4 ms·

Which is why they shut down vast miles of their networks in unprofitable rural areas... And that is why rail is so expensive in the States; transit decisions a

Which is why they shut down vast miles of their networks in unprofitable rural areas... And that is why rail is so expensive in the States; transit decisions are not made on the basis of profitability. (Note that in the case of Japan, some of these private rails were converted to "Third Sector" aka public-private rails, where they continue to be run by the private rail company under the financial subsidy of the local prefectures through which the rail line runs.)

johncessna 4y ago
> (Note that in the case of Japan, some of these private rails were converted to "Third Sector" aka public-private rails, where they continue to be run by the private rail company under the financial subsidy of the local prefectures through which the rail line runs.) I'm sure there are some differences, but this is true for Amtrak in the US too https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amtrak# https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amtrak#
pigsty 4y ago
But there are still countless lines in use where you’ll see one person get off every 3 stops. It’s sometimes insane how lines are kept running in Japan.
- gamblor956 4y ago
  Right, those are "Third Sector" lines, where the stops or even the line itself are subsidized by the local prefecture.
_dain_ 4y ago
> Which is why they shut down vast miles of their networks in unprofitable rural areas... The Japanese countryside is ageing and depopulating. Any railway operator, public or private, has to face this reality. You can either shut them down, or reduce service, or subsidize them; all three are painful in their own ways, and all three are done in different places, depending on local conditions. Furthermore, a line may be "unprofitable" on paper, but still be worthwhile overall because of network effects. The rural decline is at least being managed with more rationality than the senseless Beeching cuts[1] (and at that time, British Rail was wholly under state control). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beeching_cuts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beeching_cuts

johncessna 4y ago

> (Note that in the case of Japan, some of these private rails were converted to "Third Sector" aka public-private rails, where they continue to be run by the private rail company under the financial subsidy of the local prefectures through which the rail line runs.) I'm sure there are some differences, but this is true for Amtrak in the US too https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amtrak# https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amtrak#

pigsty 4y ago

But there are still countless lines in use where you’ll see one person get off every 3 stops. It’s sometimes insane how lines are kept running in Japan.

gamblor956 4y ago
Right, those are "Third Sector" lines, where the stops or even the line itself are subsidized by the local prefecture.

_dain_ 4y ago

> Which is why they shut down vast miles of their networks in unprofitable rural areas... The Japanese countryside is ageing and depopulating. Any railway operator, public or private, has to face this reality. You can either shut them down, or reduce service, or subsidize them; all three are painful in their own ways, and all three are done in different places, depending on local conditions. Furthermore, a line may be "unprofitable" on paper, but still be worthwhile overall because of network effects. The rural decline is at least being managed with more rationality than the senseless Beeching cuts[1] (and at that time, British Rail was wholly under state control). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beeching_cuts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beeching_cuts