depends on terms of construction; the Tokaido Shinkansen in Japan paid off all of its construction costs within a decade or so
Same with the Japanese one--capability has nothing to do w rationale for breakup
-
-
A simple model service would be to make fixed contribution toward capital via a /mile tax credit & let market forces drive service.
-
Are there places in the world where this practice is employed?
-
No because in most of world, rails are state owned.
-
OK--and where they are privately owned, as in Japan, this is not the practice either.
-
Japan, as you note elsewhere, is very densely populated, lineal, and has little use of freight. Very different from US.
-
Sure...and different parts of the US are very different from each other, too. The dense, linear parts where rail makes sense...
-
...would presumably work best with a similar ownership scheme to Japan. No mandatory subsidies for routes which ppl won't use.
-
On the other hand, if people WANT to take on the burden of keeping an underused rail line active, there's no harm in that.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.