Simply having roads is enough for people to use them. Simply having tracks is not enough for good rail service.
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.
-
As is the case for 3rd-Sector railways in Japan, which aren't profitable, but which are sufficiently beloved to be kept running
- 1 more reply
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.