3 ms·

Railways are an excellent mode of travel. They are significantly more efficient than cars in all ways that matter: cost, space, energy. Nobody looks at the bil

Railways are an excellent mode of travel. They are significantly more efficient than cars in all ways that matter: cost, space, energy. Nobody looks at the billions spent on roads and thinks "ooh these are unprofitable let's get rid of them", so why do people/governments constantly do that for rail? The reasoning people use to justify the spending on roads is that the economic value people and goods transported on said roads outweighs the costs of building and maintaining them. Trains are more efficent than cars on this simply bu economics of scale: one long tube with metal wheels carrying 2000 people into the city moves a lot more than a freeway of the same area.

perryizgr8 3y ago
> They are significantly more efficient than cars in all ways that matter: cost, space, energy. Then why are railways always unprofitable while car companies are worth billions in the free market? > Nobody looks at the billions spent on roads and thinks "ooh these are unprofitable let's get rid of them", so why do people/governments constantly do that for rail? Because roads are profitable and make sense. Rail does not. Also, railways are at least 100x more expensive than roads. And the entire infrastructure has to be subsidised. With roadways, you just build the surface, vehicles are wholly privately owned. That means trillions less spent from the taxpayer's pocket.
- Symbiote 3y ago
  The topic is British railways, where the trains are constructed, owned and operated by private companies. Railway vehicle manufacturing companies are presumably profitable, as they're all private. (At least the ones relevant to the UK.) The track, electricity supply, signalling system etc in Britain is owned and maintained (and extended) by a public company, although it contracts out a lot of the maintenance work. I am curious what you think a fair price for driving a car on the motorway from, say, London to Leicester (exactly 100 miles) should cost. Currently it's free, although fuel is taxed, perhaps around £5 for that journey.
- eppp 3y ago
  Roads are massively subsidized. I suspect more than railways. If roads were tolled at the rate to maintain each segment then sure I would buy your argument. There is no way the maintenance of all of the roads is born according to actual use. It is done by also taxing those who do not use them.

perryizgr8 3y ago

> They are significantly more efficient than cars in all ways that matter: cost, space, energy. Then why are railways always unprofitable while car companies are worth billions in the free market? > Nobody looks at the billions spent on roads and thinks "ooh these are unprofitable let's get rid of them", so why do people/governments constantly do that for rail? Because roads are profitable and make sense. Rail does not. Also, railways are at least 100x more expensive than roads. And the entire infrastructure has to be subsidised. With roadways, you just build the surface, vehicles are wholly privately owned. That means trillions less spent from the taxpayer's pocket.

Symbiote 3y ago
The topic is British railways, where the trains are constructed, owned and operated by private companies. Railway vehicle manufacturing companies are presumably profitable, as they're all private. (At least the ones relevant to the UK.) The track, electricity supply, signalling system etc in Britain is owned and maintained (and extended) by a public company, although it contracts out a lot of the maintenance work. I am curious what you think a fair price for driving a car on the motorway from, say, London to Leicester (exactly 100 miles) should cost. Currently it's free, although fuel is taxed, perhaps around £5 for that journey.
eppp 3y ago
Roads are massively subsidized. I suspect more than railways. If roads were tolled at the rate to maintain each segment then sure I would buy your argument. There is no way the maintenance of all of the roads is born according to actual use. It is done by also taxing those who do not use them.