How road privatization works in the real world.

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Brent P - 29 Nov 2007 21:01 GMT

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/lights-are-flickering-for-the-lane-cove-tunn
el/2007/11/29/1196037074486.html

<...>

The low numbers are substantially due to the NSW Government's decision to
delay changes to the surface roads, including Epping Road, until well
after the March state election.

Fearing a backlash, the Government paid $25 million to Connector
Motorways, which owns the road, to delay narrowing congested Epping Road
from three lanes to one until January.

<...>

-----------------------------

There is no competition in the real-world privatization. It is
competition that makes privatization work the way it is advertised to
work. Instead what is presented to the people is monopoly. The contracts
for these toll roads require alternate routes to be made painful to use
or closed down. If it was really about free market, then the routes would
compete, even if both were tolled.

Reply to this Message

Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS - 30 Nov 2007 07:42 GMT

On Nov 29, 2:01 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P)
wrote:

> There is no competition in the real-world privatization. It is
> competition that makes privatization work the way it is advertised to
> work. Instead what is presented to the people is monopoly. The contracts
> for these toll roads require alternate routes to be made painful to use
> or closed down. If it was really about free market, then the routes would
> compete, even if both were tolled.

Many people have made that point. The companies that own the private
roads will bribe state officials to NOT maintain the public roads.

Reply to this Message

Scott in SoCal - 30 Nov 2007 14:31 GMT

>On Nov 29, 2:01 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P)
>wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>Many people have made that point. The companies that own the private
>roads will bribe state officials to NOT maintain the public roads.

The contracts I'm familiar with do not prohibit maintenance per se,
but they do prohibit the widening of "competing" freeways during the
term of the franchise.

Reply to this Message

Ted Kennedy - 04 Dec 2007 02:16 GMT

<*Hic*> Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS <*Hic*> says:

> Many people have made that point. The companies that own the private
> roads will bribe state officials to NOT maintain the public roads.

<*Hic*> What's a little graft <*Hic*> among friends? <*YURP!*> Oh,
excuse me!

And one <*Hic*> other thing: The Senate wands <*Hic*> to know: <*Hic*>
Have you <*Hic*> ever driven a <*Hic*> car faster than the <*Hic*>
posted speed limit <*Hic*>???

Ted "Chappaqqidic<*Hic*>" Kennedy

Reply to this Message

John David Galt - 02 Dec 2007 03:14 GMT

> http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/lights-are-flickering-for-the-lane-cove-tunn
el/2007/11/29/1196037074486.html
>
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
> or closed down. If it was really about free market, then the routes would
> compete, even if both were tolled.

I agree. Privatization without allowing competition isn't real
privatization.

Reply to this Message