That is what should be the case now; let private enterprise take on infrastructure projects, seeking out potential benefits, as they do every day in the industrial and civil world in the UK, taking the risks, but enjoying the profits.
But what private enterprise is going to spend £100s of billions building it, then run it at a massive loss?
Come on, you reckon you're a business whizz, explain it
Because, as in the case of the Big Four Railway Companies 1923-48, you have to judge any "Profits" taking into account the overall benefits to the UK economy, not with a short sighted, negative, approach. The value of the GWR, LMS, LNER, and Southern to the British economy was enormous, and could not be easily assessed as a set of figures. Movements of massive amounts of coal and steel by the LNER to factories producing goods, and GWR shifted milk and fish, along with passengers, that kept the West Country Holiday industry busy, and all benefited the overall economy, must be taken into account. The Southern moved huge volumes of workers to and from London, all contributing to the British economy. The LMS, along with the LNER, also moved large quantities of minerals, but also both allowed the North to South and back transit of thousands of passengers.
The former 123 railway companies before 1923 shifted huge quantities of war materials and troops during he 1914-18 conflict, then again the Big Four repeated that exercise, but to an even greater degree, during 1939-45. But, very crucially after each of those conflicts the British Government of the day did not come close to the true costs of those movements and transits, let alone the wear and tear to locomotives, rolling stock, lines and the infrastructure generally. It left all the companies after those events reeling and loss making as they tied desperately to refurbish, repair and replace. That is one reason why the Grouping of 1st January 1923 happened, and Nationalisation on 1st January 1948, with then the railways virtually bankrupt after sustaining all the costs of war. THe PROFIT to the country in both cases of being able to use the railways in war work was incalculable, but never appreciated!!
The LNER also had suffered more than most from the depression of the 1930's with their very considerable coal and steel traffic decimated and profits wiped out.
So, you cannot judge them purely on their profit generation, without taking the wider benefits, or not, into account. That is what some are doing with HS2; the profit that company may make, or not, from their operations cannot be assessed alone. The wider benefits, and PROFITS, of northern companies, industries, and the eased movement of people must be part of the business case to give a qualified opinion of the worth, or not, of building the line. Just think where Britain would be now without the canals, then railways; a backward, third rate power with no global recognition, and probably with ll of us speaking German!