• AA5B@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 month ago

    You could say the same about pretty much any infrastructure. It’s hideously expensive and will never get paid back by utilization.

    • highways
    • local roads
    • bridges
    • air traffic control
    • utilities of most kinds
    • canals
    • flood control
    • erosion mitigation

    All are hideously expensive and will never get paid back by utilization.

    Are they all bad investments?

    I claim they all are critical for their indirect benefits to an economy, a society, and rail is exactly the same.

    • vga@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I would say that there’s quite a lot of reason to believe that infrastructure investments can be one of the best ways to help poor people rise economically. Which has obvious paybacks.

      https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/infrastructure/publication/infrastructure-and-poverty-reduction-innovative-policies

      This still requires creating infrastructure that is actually needed, otherwise it’s just wasting money (which ultimately is just an abstraction over wealth, opportunity, materials, workers’ finite time and energy, etc etc).

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        infrastructure investments can be one of the best ways to help poor people rise economically

        And specifically consider how much we can help by not requiring all the expenses of owning a car. Transit and intercity rail could be among the best investments when you consider those indirect benefits. Such a shame that short sighted people want them to be profitable in utilization