellio Greater Anglia and Abellio ScotRail) is owned by the Dutch national rail operator Nederlandse Spoorwegen.

>Heathrow Airport Holdings (Heathrow Express, Heathrow Connect) is owned by, amongst others, three sovereign wealth funds - Qatar Holding (20%), Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (11.20%) and China Investment Corporation (10%) - and Quebec Deposit & Investment Fund (12.62%).

Hong Kong, Germany, France, The Netherlands, Qatar, Singapore, China and parts of Canada clearly think that state-owned railways are a good idea. Especially if they run the UK's railways and the profits then subsidise their domestic services. Want to wank about how good the trains are in Europe? It's because you're paying for them.

Despite having a "shelf life" of 20 years, they're still in use after 33 years and there are provisions in place to retrofit the class 144s to further extend their life.

Our system isn't nationalized though
Semi nationalized
The non state regulated parts are a mess

couldn't they have kept it nationalized but give concessions for private companies to operate on state rail lines?
Rail service actually got better here when .italo started serving the venice-bologna-naples and naples-rome-turin routes, since our state rail company had to start competing with them

Tbh if the entirety of European rail was controlled by NS and DB affiliates it would be much better

Railway, mail, electricity, highways
everything should be nationalised

And to think you cunts used to own Hong Kong.

They run things more efficiently, granted but they can afford to, given how they're scalping other people elsewhere. High British train fares are basically subsidising cheap European rail.

Nationalization is OP. Go and take a look at us for example, 20€ a month and you can go anywhere in Madrid, bus, metro or train