On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 09:52:34 +0000, Mark wrote:

On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 22:23:20 +0000, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 21:15:52 +0000 (GMT), John Cartmell
wrote:

-- snip --
- and those where competition would
remove a community provision - eg post, buses, trains, health, education.

All of these can be quite easily operated outside of state control and
benefit from being so.

They can be operated in many different ways. Privatisation has mainly
failed. We have had poorly run state industries replaced by poorly
run private industries.

I'd say that BT has been moderately successful in comparison to the
GPO.......

I have a choice of numerous electricity and gas suppliers.

etc.


Other consideration eg safety may also come into play.

State services are generally very good and cheap.

They are almost always poor and very expensive when all costs to the
taxpayer are taken into account.

Many were poorly run and expensive. However privatisation does not
fix this.

It's true that there needs also to be a change of worth ethic and
attitiude. Unless there is also the cold effect of competition,
these issues may not be addressed.



- but this is rarely
appreciated until privatised. ;-(

and the improvements are realised.

Have there been any? The only 'improvements' I have noticed is for
the shareholders. Many still provide poor service and value for
money.

I'm pretty happy with the service I get from BT and my utility
suppliers.



--

..andy