4 ms·

Do dutch state railway companies not receive funds from taxes?

by nonbel 8y ago

mcv 8y ago
They do not get general subsidies as far as I'm aware, though they probably get specific subsidies for some specific purposes, like servicing lines in thinly populated areas that might otherwise not be commercially viable. But those subsidies are equally available to other train operators. I don't think they receive any kind of subsidy for this particular event; it's just standard marketing stuff.
- nonbel 8y ago
  So you are not sure if they are receiving tax dollars or not, but think they probably do. It doesn't really matter if it is for a specific purpose or not, if they have less revenue from other sources they will need larger subsidies. What incorrect assumption were you referring to then?
  - mcv 8y ago
    > What incorrect assumption were you referring to then? Pretty much every word in this comment[0]: "So everyone is also paying slightly higher taxes to pay for it. It is not free, the cost is just obfuscated." "Imagine if they just raised taxes and then made every week book week." Yes, the cost is obfuscated, just like every marketing cost of every commercial company is obfuscated. It has nothing to do with being state-owned. Nobody is paying extra taxes for this. Not every week is ever going to be book week, and even if somehow it was, that wouldn't magically make train travel free on every day. That said, I would absolutely support making train travel cheaper or free and funding it from taxes, making the Dutch railways not focus on financial profit, but on improving mobility; making it an even more attractive alternative to cars, reducing traffic jams, and freeing up highways for traffic that has no alternative. But that's never going to happen in the current political landscape. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19600233 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19600233
    - nonbel 8y ago
      > "Yes, the cost is obfuscated, just like every marketing cost of every commercial company is obfuscated." The cost of marketing for a normal business is built into the price of the product. How is that obfuscated?
      - mcv 8y ago
        You're the one calling it obfuscated. It's exactly the same thing here.
        nonbel 8y ago
        No. I am talking about decreasing the revenue for a government funded business then later paying for it indirectly via taxes. The price of the service (train ticket) does not change, but you are still paying. That is what makes it obfuscated.
        mcv 8y ago
        Again that wrong assumption. Nobody pays for this in taxes. It's just like other forms of marketing and sponsorship: the company pays money to boost their image hoping to boost their goodwill and thereby their number of customers. The train is a good place to read books. The NS sponsors the book week this way to show, and let people experience, that it's a good place to read. They hope more people will take the train in the future because they've experienced it as a good place to read. Taxes do not come into this at any point. I do wish they'd use taxes to make train travel free, but that's not how the current system works, and that's not going to change unless we get a dramatic political shift.

Do dutch state railway companies not receive funds from taxes?

by nonbel 8y ago

Do dutch state railway companies not receive funds from taxes?

mcv 8y ago

They do not get general subsidies as far as I'm aware, though they probably get specific subsidies for some specific purposes, like servicing lines in thinly populated areas that might otherwise not be commercially viable. But those subsidies are equally available to other train operators. I don't think they receive any kind of subsidy for this particular event; it's just standard marketing stuff.

nonbel 8y ago
So you are not sure if they are receiving tax dollars or not, but think they probably do. It doesn't really matter if it is for a specific purpose or not, if they have less revenue from other sources they will need larger subsidies. What incorrect assumption were you referring to then?
- mcv 8y ago
  > What incorrect assumption were you referring to then? Pretty much every word in this comment[0]: "So everyone is also paying slightly higher taxes to pay for it. It is not free, the cost is just obfuscated." "Imagine if they just raised taxes and then made every week book week." Yes, the cost is obfuscated, just like every marketing cost of every commercial company is obfuscated. It has nothing to do with being state-owned. Nobody is paying extra taxes for this. Not every week is ever going to be book week, and even if somehow it was, that wouldn't magically make train travel free on every day. That said, I would absolutely support making train travel cheaper or free and funding it from taxes, making the Dutch railways not focus on financial profit, but on improving mobility; making it an even more attractive alternative to cars, reducing traffic jams, and freeing up highways for traffic that has no alternative. But that's never going to happen in the current political landscape. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19600233 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19600233
  - nonbel 8y ago
    > "Yes, the cost is obfuscated, just like every marketing cost of every commercial company is obfuscated." The cost of marketing for a normal business is built into the price of the product. How is that obfuscated?
    - mcv 8y ago
      You're the one calling it obfuscated. It's exactly the same thing here.
      - nonbel 8y ago
        No. I am talking about decreasing the revenue for a government funded business then later paying for it indirectly via taxes. The price of the service (train ticket) does not change, but you are still paying. That is what makes it obfuscated.
        mcv 8y ago
        Again that wrong assumption. Nobody pays for this in taxes. It's just like other forms of marketing and sponsorship: the company pays money to boost their image hoping to boost their goodwill and thereby their number of customers. The train is a good place to read books. The NS sponsors the book week this way to show, and let people experience, that it's a good place to read. They hope more people will take the train in the future because they've experienced it as a good place to read. Taxes do not come into this at any point. I do wish they'd use taxes to make train travel free, but that's not how the current system works, and that's not going to change unless we get a dramatic political shift.