Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="Datafever"]Thank you for clarifying that for me, but I am still not very clear on where this would lead to. A company that owns infrastructure in a high traffic corridor is probably going to negotiate rates that are fairly reasonable.  That company will also probably do a pretty good job of maintaining its infrastructure, because that's where the money is.  In such a situation, there probably isn't even any need for any form of government regulation. But how about a company that own infrastructure in a low traffic corridor (a branch line out in the boonies).  I only see two possibilities. One is that the company charges sufficiently to cover the costs of all infrastructure maintenance and make a profit on top of that.  This will probably be quite high, and therefore the shippers are really no better off than they were before. Two is that the government regulates the price that can be charged.  This will likely not cover the cost to maintain the infrastructure.  Over the years, the infrastructure deteriorates to the point of becoming unusable.  And in this case, the shippers are worse off than they were before as they now have nothing instead of an expensive something. [/quote] On regulation, we in the utility sector have done quite well with a regulated infrastructure.  There is no reason to assume that utility regulation of the rail infrastructure would not have the same positive results.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag