3 ms·

What we need to do is make planes more expensive, instead of making trains cheaper. That would be relatively easy, but people wouldn’t like it because they want

What we need to do is make planes more expensive, instead of making trains cheaper. That would be relatively easy, but people wouldn’t like it because they want change that doesn’t affect their lifestyle. But if we’re to take climate change seriously, all lifestyles have to change radically.

Ericson2314 5y ago
We should subsidize one and tax the other. Yes, flying needs to suck, but travel doesn't need to suck. Don't be too self-flagellist about this. If we really subsidize trains, we will induce enough demand to make investments look better in nominal terms and shift the culture/politics by normalizing way more rail travel. Easy victory. A problem is the Europeans are prudish about printing money with their bad ordoliberal EU Constitution.
- HPsquared 5y ago
  Trains over long distances are always going to suck relative to planes, unless they're something like maglev or other ultra high speed design.
  - ghaff 5y ago
    "Suck" for certain dimensions. Travel is slower. Which can equate to cheaper (e.g. long distance buses) or can equate to roomier with more luxury--and more expensive. But there's not a lot of market these days for expensive, luxurious travel that takes a long time.
  - Ericson2314 5y ago
    City center to city center transport with lots of room and good internet I can realistically work during? Sign me up. I don't think people realize how much more travel we all could do with good cheap comfortable HSR everywhere. Stuff like go to Miami from North Carolina every weekend.
lostgame 5y ago
But planes are cheaper. The infrastructure alone for trains is insane. We don’t need rails in the sky. Not only that - but we’re talking about staff for half a day instead of a couple hours. What we could use are electric planes, for short distances. Plane usage isn’t going to stop. Only the select few with the luxury of time to kill are going to pick a 12hr train over a 2-3hr flight for the same distance, even at half the price. Business travel alone makes the idea of increasing flights costs a serious no-go.
- sofixa 5y ago
  > The infrastructure alone for trains is insane. We don’t need rails in the sky. Airports past a single runway and hangar also cost a lot of money. Not to mention all the related infrastructure ( road, public transit connections), ATC, etc. Airplanes are expensive and need maintenance, luggage handling, etc. and fuel. Tons of it, to be stored, transported, refueled, etc.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

Ericson2314 5y ago

We should subsidize one and tax the other. Yes, flying needs to suck, but travel doesn't need to suck. Don't be too self-flagellist about this. If we really subsidize trains, we will induce enough demand to make investments look better in nominal terms and shift the culture/politics by normalizing way more rail travel. Easy victory. A problem is the Europeans are prudish about printing money with their bad ordoliberal EU Constitution.

HPsquared 5y ago
Trains over long distances are always going to suck relative to planes, unless they're something like maglev or other ultra high speed design.
- ghaff 5y ago
  "Suck" for certain dimensions. Travel is slower. Which can equate to cheaper (e.g. long distance buses) or can equate to roomier with more luxury--and more expensive. But there's not a lot of market these days for expensive, luxurious travel that takes a long time.
- Ericson2314 5y ago
  City center to city center transport with lots of room and good internet I can realistically work during? Sign me up. I don't think people realize how much more travel we all could do with good cheap comfortable HSR everywhere. Stuff like go to Miami from North Carolina every weekend.

lostgame 5y ago

But planes are cheaper. The infrastructure alone for trains is insane. We don’t need rails in the sky. Not only that - but we’re talking about staff for half a day instead of a couple hours. What we could use are electric planes, for short distances. Plane usage isn’t going to stop. Only the select few with the luxury of time to kill are going to pick a 12hr train over a 2-3hr flight for the same distance, even at half the price. Business travel alone makes the idea of increasing flights costs a serious no-go.

sofixa 5y ago
> The infrastructure alone for trains is insane. We don’t need rails in the sky. Airports past a single runway and hangar also cost a lot of money. Not to mention all the related infrastructure ( road, public transit connections), ATC, etc. Airplanes are expensive and need maintenance, luggage handling, etc. and fuel. Tons of it, to be stored, transported, refueled, etc.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]