5 ms·

We need to first get past: 1) differing rail gauges 2) inability to buy international tickets from many (most?) national rail providers Here in Portugal, the f

We need to first get past: 1) differing rail gauges 2) inability to buy international tickets from many (most?) national rail providers Here in Portugal, the formerly national rail line "Comboio Portugal" was privatized and sold off to 1 (one) company. This was the stupidest possible thing we could have done. They promptly shutdown many interior (lower profit) lines and left many areas as transport-deserts, shifting even MORE traffic to our limited roads infrastructure (the entire eastern side of Coimbra just shut down afterwards as a result. It's still low-value real-estate for precisely the lack of transport. The famous Lousã line etc.) Nevermind that this monopolistic idiocy was repeated across telecom and other industries, focusing purely on railways, we have basically coastal coverage with some select lines through the interior (The once-a-day Alfa Pendular Lisboa-> Madrid line, for example) Our railway decadence roughly mirrors the US rail decline, as cars clearly dominate the Iberian peninsula...

ParksNet 4y ago
What US rail decline? Rail has a higher freight modal share in the US than any major European countries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_rail_usage#Freight_modal_share_for_rail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_rail_usag...
- upbeat_general 4y ago
  Maybe they meant passenger rail where we are last (by capita/transport share)
  - throwntoday 4y ago
    Our country is too big and sparsely populated to make passenger rail viablr. It's why our airline industry is top notch.
cinntaile 4y ago
If a line is not profitable, it's not that bad to get rid of. If the stations want to stay open, they should pay the train operator to stop there. Then people can locally decide if they want the station or not. Another alternative would have been to have it as a demand when it was sold. When you buy the company, you are obligated to keep these lines open.
- otter-rock 4y ago
  This is the difference between a business and a service. The unprofitable lines could have continued as a government-backed service to promote economic development, for example.
  - cinntaile 4y ago
    That's what I said, if the locals think it's important for them then they can pay for it.
    - otter-rock 4y ago
      > if the locals think it's important for them then they can pay for it That's what I thought you were saying, but that's not what I'm saying. There might never be enough local money to support it. But the regional or higher levels of government might think it's strategically important, or even profitable over a much wider area beyond local municipalities. For example, the USPS services rural areas where they lose money because it's considered important enough.
      - cinntaile 4y ago
        Municipalities can certainly work together on a regional level, my explanation does not exclude that option. Just that the funding has to come from the local level, this serves as a verification that there is a local need for the line and that the need outweighs the alternatives. We know the line in question was not profitable, that's why it was shut down. I don't know if this was beyond municipality level but I would assume so.
        cinntaile 4y ago
        Whoever keeps downvoting my posts should perhaps try and participate in the debate ;)
        otter-rock 4y ago

ParksNet 4y ago

What US rail decline? Rail has a higher freight modal share in the US than any major European countries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_rail_usage#Freight_modal_share_for_rail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_rail_usag...

upbeat_general 4y ago
Maybe they meant passenger rail where we are last (by capita/transport share)
- throwntoday 4y ago
  Our country is too big and sparsely populated to make passenger rail viablr. It's why our airline industry is top notch.

cinntaile 4y ago

If a line is not profitable, it's not that bad to get rid of. If the stations want to stay open, they should pay the train operator to stop there. Then people can locally decide if they want the station or not. Another alternative would have been to have it as a demand when it was sold. When you buy the company, you are obligated to keep these lines open.

otter-rock 4y ago
This is the difference between a business and a service. The unprofitable lines could have continued as a government-backed service to promote economic development, for example.
- cinntaile 4y ago
  That's what I said, if the locals think it's important for them then they can pay for it.
  - otter-rock 4y ago
    > if the locals think it's important for them then they can pay for it That's what I thought you were saying, but that's not what I'm saying. There might never be enough local money to support it. But the regional or higher levels of government might think it's strategically important, or even profitable over a much wider area beyond local municipalities. For example, the USPS services rural areas where they lose money because it's considered important enough.
    - cinntaile 4y ago
      Municipalities can certainly work together on a regional level, my explanation does not exclude that option. Just that the funding has to come from the local level, this serves as a verification that there is a local need for the line and that the need outweighs the alternatives. We know the line in question was not profitable, that's why it was shut down. I don't know if this was beyond municipality level but I would assume so.
      - cinntaile 4y ago
        Whoever keeps downvoting my posts should perhaps try and participate in the debate ;)
        otter-rock 4y ago