View Single Post
Old 11-14-2012, 07:07 PM   #166
4444
I contribute to threads in the offtopic forum
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: not vancouver
Posts: 2,642
Thanked 1,941 Times in 765 Posts
Failed 532 Times in 202 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Graeme S View Post
So...wait. You're saying that it's translink's fault Vancouver isn't built up European style, or isn't spread out american style?



I don't know about you, but I seem to remember having to pay a fuel cost surcharge when I flew a few years ago. Crude prices were high and unstable, and companies didn't want to increase ticket prices so they added a fuel surcharge. Airlines are private entities...and they had a fuel surcharge. Not sure what your point is there.

And as I've said before in this post, when there is a profit to be made, private companies are more than happy to swoop in and steal business from government. But when the industry is a necessity for the people which would not be affordable to the ordinary individual, it's very unlikely to turn a profit. Yet its necessity mandates that it exist. It is because of these two factors that a lot of crown corporations "lose money" and "require government subsidies".


If private corporations could build roads and profit from it, don't you think they would? If private companies could make money from public transit, don't you think they'd be lobbying the government and advertising to us that "they deserve a chance to prove what they can do"? I mean, god knows they do it enough for forestry and mining and oil and the like.

What's stopping them?




Oh, right. These things lose money.
Most of ur points aren't valid, much of britains transit is privately owned

Roads are a right (of sorts), they must be provided by the government (if they weren't the government would be voted out), and yes, if u wanted to allow privatization, they would be built, tariffed, and thus profitable for said builder - look at pipelines, roads are pipelines
4444 is offline   Reply With Quote