Cameron wants to privatise the roads

I have already explained why privatizing the rail network completely would reduce prices and improve the quality of the service in other threads.

The only argument that I had against was that it would be impossible to have a private system with no centralized pricing structure because there are too many people using it. Even though millions of people go through private airports without centralized pricing structures and without any problems on a daily basis. In other words there was no credible argument for the fascist rail network that we have at the moment, with low standards and high prices.
 
I actually think privatised roads could work.

However, the amount of change required for them to work means that simply contracting out to private companies and then charging users to drive on them is a stupid idea that won't work. There are far too many other issues motorists are facing that need to be resolved before this should be a priority, for example the unchecked license to print money that the government gives to motor insurance providers.
 
RDM said:
The problem comes when deciding what isn't as important. Pretty much all government spending will be considered important to someone...
Click to expand...

The basics its not rockets science for me.

Infrastructure (i.e transport networks)
Medical
Security

It's not like the a small amount of my tax from my wages is used for the road, I could understand the problem there. Roads have there very own tax, where's it going, are they syphoning it off to pay for other things un-road related?
 
Last edited:
Having driven frequently on toll rods in France, I am generally in favour of this. For one thing, it would cut down on the number of lorries taking a couple of miles to creep past one another whilst holding up everyone else :)

Another appeal is that it might cut down on unnecessary mileage and consequent pollution. Like increasing fuel duty, it does tend to mean that the user pays and is forced to make a judgement about the utility of the journeys they make. I imagine that the proposal would not apply to rural and local roads.

On the face of it, this would get my vote.
 
UK PLC : For Sale

Since privatising the rail network and now having one of the most efficient, cheapest rail services in Europe I think this is a great idea to implement on our road network and will be beneficial for all road users.

Oh wait...
 
Privatizing the rail network? When did that happen? Unless you call the fascist organizations like network rail and TFL privatized?

I am in favor of privatizing the roads by putting toll booths on them and at the same time they should reduce taxation to compensate for the increases in revenue that they will receive from the toll booths. This way people that use the roads can pay for their upkeep and people that don't use them often will not have to pay for them.

But of course that will never again, government is only realy interested in finding new sources of revenue.
 
groen said:
I am in favor of privatizing the roads by putting toll booths on them and at the same time they should reduce taxation to compensate for the increases in revenue that they will receive from the toll booths. This way people that use the roads can pay for their upkeep and people that don't use them often will not have to pay for them.

But of course that will never again, government is only realy interested in finding new sources of revenue.
Click to expand...

This is not about new sources of revenue, but cutting costs. The private companies would be getting a slice of the Vehicle Excise Duty now plus Toll charges on 'new' (improved?) roads.

So I will guess we could expect VED to increase significantly over the next decade plus expensive tolls as well.
 
stockhausen said:
Having driven frequently on toll rods in France, I am generally in favour of this. For one thing, it would cut down on the number of lorries taking a couple of miles to creep past one another whilst holding up everyone else :)
.
Click to expand...

The lorries would still be there, they would simply pass the cost of the tolls on to the customer.

If the taxation from car tax and fuel duty was actually spent on the roads we wouldn't have this issue, instead now we'll have to pay an extra tax to use good roads.
 
groen said:
the fascist organizations like network rail and TFL
Click to expand...

Wikipedia said:
Fascists seek rejuvenation of their nation based on commitment to an organic national community where its individuals are united together as one people in national identity by suprapersonal connections of ancestry, culture, and blood through a totalitarian single-party state that seeks the mass mobilization of a nation through discipline, indoctrination, physical education, and eugenics.
Click to expand...

I don't think fascist means what you think it means.
 
Pinter75 said:
I pity the fool who ends up with the m25
Click to expand...

That'll be the most profitable one I imagine, there only alternative is often to drive through central London. Unless the service company doesn't get paid if people are stuck in traffic jams, which I've not seen included as part of the proposals.
 
Fascist as in Italian fascism, not this miss-educated non sense again. Let me guess you think fascist means nazi racist socialist authoritarianism?

Fascism is actually where the state operates private business for a profit but retains all the benefits of a public organization. Heavily subsidized by tax payers, big unions, high prices, low standards, state regulated monopoly etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Fascism#Economy

Although this wikipedia article keeps getting modified by people who think that fascism is racist and violent.

Moreover, Italian Fascism was (officially) neither atheist nor racist — provided the colonized folk agreed to Italianisation and swore fealty to Il Duce, (See: Racial classification).[56] Just as Italian Jews were allowed membership in the National Fascist Party, in metropolitan Italy,[58][59] in the Libyan colony, Muslims were Fascist Party members via the Muslim Association of the Lictor.[60] In a unity ceremony, a Libyan chief awarded Prime Minister Mussolini an ancient Yemeni Sword of Islam artefact.[61] East Africans were allowed to serve with Italians in the MVSN Colonial Militia.[62]
Click to expand...
 
they've said it plenty of times, road tax isnt spent on the road..

its now just another way of getting tax which isnt spent on the roads..
its mainly local councils that fix roads in their area but obviously they never really go as far as building new roads that often..
 
WTF. No, just no.

I wish he'd have some ******* backbone, and stop trying to sell everything off. Makes him just as bad as Brown IMO. Roads are and should always be under government control. The railways are excessively expensive, and a perfect example of why we shouldn't allow private companies to do this.

IMO Services should NEVER be under private control, they should be shared resources for the public. Private companies are for MAKING money and nothing else, and will cut corners/safety to make a profit.

And that magical toll road that you pay £6 for? No wonder it's so good, it's new for goodness sake.
 
There are things which should be privatised and there are some which shouldn't. The privatisation of roads will be another disaster, like the privatisation of rail and water services. Now they are much more expensive, less reliable and there is no competition whatsoever.
 
There should be an option between privatisation and 'free' roads. I think people expect far too much from roads. In my experience the roads that we have are fit for purpose in most regards. Granted, in some areas they could be larger but for the most part they are fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom