• yA3xAKQMbq@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Your point was that air travel uses less infrastructure.

    And of course I can point to a high throughput airport and to a high throughput train station and conclude that the airport is using way more infrastructure in comparison.

    Also nobody asked for „global travel“ by train.

    And what about the SE Asian train network? Do you mean China, lol? Why must „many places“ be accessible by train edit: plane? This is not an argument.

    • Driftking@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      And your point still does not support that trains are more expensive on long disances without being subsidised by tax money. Short distance train travel is not the problem. We need long distance air travel. Who do you think occupies the economy seats. Its not the fat cats

      China, japan etc

      • yA3xAKQMbq@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        The question was: „Why are planes cheaper than trains in Europe?“

        Your answer was: „because infra“.

        I showed you this is wrong because you underestimate the infra needs of air traffic and also neglect the long term savings.

        Because that’s why you install infra: it saves money in the long run.

        Nobody – except you – is talking about „global air traffic“. Nobody.

        So, if you want to burn straw men apply for a job as a fire fighter, and if you want to be a professional goal post mover, IDK, call FIFA maybe?

        But stop pulling out „arguments“ out of your ass. Thank you.