Search results

The corp of engineers as it is right now, might be better. It will become bloated and worse in short order after nationalization. HAHAHAHAHA! Yes, because a company doing company things is so political. It's why politicians decide the price of freight transport. Oh, wait, they don't. Just...

If you nationalize the rail network, it won't stay apolitical. That's the issue you are missing here. If it becomes valuable, it will be corrupted. If it isn't corrupted, it isn't valuable. You are making the classic mistake of assuming that the government can work at scale because it can do...

I really have no idea what the dividing line between the two is. Still, I generally view the government as something that should do nothing until a fuckup, then come down like a hammer on those who fucked up.

There's a 1000 derailments/year. My guess is that a lot of shipped stuff has some form of hazmat. It's usually just not all that bad. That time it was. If derailment is fine for the companies involved and the companies are completely liable for spillage and cleanup and negative health results...

Sadly, this isn't sus, just really really unfortunate. It's happened before. Most/ a bunch of the world experts for AIDs research were in the plane shot down over Ukraine, IIRC. Basically, they didn't consider the Bus Factor. Regardless, this seems much more replaceable, but still. BTW, how do...

They aren't defense assets. They are useful, yes. But just calling infrastructure a defense asset is a bad idea that leads to future problems, and screams of a lead up to nationalization to me. As for who is liable, IMO even if it was a genuine accident despite using the best of safety...

Because, quite frankly, rail companies don't have much of a long term. Or at least it's little different than the short term. Expansion of the rails is very difficult. A thousand train derailments is likely cheaper (to them) than actually fixing rails. So why not continue in this manner? And...