Call to renationalize UK rail service

Chris Burford cburford at gn.apc.org
Fri Oct 15 15:56:06 PDT 1999


At 17:03 15/10/99 EDT, you wrote:
>>The privatisation of rail has not been totally illogical if it is a way of
>>promoting a culture of individual responsibility in individual teams.
>
>There was an interesting front-page article in the Wall Street Journal the
>other day saying that Blair & Co. are intent on privatizing the London
>Underground. By contrast, the New York City subway system *started out* as
>three privately owned subway lines -- the IRT, BMT and IND -- with different
>technical specs, which is why the same rolling stock can't be used
>throughout the system. These lines were taken over by the local government
>because they proved unprofitable and, as memory serves, unsafe.
>
>Carl

There is an old marxist saying that that only thing the bourgeoisie nationalises is the national debt - ie enterprises that are bankrupt and useless in their existing from for the purposes of accumulation of capital.

Is is actually a quote from Marx or Engels?

About the London Underground Blair and the Labour government are intent on raising capital for modernisation by means of a "partnership" between the state company and private finance. This is being used in the health service and in education as the "private finance intitiative".

It is a different concept from wholesale privatisation. Similarly the government looks as if after the Paddington crash it will bring the railway system under much more social control, but this too is different from re-nationalisation.

Perhaps it is more of what the Swedish business representative called the "networked economy".

Exactly where surplus value goes in such an economy, and how exploitation occurs, I suspect is pretty mysterious.

Chris Burford

London



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list