07-09-2021, 12:01 PM
(07-09-2021, 11:25 AM)KevinL Wrote:Quote:the project would be funded entirely through the private sector
There's the magic words to get the government on side.
Unfortunately it’s probably nonsense. Nobody in politics would ever complain that a road project “loses money” (i.e., requires government subsidy in order to keep operating), but it’s perfectly normal to complain about transit projects not breaking even. Point being, as long as a significant competitor (the highway from Calgary to Edmonton) is funded by the taxpayer, an entirely user-paid alternate is unlikely to be able to make money.
Now with it being high-speed it’s just barely conceivable that it could provide service so much better that even with having to pay all its own costs it would still attract enough ridership, but I’m skeptical. There just aren’t that many people for whom time is so valuable that they will pay for the fast trip rather than driving.
I could actually go either way on the question of government funding of intercity travel. On the one hand, having subsidized transport between cities obviously makes it cheaper to move people and goods between cities; but on the other hand if charging the full economic cost of the transport would make it not happen, maybe it’s not really that important. But what we need is to be consistent between modes; either transport needs to pay its way, which for roads means that all highways would be toll roads, or it doesn’t, in which case government support for railways, where warranted, should be expected.