[PRCo] PRCo___Demise

[Jim Holland]

Good Morning!


> Harold Geissenheimer wrote:

> I believe that public transit and passenger railroads
> should be owned by the public like the highways and
> airports and rivers and streets and sidewalks and parks, etc.

> Privatisation of rail and transit does not work. 
> The UK experience proves this.  British rail is now a joke

	A system in and of itself is not bad  --
it's the People behind the system that make same sink or swim.
Remember the old statement:::::::

	It's the  LOVE  of money that is the root of all evil.

NOT  MONEY  ITSELF    ----    but Altitude Toward Same!!!!!!!

	If it is private and it works  --  fine!

	If it is public and it works  --  fine!
But  DON'T  keep pouring money into something public
	Just To Keep It Running.



	We have Family businesses that break up
		because of bickering.

	We have big corporations that go bankrupt and fold
		or are swallowed into other firms.

	We have 'publicly' funded programs // utilities //
		etc. which become giant sinkholes  --
		even BlackHoles  --  for money.

	And don't forget the bottom line    ----

		EVERY  Man,  Woman,  Child on this earth
			SHALL  DIE.



	It befuddles me that we work so hard to keep some
system going when we lack control over our own personal lives!




	That being said!!!!!!!.......


	There are success stories as well.     Any // All
of the above could have been successful for several
generations and then gone belly-up.

	And as far as transportation is concerned, and
city transport in particular, it is Far More than just
an issue of Public vs. Private ownership which contribute
to success or failure.

	TrolleyCars were popular in their heyday because
they were better than the alternatives.     When the
alternatives became more convenient than the TrolleyCar,
then the people abandoned the TrolleyCar // bus // whatever.

	Very difficult to make something succeed which
a High Majority of People do not want.     Thus the
private business of running TrolleyCars rode off into the
sunset.     Should we just pour endless buckets of money
into a system to keep it running Just For The Purpose
of keeping it running?




> PRC flopped when the bottom line was applied.

	An extremely general statement  --  could you give
facts // examples to substantiate?




> PRC was adequate in receivership but the decline after
> 1950 was not in the best interest of the public.

	As mentioned above, there are far more items to
consider than the bottom line of profit // loss // ridership.

	Any form of public transit took a hit because
		of the auto.

	PRCo was bitterly hated by local politicians.

	Local politicians did everything in their power
		to denigrate and devalue PRCo for
		personal gain.

	The winds of change to public ownership were
		very strong in the 1950s.

	Voter referendum on above  PASSED  in 1954--1956.

	Considering all the above  --

		ridership loss
		local politicians trying to devalue
			PRCo property.
		out of bankruptcy 1952--1953.......

	Would you really sink more money into the PRCo
system?     PRCo did replace track into the 1960s so they
did not abandon all.     PRCo saw the handwriting on the
wall and the system slid.



	I don't like  *creating*  artificial circumstances
to force people onto transit; i.e., taxing gasoline to
raise the price in hopes people will abandon their autos.
This creates far more problems than it solves as well as
distrust of power that be  AND  since it is artificial it
backfires eventually.     If that happens as a result of
market functions, that is another thing  --  but whatever
goes up also comes down  --  circumstances change.

	The  ONLY  Constant  IS  Change!! :):)




<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

JB

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>