[groundzeros2015]

> the simple option is to cut lines serving small and rural communities

We don’t see this in practice to though. Three examples:

1. In the airline industry big airlines don’t go everywhere for this reasons but small local airlines fill the gap due to market opportunity.

2. Changes in technology enable big companies to operate more efficiently. See starlink.

3. Big companies know that ubiquity is important for their brand. In practice Amazon will deliver packages across the US.

[card_zero]

Meanwhile in Britain in the 1960s, this cost-cutting closure of local rail lines did happen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beeching_cuts ... at a time when the trains and rail infrastructure had been publicly owned for about 15 years already. It doesn't dispel the incentive.

[groundzeros2015]

I’m not arguing a rail has never been closed. I’m arguing that being a small difficult market doesn’t exclude you from being served by marketed forces.

Did nobody ever operate rail to those cities again due to them being rural?

[card_zero]

Rural cities? Come again? What was demolished remained demolished, yes. Unclear on your point.

Oh I see (thanks to that edit). I mean, I agree with you. This is just the additional amusing detail that government-run services are still subject to a sort of dulled and homogenous version of market forces, which can be worse for small local concerns because it's less responsive. Though, admittedly, a giant corporation can simulate government very well, and can be just as crap.

[groundzeros2015]

It’s confirmed in the opening summary:

> A few of these routes have since reopened. Some short sections have been preserved as heritage railways, while others have been incorporated into the National Cycle Network or used for road schemes

> Some, such as the bulk of the Midland Metro network around Birmingham and Wolverhampton, have since been incorporated into light rail lines.

Furthermore, the transformation to other transportation forms suggests this event also coincides with changing technology.

[Certhas]

There are many more places that were never reconnected.

[groundzeros2015]

Indeed. Your rail was being subsidized.

[BoxOfRain]

I have never heard the name Beeching spoken with more venom than in Wales, I used to live in Mid Wales and now I live in Cardiff. If I wanted to visit where I used to live by train, I'd have to do a multi-hour detour of a sightseeing trip around the West Midlands, deep into England. The Beeching Axe literally cut Wales in half and the consequences are felt to this day, even though there wasn't much outright salting the Earth to make sure the terrible decision couldn't be reversed as there was in some cases, the Welsh government doesn't have the money to reinstate the Aberystwyth-Carmarthen line which would deal with a lot of these north-south issues.

Also it's not just Wales where Beeching carried out intense vandalism of public infrastructure, the South West was severely affected too. Basically anywhere that wasn't London-centric suffered, which is the British government to a T regardless of the party in power. The general assumption was that private cars would replace the local trains, which as someone who currently doesn't drive for medical reasons really makes my blood boil. While perhaps not in intent, in effect the Beeching Axe was a profound kick in the teeth for the disabled.

[inigyou]

> anywhere that wasn't London-centric suffered, which is the British government to a T regardless of the party in power

I've heard that if you remove London from statistics, the UK has the economy of an Eastern European country after the fall of the USSR.

[debo_]

Are you saying they were Beeched Wales?

[miltonlost]

You cut off the OP's sentence of that being examples for "Rail companies" and then added your own examples. Please be better at comprehesion and editing comments

"In practice Amazon will deliver packages across the US." You know they use the Postal Service for last miles often? And the Postal Service is required by law to service far-flung places. So Amazon is only, in practice, delivering packages to those places due to USPS.

[groundzeros2015]

> then added your own examples. Please be better at comprehesion and editing comments

Did you miss the part where the conversation was about Ticketmaster and rails were used as an analogy for understanding the problem?

> So Amazon is only, in practice, delivering packages to those places due to USPS.

I don’t think that’s true as I can buy many things on Amazon which cannot be shipped via USPS.

[derektank]

>In the airline industry big airlines don’t go everywhere for this reasons but small local airlines fill the gap due to market opportunity.

You’re not wrong, but small and rural airports would not be able to maintain even these routes without EAS (essential air services) subsidies

[christina97]

The airline industry gets huge subsidies in most countries to operate more rural/less profitable routes. Most of the passenger airports in the US for instance would not be viable without subsidies (most flights go to a few profitable hubs, but the long tail or airports forms the majority by count).

Amazon delivers everywhere because USPS subsidizes package delivery to unprofitable areas. You don’t get next day prime except in a relatively small proportion of the country (by area).

[groundzeros2015]

> You don’t get next day prime except in a relatively small proportion of the country

I agree that the cost or level of service differs (it literally costs more to serve you).

[Certhas]

What is your point? Sometimes it works due to other factors so we don't need regulation?

Beyond the very real closures of unprofitable rail lines that is always happening or threatening (including in state owned rail companies) your examples don't really measure up either:

Local airports are typically subsidized. So the infrastructure aspect is not market driven.

Eventually getting starlink means it was fine to not have fast internet for a couple of decades? We still don't have good mobile internet on many train lines in Germany. In Poland it's fine. The difference? Poland mandated that companies bidding for 4G meet certain coverage goals. Market forces have absolutely failed to actually get reasonable mobile internet to everyone.