I take this particular argument seriously because it's a very real obstacle even when all other factors support railhttps://twitter.com/380kmh/status/872152288558764032 …
-
-
Replying to @380kmh
What are your options when you really, really want rail service even though local ridership can't pay for its upkeep?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @380kmh
One is to pay extra to maintain the rail line even when you aren't using it--through local taxes, etc. In Japan this usually = 3rd Sector
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @380kmh
A 3rd Sector railroad being a partly-state-owned corporation which pays for its operations through a mix of fare revenue and gov spending
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @380kmh
Another way is to get non-locals, who may never ride the service, to pay for it. Either state owned + funded, or cross-subsidized...
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @380kmh
...within a sufficiently large private company (eg. JR East or JR West cross-subsidizing unprofitable rural lines in their network)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @380kmh
The last way to do this, and the least reliable, is to develop a rail service that specifically caters to non-locals; a tourist service
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @380kmh
This is unreliable because tourists can be a fickle bunch with varying attendance rates, but the bigger problem with this option...
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
...is that you end up with a rail service that isn't much use for the daily needs of the people who live around it. It's largely decorative.
-
-
Replying to @380kmh
All of these options have their drawbacks, and none of them can guarantee that an unprofitable rail service will continue.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.