> good enough" with respect to "Air travel should be for medical emergencies only"? Yes.
Seems a little extreme to me, but fine.
> high speed trains in china run on electricity. I'm not sure how fuel duties are relevant here.
Because to highlight how HSR "runs at a loss" without mentioning the enormous state subsidies that go to the aviation sector, without which air travel would also run at a loss, is a little selective.
But, as you say, this is China. I think "profit and loss" mean slightly different things there.
Blame thanatos519, which made the claim and caused me to reply, not me.
>Because to highlight how HSR "runs at a loss" without mentioning the enormous state subsidies that go to the aviation sector
Again, I'm not disagreeing with this line of reasoning, only pointing out that it's incomplete. High speed trains most definitely received subsidies in the form of government financing, and not having to turn a profit. Your response to that is... airlines might be getting subsidies too but you you can't really point out what they are? Or are you claiming that the fact that other fuels are subject to duties, jet fuel isn't, then airlines are getting "subsidies", even if HSRs aren't taxed in the same way (ie. for electricity)?
>But, as you say, this is China. I think "profit and loss" mean slightly different things there.
> Blame thanatos519, which made the claim and caused me to reply, not me.
Sure. I'm just saying that I don't agree that "not making a loss" is a prerequisite for any type of measure of success. Lots of things are successful that don't turn a direct profit.
> Your response to that is... airlines might be getting subsidies too but you you can't really point out what they are? Or are you claiming that the fact that other fuels are subject to duties, jet fuel isn't, then airlines are getting "subsidies", even if HSRs aren't taxed in the same way (ie. for electricity)?
I'm saying lots in both sectors is subsidised, all the way from manufacturing through to runtime costs.
Whether or not a railway or a flight route makes a "profit" or "loss" is really down to level of state funding across the whole industry, so using it as a measure to see which mode of transport is 'better' is (I think) not very enlightening.
Seems a little extreme to me, but fine.
> high speed trains in china run on electricity. I'm not sure how fuel duties are relevant here.
Because to highlight how HSR "runs at a loss" without mentioning the enormous state subsidies that go to the aviation sector, without which air travel would also run at a loss, is a little selective.
But, as you say, this is China. I think "profit and loss" mean slightly different things there.