* Posts by ShandyPandy

1 post • joined 29 Jun 2015

Why OH WHY did Blighty privatise EVERYTHING?


Most of the argument either for or against private ownership of infrastructure is basically based on the "Look at that, it's owned publicly and it costs a shed-load to run; privatise it. Worked in place {A}" argument, or the opposite; "Look at that, it's owned privately and costs a shed-load Make it Publicly owned. Worked in place {A}".

Few think of the possibility that the way the infrastructure was built made it inherently expensive to operate, no matter how it's run or upgraded.

There's nothing inherently wrong about {X} being either publicly or privately owned; but if {X} was inherently unprofitable, impossible to upgrade and it's replacement cost more than it did initially, no private enterprise would go near it.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019