@ChrisMayLA6

I admire the German Deutsche Bahn model:

1. Buy and run four private train companies in the UK, including London Overground and the Grand Central line.

2. Charge Brits up to £2 per mile.

3. Use profits made in the UK to subsidise German train tickets (58€ per month, unlimited travel).

At least one nation has benefited from Thatcher’s privatisation.

@RaffKarva

Yes, its ironic isn't it..... or perhaps (if I was to be more judgmental) exploitative

@ChrisMayLA6 @RaffKarva

The other question is why not subsidise rail rather than roads? I don't know what the figures are for the UK, but in the US it's reckoned that state and federal income from fuel etc taxes is only around HALF the level of expenditure on roads - and that's without taking into account road transport 'externalities' (air pollution, congestion, accidents, noise and climate change) - and there's a study in the EU showing that when you do include these externalities ALL countries subsidise road transport. Yet there's very little controversy about public subsidy of roads, while the much more sensible subsidy of rail always seems to attract criticism.

@ChrisMayLA6 @RaffKarva

Of course, road subsidies help wealthy corporations and individuals, rail subsidies the young and more hard-pressed people. And wealthy corporations and individuals own the media.

@GeofCox @ChrisMayLA6 @RaffKarva no, they help pretty much everyone. The “problem” with public transport is that most of the economic benefits are external - they accrue to land owners and businesses rather than the people using the transport.

Unfortunately everyone is too system blind to understand that.

@Colman

Not sure I understand your point. In the EU study I read most benefits of road transport subsidies actually accrued to businesses (primarily because diesel taxes are far too low). Far more goods transport goes by road now, so business is the main beneficiary of road transport subsidy - and generally the bigger the business the more it benefits. Conversely, for people's mobility, good, cheap public transport disproportionately helps younger and poorer people that don't have cars, or can't afford taxis - but they (especially the young) are most severely affected by the external costs of roads, like pollution and climate change.

@ChrisMayLA6 @RaffKarva

@Colman

I'd like to see some - any - evidence for claims like that. What I have seen is evidence that roads drive up property prices - and car use - and access to customers, etc. That's why the developed world is filling up with awful peripheral retail developments, and supermarkets, many only accessible by car.

@ChrisMayLA6 @RaffKarva

@GeofCox @Colman @RaffKarva

Americanisation?