Re:Spain will introduce free train travel
by zhoujianfu on Saturday July 23, 2022 @04:29PM
(#32207283)
Probably the right solution is charging for all public roads, not making trains free.
And after that, make sure everyone pays for using public air
That's unironically a good idea:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_tax
I was talking about individuals but thanks for pointing about one of the biggest scams regarding climate change.
It had to be said that I am not at all opposed to the idea of accepting one's responsibility. It's just that how would we implement something like that in a non-dystopian way?
Re:Spain will introduce free train travel
by treasurebots on Saturday July 23, 2022 @05:44PM
(#32207865)
If there's some externality in the way that someone is using public air, like burning garbage in their backyard, then they should be expected to pay for it
Not opposed to the idea. Implementation, on the other hand, would be tricky.
Re:Spain will introduce free train travel
by jon_adler on Saturday July 23, 2022 @03:11PM
(#32206580)
As American housing is mostly sprawling and low density, it isn’t terribly well suited to mass transport like rail in most places. Perhaps light rail or even (eventually) self driving cars might work better. Alternatively, change planning rules to encourage higher density although it is probably already too late for any meaningful change.
Re:Spain will introduce free train travel
by throwaway743 on Saturday July 23, 2022 @03:25PM
(#32206711)
Might not be too late. Car culture has heavily influenced planning in the States. If the focus shifted to public transportation maybe the planning would follow, though it'd take a lot of time to change
Re:Spain will introduce free train travel
by pawsforthought on Saturday July 23, 2022 @06:29PM
(#32208180)
There’s little point putting in transit if dense development isn’t also allowed to follow. I concur though that it’s not too late.
Especially if you consider, car-centric development is bankrupting many smaller US cities. There’s a strong economic case for promoting dense, mid-rise, mixed-use development: it brings in much more in property taxes relative to the cost of city services required.
Simply put, every foot of road or pipe or power cable serves far more people (and economic activity) with dense development.
Paying for rail infrastructure is not fundamentally different, except insofar as it is generally cheaper, more efficient, and long-term much healthier for the society.