A government mandated monopoly is hardly "free market."Quote:
Originally Posted by DexDexter
Printable View
A government mandated monopoly is hardly "free market."Quote:
Originally Posted by DexDexter
Pretty much. It seems like a choice to me. Either we destroy our economies to "save" our environment (*cough*China, India*cough* ... who said that?). Or we let our economies recover from this recession and slowly work in what we can to clean stuff up. But that being said, we must remember that CO2 is not a pollutant, IT'S PLANT FOOD.Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
Ok how did we go from healthcare, to the British Rail System, now to the environment?
Back on topic. There still has been NO ONE who has even taken a serious shot at a plan on how to pay for $1,000,000,000,000 in new government spending. Anybody got a plan? Anyone? Any plan? Anything?
No, because of the environmental damage caused (fact, not something dreamed up to annoy the unthinking right) and the utter absurdity of the situation in question.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
Er... quite a lot. Look it up.Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
Efficient how? Certainly not in environmental terms. And long may it go on being subsidised by governments, because the quality of travel thus provided by state rail operators is excellent when the systems are well-run. This is called providing a public service.Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
I don't know what you guys are on, but anyway, I merely pointed out that in some sectors, government monopoly can actually work. The British privatized their railways which lead to for example terrible maintenance problems whereas here in Finland the state owned railway system works very well and when state controlled the railways in the UK things were better there as well. By the way, over here the state provides free education for all , no private schools etc. and that works well also, we are near the top in PISA scores in the whole world. Nothing is perfect and I'm not saying that things that work around here would work in the States, but the fact is that government-lead things are not always bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Program...ent_Assessment
Again, you are commenting on something about which you seem to know little, other than what your pre-conceived notions tell you that you ought to think. The British railways were far better run when they were run by the state. They have been ruined by privatisation, which has introduced competition where once there was co-operation. All it has done is allowed the government to get the railways off its books, even though they probably cost the taxpayer much more on an annual basis now, not something that any of the parties will admit. It is a classic example of how the private sector definitely does not enjoy any form of superiority.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
I would suspect that the only reason you think rail travel should maybe be done away with is because those concerned with the environment see it as the way forward, and your own views do not tally with this; therefore, it must somehow be a backward step, and not to be supported. In fact, travelling between Paris and London, and indeed many other European city pairs, by train is quicker than doing so by aircraft, as well as being far more environmentally friendly and far less hassle. In these circumstances, it is air travel that should gradually be done away with — and I say this as an aviation journalist.
Exactly. See above. And also see the many other 'less efficient' means of transport that one could name. How, exactly, have Ferrari or Porsche 'adapted' to changing circumstances? Their products are more expensive and less efficient than other cars. Should they be forced to 'go away'?Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
Not 'feel green', but 'be green'. There is a significant difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
Much as you have done in relation to right-wing political philosophies. There's precious little depth of thinking involved.Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
Railways are a 'natural monopoly'. Not a true free market.
Railways in Canada are privately run for frieght, and gov't run for passengers. It works if you are the CNR or CPR, but VIA rail hauling the passengers is a money pit. That said, railways don't work well in the age of the airplane in nations smaller than Canada at times, so I Know they are not a viable option for travellers in Canada.
What works in one country may not work in others. That can be healthcare and all the rest of it....Each nation has to find what works for them, and while I can see the merits of having universal healtcare because I live with it, I can also say the US isn't wrong to not have it, and they cant afford to make that change now in any case. The USA is broke. Like all Social Liberals who want it cant seem to grasp the economic truth of it cant understand this is NOT the time to even have this discussion. I would like a Ferrari, but I cant afford it.....but it would be better in theory than what I am driving. Realism.....what a concept.