[cringepirate]

I don't believe that for a second.

In the UK where I live the government subsidise rail. Rail is very expensive, slow and unreliable especially compared to my diesel car. I would rather cycle to the train station, get onto the train with my bike and then cycle the other side to work. However it costs me almost twice as much to do and takes me 3 times as long.

Even with all the taxes on fuel, emissions and the price of repairing what is now an old car (my Car is over 15 years old and has done many many miles). Driving is cheaper, generally gets me there quicker even when travelling across the whole country.

Rail tickets keep on increasing in price and the service never improves and the whole experience is unpleasant.

In the rest of Europe cars are just taxed heavily and people still buy them. This idea that people don't want cars just isn't true.

[pessimizer]

In the UK where you live the government ripped up half the rails, then privatized the rest. Oh, Doctor Beeching! Please, Mr. Branson!

The UK once subsidized a working system, then destroyed most of that system without any resulting cost savings, then sold it to billionaires who it now subsidizes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beeching_cuts

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privatisation_of_British_Rail

[cringepirate]

This old attempted gotcha. It doesn't prove what you think it does.

I am well aware of the story. BTW British rail stopped being profitable back in 1955 (7 years after nationalisation).

It proves that maybe you shouldn't let government take public ownership of companies. Government will frequently provide the worse of both worlds as it tries to appease everyone and ends up serving no-one.

The result for the UK is that we have a very expensive rail service that is horrible to use and it is simply cheaper to drive.

[andys627]

Think of the roads as public transit. It was never "profitable" and requiring profitability is a bad way to run a transit system.