In article , Huge
wrote:
"Jonn Elledge" writes:

"David Fairthorne" wrote in message
...

It seems to be widely accepted that public transport must be subsidised,
but
subsidies modify peoples' behaviour, and in this example, and many others,
the consequences are not altogether desirable.


Perhaps unsurprisingly, I disagree with this completely.

Like public education and the military, public transport is an important
form of social overhead capital. Many people may not benefit from the
subsidies directly. But if rail travel was priced at cost, then commuting
would for many become impossible.

Thameslink make a profit. Ergo your asserion is incorrect.

If that is so, then WHY is it so?

Has it got much better management. That can be copied!

Has it got unique geographical advantages? That cannot be copied!


Michael Bell

--