cirdan
Engineer
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2011
- Messages
- 3,843
If it means the state gets the present of a well built and modern rail system serving a real purpose, then surely that is better for the state than having the state build the same with its own money, especially taking into account the states ability to turn such things into pork barrel spending, waste and inefficiency.In the late 19th century on into the early 20th, early suburban communities were developed with the developer building a streetcar line to entice the sale of the houses. Once that was accomplished, the streetcar system was sold to another party, or turned over to the city as part of their transit system. I wonder if we are seeing a 21st century variation of that? I, for one, hope not. I would like to see this flourish as a private entity. That way, it would not end up as Florida's Amtrak: A ward of the state with meddling politicians.
Many private sector products will by law full into state hands after a certain number of years. For example it was written into the Channel Tunnel's statute from day one that after something like 80 years it will be given to the state. That gives the private sector sufficient time to recover its costs (well, maybe the Channel Tunnel is a big example here) whil in the longer term the state isn't losing its silver.