> think about how almost every private institution that built that infrastructure went bankrupt and had to be bailed out by the taxpayers. Did they really, tho

> think about how almost every private institution that built that infrastructure went bankrupt and had to be bailed out by the taxpayers. Did they really, though? "Have to be" bailed out I mean. They were bailed out, yes, but... just as a thought experiment... perhaps we should have let them go under? Edit: Going bankrupt implies either mismanagement, failure to lower cost and increase margins, or the market does not value their service. If it is the first two, going bankrupt will potentially allow them to sell off their assets to new management who might do a better job. If it is the last one, then they should be shut down. All the government bailing them out does is prop up bad management and artificially lower prices at the expense of the tax payer having to pay them on the other end. (me paying for half empty train cars even though I haven't ridden a train in years)