[account42]

> It's also much more pleasant.

And much slower. Most people prefer shorter discomfort over a longer one.

Also sometimes more expensive because train service is much more monopolized due to the need for infrastructure betweem stations.

[fc417fc802]

Granted the lines are a natural monopoly. I don't see why the usual regulatory approaches shouldn't work. The government could even provide the infrastructure similar to highways.

> sometimes more expensive

Examples? Because that seems patently ridiculous on its face given the differences in energy requirements.

There are plenty of places with functional rail systems to compare to. This stuff isn't rocket science.

[account42]

Prices have little to do with cost when monopolies are involed, that's the point.

DB quote for "high"speed train from Frakfurt to Paris: from 151 €

Flight from Frakfurt to Paris: options as low as 76 €

This isn't a 100% fair comparison but hopefully serves to demonstrate the absurdity.

[fc417fc802]

That is indeed absurd, and I would argue a clear regulatory failure. Thank you for the example though. That is pretty wild.

Still, there's a decent chance I'd personally choose to pay that premium for the comfort afforded by train travel while nonetheless being disgusted by the broader situation.