Yeah, lots of correct observations, but also lots of wrong conclusions. I’d even argue the very first point about culture is very relevant, because japanese culture inherently puts a small bit of breaks on the aspects of capitalism that spiral out of control (they have tons of hypercapitalist issues too, though).
I think it’s correct that having private companies compete has certain advantages in railway infrastructure, if the right framework is given. Imagine someone from here was to start a railway company - they would know about induced demand, about the importance of having frequent service even at times of lower demand to enable rail as primary transport. They wouldn’t have to convince rightoids that spending public money on that is worth it, they could just do it and see the results. In general the good thing about markets is that they enable less planning overhead as everyone focuses on their own thing. Loosely some sort of swarm intelligence.
But none of that will ever work when cars are effectively subsidized and even private rail companies would still be beholden to massive political hurdles for building new lines. Though especially the latter is a real question about tradeoffs of benefit for society vs. individual preference with no single correct answer.
having private companies compete has certain advantages in railway infrastructure, if the right framework is given.
Its better than private monopolies, but no, lack of centralization has lead to really awful transfers compared to China and Korea.
Under capitalism the ideal rail company runs zero trains, owns no infrastructure, is somehow charging rent to every other business, employs nobody, pays them nothing, and charges infinity dollars. It requires external force to fight against the pressures pushing it towards its ideal form.
Hell the author even glosses over the “runs no trains” part in the article, saying the OG JR built too many unprofitable rural lines, as if having reliable transit isn’t good in and of itself, and then explains how the JR’S land ownership is profitable, as if charging businesses rent is a social good.
In general the good thing about markets is that they enable less planning overhead as everyone focuses on their own thing
This is how you get 12 companies owning mass transit in 1 city that don’t share timetables and have bizarre interchanges between like subway, grade-seperated streetcar, and an elevated bus.
Japan’s sucess is in spite of neoliberalism, not because of it.
Yeah, lots of correct observations, but also lots of wrong conclusions. I’d even argue the very first point about culture is very relevant, because japanese culture inherently puts a small bit of breaks on the aspects of capitalism that spiral out of control (they have tons of hypercapitalist issues too, though).
I think it’s correct that having private companies compete has certain advantages in railway infrastructure, if the right framework is given. Imagine someone from here was to start a railway company - they would know about induced demand, about the importance of having frequent service even at times of lower demand to enable rail as primary transport. They wouldn’t have to convince rightoids that spending public money on that is worth it, they could just do it and see the results. In general the good thing about markets is that they enable less planning overhead as everyone focuses on their own thing. Loosely some sort of swarm intelligence.
But none of that will ever work when cars are effectively subsidized and even private rail companies would still be beholden to massive political hurdles for building new lines. Though especially the latter is a real question about tradeoffs of benefit for society vs. individual preference with no single correct answer.
Its better than private monopolies, but no, lack of centralization has lead to really awful transfers compared to China and Korea.
Under capitalism the ideal rail company runs zero trains, owns no infrastructure, is somehow charging rent to every other business, employs nobody, pays them nothing, and charges infinity dollars. It requires external force to fight against the pressures pushing it towards its ideal form.
Hell the author even glosses over the “runs no trains” part in the article, saying the OG JR built too many unprofitable rural lines, as if having reliable transit isn’t good in and of itself, and then explains how the JR’S land ownership is profitable, as if charging businesses rent is a social good.
This is how you get 12 companies owning mass transit in 1 city that don’t share timetables and have bizarre interchanges between like subway, grade-seperated streetcar, and an elevated bus.
Japan’s sucess is in spite of neoliberalism, not because of it.