Germany's 49-euro ticket resulted in significant shift from road to rail • Hacker News Board

Re: Germany's 49-euro ticket resulted in significant shift from road to rail

#621

Post by BlackLotus89 » Sun, Oct 13, 2024, 1:13 PM UTC

rtpg wrote: post #609

lucumo wrote: post #518

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> time on a train can be better spent than time in a car because one doesn’t need to pay as much attention, which could be a small improvement to many people’s lives. This is not really true on busy trains. I've commuted both on trains and in cars, and when comparing transportation methods near the saturation point, cars win when it comes to personal comfort. A traffic jam is no fun, but you can still sit, aren't jos…

I.... I really don't feel like driving in a traffic jam is better than being in a train in anything except the most extreme cases of train crowding. I haven't experienced massive commuter driving but even the cases I've just been stuck in stop and go traffic for 30 minutes it felt worse than any train ride I've taken except for the few times I was in "I feel like I'm going to get crushed" levels of crowded. And like.…

> I don't know how you walk away from the 30 minute trip

You never drove with the DB before I take it (die Bahn - German trains). You routinely have that a 30min trip takes multiple times of what it should.

* train coming in late * no replacement * suddenly from another track * people taking their life * missing the follow train * having to wait because an ICE gets priority

You don't know how many trips I had to cancel because coming 3 hours to late (when starting the trip 30min early) isn't viable.

Yeah sure being in a traffic jam sucks! Big time. I hate it with all my heart, but I then start playing a podcast or calming music and actually get something out of it. It's actually not so nervewracking if you change your mindset. It bothers me more that I know that my mileage will tank for that short while... But yeah if I can I stay at home...

Re: Germany's 49-euro ticket resulted in significant shift from road to rail

#622

Post by kortilla » Sun, Oct 13, 2024, 1:15 PM UTC

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #296

kortilla wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a boring trope. Whether it’s a group of United States or a single State is a debate as old as the country. You’re going to need really compelling reasons for states to give up their representation and participate in the state vote required to amend the constitution to remove their rights.

> states to give up their representation > their rights You talk about states as if they are people. But they are not. States are a fiction invented by people (and let's be honest, by rich and powerful people), and so they can be torn down by people (likely not the rich and powerful). "State representation" and "states' rights" are not compelling to most people, other than via some vague appeal to "isn't it great tha…

States are organizations of people. Boosted representation isn’t compelling to people who don’t care, but the people in smaller states do care. It means more fed govt consideration when it comes to regulatory decisions and funding.

Your post of “bUt thEYre nOt pEOple” is pointless. When people talk about the rights of governments nobody is saying that the government is a person.

Re: Germany's 49-euro ticket resulted in significant shift from road to rail

#623

Post by bratwurst3000 » Sun, Oct 13, 2024, 1:20 PM UTC

eru wrote: post #611

PaulRobinson wrote: post #603

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cities and councils should not be making decisions based on how to raise revenue. They should be making decisions based on how to improve quality of life for residents. Parking should exist where public transport is not a viable option. Ideally the work to make public transport an option should be prioritised over the work to making parking exist. Cities and councils can make money from public transport too, it'll wo…

> Cities and councils should not be making decisions based on how to raise revenue. Why not? > They should be making decisions based on how to improve quality of life for residents. Residents can use money to purchase goods and services to improve their quality of life. > Parking should exist where public transport is not a viable option. And the market can provide parking at market-prices. (And, cities and councils…

> Residents can use money to purchase goods and services to improve their quality of life.

i live in a city with pollution problem. where can i buy this clean air to improve the quality of my life?

Re: Germany's 49-euro ticket resulted in significant shift from road to rail

#624

Post by kortilla » Sun, Oct 13, 2024, 1:20 PM UTC

Qwertious wrote: post #234

kortilla wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a boring trope. Whether it’s a group of United States or a single State is a debate as old as the country. You’re going to need really compelling reasons for states to give up their representation and participate in the state vote required to amend the constitution to remove their rights.

It was a valid debate back when travelling to the capitol took months by horse. Nowadays everyone uses services from other states on a daily basis, and possibly work in another state (with WFH) on a daily basis. It's pretty darn clear that the USA simply could not exist as a bunch of separate states anymore. And frankly, states are already giving up their representation in the current system. If you're not a swing st…

> And frankly, states are already giving up their representation in the current system. If you're not a swing state, you're irrelevant.

You’re talking about presidential elections, which are a tiny slice of the picture. Wyoming has 2 senators and so does California. That’s huge for Wyoming.

> It was a valid debate back when travelling to the capitol took months by horse. Nowadays everyone uses services from other states on a daily basis, and possibly work in another state (with WFH) on a daily basis. It's pretty darn clear that the USA simply could not exist as a bunch of separate states anymore.

