I do not understand the word privatised fully so idk what would happen if it were or is owned by government the difference
No, no privatization of a service has improved. It only got better for the wealthier or more fortunate, but not for the majority.
@9D8QK3KSocial Democratic9mos9MO
No, but let other private companies enter the market.
No, privatize the operation of trains only.
Yes. Privatize the trains but not the tracks.
@98LHLF61yr1Y
Yes, but privatize trains only.Not the tracks.
Yes, privatize trains but not tracks.
Yes, but the private companies should compete with the government
@8QZ3SS23yrs3Y
Yes, but subsidize train tickets for low income groups
Yes and no, split the DB into two entities. One run by the government that deals with infrastructure, allowing for safety and regulation throughout. The other privatized will deal with trains and scheduling in order to ensure competition.
@9993P6D1yr1Y
Yes , but with strong government regulation
No, but privatize operation of trains, not the tracks.
Yes, privatize the operation of trains only.Not the tracks.
@8VD6FYMFree Democratic3yrs3Y
It is not fully government owned already.
There should not even be a monopoly on the national railway, more companies should contribute for the national railway network to allow for more competition.
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...