• Wanderer@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    7 months ago

    There is a slight problem with this and it depends on how you view the world.

    If only things that are profitable should be built then great.

    But things like railways are built and effectively the most profitable lines subsidise the least profitable. But the system as a whole is more profitable because it is larger. But if companies come in and take all the icing off the cake for themselves. The rest of the cake looks a lot less interesting and might not get developed.

    I do think a couple of lines that go directly past cars stuck in traffic are going to blow peoples minds and can be good PR though.

    I was amazed at the trains in Chicago, the railway capital of America, probably the world at one point. The train was cruising along and I kept looking at cars and saying “the bloody cars are going faster than us! What kind of train is this?” The answer I got was “A good one, at least for America”

    • Dempf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      7 months ago

      Rail also has a sort of hidden economic benefit in that once you overcome the network effect, it boosts economics on a larger scale. Some people in China thought it was crazy for the government to build high speed rail at the speed and scale that they did, and that it would never compete with flights, etc. And yes, the line all the way out to Xinjiang is not profitable and subsidized by other lines. But the overall benefit to the Chinese economy by connecting all the major cities together can’t be underestimated.