Gregory's Server@econads @waitworry @researchfairy Rail’s an interesting case. Allowing multiple, potentially private operators, to directly compete, can have benefits, but rail infrastructure needs to be something like a public good to allow such a market. Railway privatisation results in a natural monopoly, which worsens outcomes. In effect, a market requires public ownership, which is not what economic orthodoxy would indicate.
@janef0421 @waitworry @researchfairy
Yes thank you that was basically my point. Privatisation doesn't work for the passenger with rail, and I doubt it would even if different operators would run the same routes.
The competition generated by the privatisation of in theory rail serves the government because it can get bids for the lowest cost, but the government is not passengers. Temporarily nationalised services when an operator goes out of business tend to improve the outcomes.