Privatisation is morally wrong and ineffective. Watch

lazerbeem
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#21
Report 1 week ago
#21
(Original post by anosmianAcrimony)
''People don't always make good decisions so let's be like them and not make good decisions.''
LOL. Where did I say that? I was giving a big run down of all the **** we SHOULD be doing but don't. And if we can't do the basic things like be nicer and not road rage, how the hell would we ever muster up enough motivation to care for each other and find a sustainable way to get proper resources to everyone who needs them?

It sounds like you just put a sarcastic quote to insinuate that's what i was saying, which I wasn't. I don't feel much care coming from you so we've crumbled at the first hurdle.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#22
Report 1 week ago
#22
(Original post by Ferrograd)
Let's take water for example. Water is a human right, no one should pay to have access to clean water. Yes, I realise you will end up paying for nationalised water in tax but it would be much cheaper than ludicrous water utility rates. Secondly, the whole goal of privatisation is to increase efficency and to create competition. Yet there is no competitition in the water industry. You have single companies holding massive monopolies for entire regions. Someone in Norfolk can't decide they want to go with Welsh Water because its cheaper than Anglian or whatever.

And the whole idea of transport being inefficeint if nationalised is grossly misleading. Look at the current state of the UK rail network. Ridiculously expensive fares and trains are never on time or running correctly. So much so, The tories seem to agree with Labour and have already nationalised two rail companies!
Privatisation and marketisation are not the same thing. Marketisation generates competition, franchised privatisation amounts to state licensed monopolies.


The franchise model used in rail is disjointed because it was originally based on a kind of vertical intergration model through Railtrack which had investment from a lot of the operators like Japan, Railtrack tried to do things on the cheap though and failed miserably. The state also has significant control of everything from fares to stock.

Water I accept is a victory for the lobbyists and should be rebuilt on the model of the energy grid. A central body should be responsible for transmission and maintaining the sewage and filtration systems while private firms should be responsible for supplying water to the grid through building desalination plants or reservoirs and also manage the retail aspect.

Though I very much disagree that it’s wrong or ineffective overall.

Water loss is lower now than it was understate ownership, investment is higher than France or Germany and the cost is comparable to France.
Train network is considerably better than it was under British Rail on main line routes (also the largest - HS2 will also be the largest infrastructure project in Europe and the fastest), it is expensive because less than 13% of journeys (and most are in Scotland/Wales) receive taxpayer subsidy. Fares on average are not much higher than France and Germany per mile, they are skewed higher by long distance and peak fares.
The energy grid is cheaper than Germany and Italy and the second cleanest (only beaten by Germany for renewable) of major European economies.
Mobile broadband is comfortably the cheapest in Western Europe, home broadband above 100mb is also on par (we do perform poorly at slow speed in terms of cost - mainly because our broadband penetration in rural areas is much higher so your bill is subsidising farmer John).
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#23
Report 1 week ago
#23
It might be nominally wrong to pay for the water but then again youre paying for the infrastructure more. Especially in areas with little rainfall which have to have the water piped in miles away.
0
reply
anosmianAcrimony
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#24
Report 1 week ago
#24
(Original post by lazerbeem)
LOL. Where did I say that? I was giving a big run down of all the **** we SHOULD be doing but don't. And if we can't do the basic things like be nicer and not road rage, how the hell would we ever muster up enough motivation to care for each other and find a sustainable way to get proper resources to everyone who needs them?

It sounds like you just put a sarcastic quote to insinuate that's what i was saying, which I wasn't. I don't feel much care coming from you so we've crumbled at the first hurdle.
You really seem to be arguing that we should not attempt to collectively care for each other to the greatest extent we can, because we don't have enough societal ''motivation'' - which you have defended by showing ways we do not currently care for each other. It's defeatist! All I did was paraphrase you.
0
reply
lazerbeem
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#25
Report 1 week ago
#25
(Original post by anosmianAcrimony)
You really seem to be arguing that we should not attempt to collectively care for each other to the greatest extent we can, because we don't have enough societal ''motivation'' - which you have defended by showing ways we do not currently care for each other. It's defeatist! All I did was paraphrase you.
No.
I'm calling attention the stuff we don't currently do. That's it. If it seems to you that I'm saying we shouldn't attempt to do it then that's just how you're interpreting it.

Do we all have motivation enough as a society to do all of those things I mentioned? No. It doesn't seem so. As they are all still a problem. That is me calling attention to it.
Should we all have motivation to do it? Yes. Of course.
The natural next part of that kind of discussion would be "well how can we motivate people to care?"
But you have to call attention to the things that are a problem before you can find a solution.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

People at uni: do initiations (like heavy drinking) put you off joining sports societies?

Yes (364)
67.03%
No (179)
32.97%

Watched Threads

View All