3 ms·
Road-building is also not profitable unless you capture the increase in land value around roads. Curiously, most people are okay with tax-funded roads and stree
by claudius 10y ago
Road-building is also not profitable unless you capture the increase in land value around roads. Curiously, most people are okay with tax-funded roads and streets but strongly oppose spending public funds on trains.
Of course, ideally both would be run exactly at cost via user fees (i.e. train tickets, tolls etc.), but this is not an often-shared opinion.
- crdoconnor 10y ago>Curiously, most people are okay with tax-funded roads and streets but strongly oppose spending public funds on trains. Actually the public is strongly in favor of spending public funds on trains, but the British oligarchy (reflected by the media's default opinion - which some people confuse for the public's), is vehemently against it: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11867259/What-Jeremy-Corbyn-doesnt-get-is-that-the-government-causes-most-of-the-problems.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11867259/What-J... Note the Telegraph accusing the general public of being communists: "the majority of the electorate who have no love for bankers and are positively Trotskyist when it comes to trains and utilities" "A recent YouGov poll showed that the majority of people support the renationalisation of railways, including those who identified themselves as Conservative or UKIP voters." >Of course, ideally both would be run exactly at cost via user fees Why are you against capturing the increased land value like Japan does?
- arethuza 10y ago"the Telegraph accusing the general public of being communists" Isn't that a fairly succinct summary of the Telegraph's political stance on pretty much everything?