None of this is relevant because crossing states to work has been a thing since the founding of the country. The only meaningful difference between the founding and now is the massive expansion of the duties of the federal government

Re: Germany's 49-euro ticket resulted in significant shift from road to rail

#625

Post by kortilla » Sun, Oct 13, 2024, 1:21 PM UTC

smcl wrote: post #305

kortilla wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not a weasel word, it’s a word used to describe any program provided by the government that does not bring in enough revenue on its own to pay for itself. The same word applies to roads that do not pay for themselves through gas tax and/or tolls. If the government pays for something through a general fund from income/property/corporate taxes, it’s subsidized. It’s important to call these out whenever they are be…

> The same word applies to roads that do not pay for themselves through gas tax and/or tolls. It’s very weird how people talk about roads as a sort of universal public good whose construction and maintenance needs to be financed by local authorities and taxation. Yet rail is expected to not just stand on its own two feet but to yield a profit. Both facilitate commerce and improve a regions productivity (rail inarguab…

It’s not different. The same word applies to both.

Re: Germany's 49-euro ticket resulted in significant shift from road to rail

#626

Post by kortilla » Sun, Oct 13, 2024, 1:22 PM UTC

eschaton wrote: post #176

kortilla wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not a weasel word, it’s a word used to describe any program provided by the government that does not bring in enough revenue on its own to pay for itself. The same word applies to roads that do not pay for themselves through gas tax and/or tolls. If the government pays for something through a general fund from income/property/corporate taxes, it’s subsidized. It’s important to call these out whenever they are be…

> not sustainable on its own Or it is something that provides a benefit to society as a whole and therefore deserves to be maintained by the institution established by society to do such things, government, without assuming economic efficiency is 100% correlated with societal benefit.

Yes, that’s the argument for all subsidized things.

Re: Germany's 49-euro ticket resulted in significant shift from road to rail

#627

Post by PaulDavisThe1st » Sun, Oct 13, 2024, 1:23 PM UTC

kortilla wrote: post #622

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> states to give up their representation > their rights You talk about states as if they are people. But they are not. States are a fiction invented by people (and let's be honest, by rich and powerful people), and so they can be torn down by people (likely not the rich and powerful). "State representation" and "states' rights" are not compelling to most people, other than via some vague appeal to "isn't it great tha…

States are organizations of people. Boosted representation isn’t compelling to people who don’t care, but the people in smaller states do care. It means more fed govt consideration when it comes to regulatory decisions and funding. Your post of “bUt thEYre nOt pEOple” is pointless. When people talk about the rights of governments nobody is saying that the government is a person.

If federal rules provide some version of equal treatment, then "boosted representation" for small states is about nothing but a desire for local power.

There's no reason for smaller states to get less money per capita for schools, or less money per mile for US highways, or less money per million dollars of damage from a natural disaster. And indeed, they do not, because we have historically believed in fairness.

However, the idea that the 300k residents of Wyoming should be able to exert outsize power of regulatory decisions just because "they are a state" is anti-democratic. We put the things we don't want majoritarian decisions on into the constitution; the rest is up for a vote, and a handful of people shouldn't be able to veto the decision of the many just because they happen to be clustered in one place.

Re: Germany's 49-euro ticket resulted in significant shift from road to rail

#628

Post by geysersam » Sun, Oct 13, 2024, 1:24 PM UTC

thehappypm wrote: post #582

geysersam wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost every road project is paid by public money.

$200B/year spent on roads in the USA (federal, state, and local) for passenger vehicle miles driven in the trillions, plus truck miles. $4B/year spent on Amtrak for passenger miles in the billions. Roads are an order of magnitude cheaper

You can't just compare the entire multi purpose road network of the US to a single rail company. That's just not a serious comparison.

Besides, you didn't include the cost of the vehicles or the cost of fuel for the cars. I presume the number for Amtrak include all operating costs.

The truth is that different modes of transport have different strengths and weaknesses. In densely urbanized areas trains and trams are typically more efficient than cars.

Re: Germany's 49-euro ticket resulted in significant shift from road to rail

#629

Post by kortilla » Sun, Oct 13, 2024, 1:24 PM UTC

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #238

kortilla wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not a weasel word, it’s a word used to describe any program provided by the government that does not bring in enough revenue on its own to pay for itself. The same word applies to roads that do not pay for themselves through gas tax and/or tolls. If the government pays for something through a general fund from income/property/corporate taxes, it’s subsidized. It’s important to call these out whenever they are be…

> The same word applies to roads that do not pay for themselves through gas tax and/or tolls. More or less all non-toll roads (and a few toll roads too). Which makes "applies" seems a bit pointless.

I don’t think you know what the word “applies” means.

Re: Germany's 49-euro ticket resulted in significant shift from road to rail

#630

Post by kortilla » Sun, Oct 13, 2024, 1:25 PM UTC

drawkward wrote: post #339

kortilla wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not a weasel word, it’s a word used to describe any program provided by the government that does not bring in enough revenue on its own to pay for itself. The same word applies to roads that do not pay for themselves through gas tax and/or tolls. If the government pays for something through a general fund from income/property/corporate taxes, it’s subsidized. It’s important to call these out whenever they are be…

Ths US military is not sustainable on its own... Or maybe, governments have programs that are funded by all to benefit all, because they are onlt beneficial when they are society-scale? 1/350,000,000th of the US army won't be very useful to any individual American on its own.

Yes, that is the argument for subsidies. What’s your point?