3 ms·
It’s important to distinguish between an operational cost and capital investment here. If rail usage continues once the spending stops then it’s an investment.
by spacebanana7 2y ago
It’s important to distinguish between an operational cost and capital investment here.
If rail usage continues once the spending stops then it’s an investment. Otherwise is an operating subsidy.
- chii 2y agopaying for part of the ticket is not an investment, as there's no residual value from this payment. An investment must have some sort of residual value, which over time, is recouped and perhaps even makes a return (hopefully).
- Swizec 2y ago> paying for part of the ticket is not an investment, as there's no residual value from this payment Disagree. There is a lot of residual value in reducing congestion and road usage. Roads need fewer repairs, CO2 impacts the atmosphere less, cities move more efficiently, etc. There’s residual value also in people spending more time on tax-paying activities and running the economy instead of being stuck alone in their cars. Etc. If you pay $50 more in taxes because you got a $40 train ticket subsidy that’s a huge win. I don’t know if that’s how the numbers shake out, but governments are def not doing stuff like this just to throw money in the furnace.