4 ms·

Personally my main gripe is not so much the speed as going to higher speed is probably less efficient hence more expensive. My main gripe is the price (I am po

Personally my main gripe is not so much the speed as going to higher speed is probably less efficient hence more expensive. My main gripe is the price (I am poor by european standards). For example going from Paris to Napoli only by train is currently above 300 euros whereas you can find a flight for 40 euros. I am ready to pay around 100 euros for that. Recently there was sleeper car train from Paris to Milano which was affordable but the company did not last alas. I am personally ready to pay more in order to avoid a flight, I don't even care about the time it takes, I like being on trains. Sleeper cars are even better. The only thing is the price.

egman_ekki 3y ago
So much this. We’re so spolied by low cost airlines in Europe. I can either - go for a train trip to the 2nd largest city in Denmark (Copenhagen to Aarhus) for 230 eur (2 adults + a kid) and it takes almost 3 hours. - take a Ryanair flight to Alicante for 240 eur (2 adults + a kid), flight takes 3.5 hours The weather will be much better, the food and accommodation cheaper by a long shot (not to mention Spanish cuisine). It’s not even comparable how much more value you get when flying.
- pvaldes 3y ago
  Is probably an unfair comparison. (And if you think that living in Alicante is cheap, you should see the boring inner smaller cities, easily reachable by train) My impression is that Air travel to touristic destinations is just too cheap, for a reason. Selling airplane sits for pennies is probably just part of a bigger business. Tourists typically will spend money on services and hotels that could be owned by a sibling company, etc... In Spain is often discussed how UK tourists can came to Spain for ridiculous prices, while we can't do the same in the opposite direction (or when flying inside the country). Tour-operators altering the market could be the reason for that "magic" IMAO. Trains are nice in any case (but nobody is armed here, so just copy the system could be more defiant in other places)
philjohn 3y ago
It's worse in the UK. Paris to Napoli is a long distance. London to Birmingham walk up fair can be £150.
chris-orgmenta 3y ago
I think that the hidden benefits of open travel is highly elastic. That is to say, that if we subsidized train travel, then there are benefits (open trade, comms, etc.) that are easily realised but that we don't see. I feel it is so elastic (sorry, I'm misusing this term somewhat) that you can subsidize to an extremely high percentage without net cost (if all externalities could actually be known and costed in) I want train journeys to be 50Euro Athens-Stockholm. 10Euro Paris-Hamburg. I want my taxes to pay the difference.
- reaperman 3y ago
  Maybe “positive externalities” instead of “elastic”.
  - chris-orgmenta 3y ago
    Yes I suppose 'net-positive externalities' is the most correct - Thanks
PeterStuer 3y ago
This is because of the extreme subsidies air traffic receives. If it were not for these rail would be very competitive.
- foofie 3y ago
  > This is because of the extreme subsidies air traffic receives. I don't think so. Railway lines are the epitome of lost fund subsidies by the state. You need to build and maintain a new line for each direct connection you want to create. The construction cost of a railway line, let alone a line that supports high-speed rail, eclipses the cost of a brand new airport. Once a railway line is in place, getting a train to travel from point A to B costs peanuts.
- porompompero 3y ago
  I have not hear this point before, please would you mind to elaborate, if possible with sources to share? Thanks.
- rspoerri 3y ago
  Who subsidizes the air traffic?
  - maxwell22 3y ago
    Tax payers. In Germany, airplane fuel is not taxed. See this Greenpeace study (in German) about how much cheaper flying is than train rides and why: https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/regional/nordrheinwestfalen/wdr-greenpeace-studie-fliegen-ist-billiger-als-bahnfahren-100.html#:~:text=Das%20liegt%20unter%20anderem%20daran,wo%20sie%20mehr%20verdienen%20k%C3%B6nnen https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/regional/nordrheinwestfalen....
    - testrun 3y ago
      Not taxed does not mean it is subsidized. Subsidy is when money is paid by the government to the airlines.
panick21_ 3y ago
For 300 Euros you can get Interrail and and ride around Europe all you want for 4 days in a month.

egman_ekki 3y ago

So much this. We’re so spolied by low cost airlines in Europe. I can either - go for a train trip to the 2nd largest city in Denmark (Copenhagen to Aarhus) for 230 eur (2 adults + a kid) and it takes almost 3 hours. - take a Ryanair flight to Alicante for 240 eur (2 adults + a kid), flight takes 3.5 hours The weather will be much better, the food and accommodation cheaper by a long shot (not to mention Spanish cuisine). It’s not even comparable how much more value you get when flying.

pvaldes 3y ago
Is probably an unfair comparison. (And if you think that living in Alicante is cheap, you should see the boring inner smaller cities, easily reachable by train) My impression is that Air travel to touristic destinations is just too cheap, for a reason. Selling airplane sits for pennies is probably just part of a bigger business. Tourists typically will spend money on services and hotels that could be owned by a sibling company, etc... In Spain is often discussed how UK tourists can came to Spain for ridiculous prices, while we can't do the same in the opposite direction (or when flying inside the country). Tour-operators altering the market could be the reason for that "magic" IMAO. Trains are nice in any case (but nobody is armed here, so just copy the system could be more defiant in other places)

philjohn 3y ago

It's worse in the UK. Paris to Napoli is a long distance. London to Birmingham walk up fair can be £150.

chris-orgmenta 3y ago

I think that the hidden benefits of open travel is highly elastic. That is to say, that if we subsidized train travel, then there are benefits (open trade, comms, etc.) that are easily realised but that we don't see. I feel it is so elastic (sorry, I'm misusing this term somewhat) that you can subsidize to an extremely high percentage without net cost (if all externalities could actually be known and costed in) I want train journeys to be 50Euro Athens-Stockholm. 10Euro Paris-Hamburg. I want my taxes to pay the difference.

reaperman 3y ago
Maybe “positive externalities” instead of “elastic”.
- chris-orgmenta 3y ago
  Yes I suppose 'net-positive externalities' is the most correct - Thanks

PeterStuer 3y ago

This is because of the extreme subsidies air traffic receives. If it were not for these rail would be very competitive.

foofie 3y ago
> This is because of the extreme subsidies air traffic receives. I don't think so. Railway lines are the epitome of lost fund subsidies by the state. You need to build and maintain a new line for each direct connection you want to create. The construction cost of a railway line, let alone a line that supports high-speed rail, eclipses the cost of a brand new airport. Once a railway line is in place, getting a train to travel from point A to B costs peanuts.
porompompero 3y ago
I have not hear this point before, please would you mind to elaborate, if possible with sources to share? Thanks.
rspoerri 3y ago
Who subsidizes the air traffic?
- maxwell22 3y ago
  Tax payers. In Germany, airplane fuel is not taxed. See this Greenpeace study (in German) about how much cheaper flying is than train rides and why: https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/regional/nordrheinwestfalen/wdr-greenpeace-studie-fliegen-ist-billiger-als-bahnfahren-100.html#:~:text=Das%20liegt%20unter%20anderem%20daran,wo%20sie%20mehr%20verdienen%20k%C3%B6nnen https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/regional/nordrheinwestfalen....
  - testrun 3y ago
    Not taxed does not mean it is subsidized. Subsidy is when money is paid by the government to the airlines.

panick21_ 3y ago

For 300 Euros you can get Interrail and and ride around Europe all you want for 4 days in a month.