Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
Passenger
»
To what extent is the Intercity Marketplace skewed in the US
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
<p>In accounting and finance parlance sunk cost refers to an expenditure that cannot be reversed. It is history. At the time the expenditure was made, in the case of most assets, the accountants determine whether the asset has any salvage value. If it does, the depreciation schedule is structured to reflect this fact. But the original expenditure cannot be clawed back. </p> <p>The asset can be sold. As I noted above, the buyer may purchase part or all of the original cost, but doing so does not wipe it out. </p> <p>What the country has spent on highways, airways, waterways, etc. (wisely or not) is irrelevant to solving today's transport problems. You cannot reverse them. You can only solve problems going forward, although there may be some valuable lessons in the history, i.e. identification of decision points that could have gone the other way and why. </p> <p>As to the point that people don't understand how transport systems are financed in the United States, most people in the U.S. or the other countries where I have lived don't understand finance period. Just yesterday I read an article in Bloomberg pointing out that more than 40 per cent of American high school graduates cannot compute simple interest or understand the terms of a credit card.</p> <p>Cost is not the only driver in decision making. Cost accountants can determine with a reasonable degree of precision how much a product or service costs. But they don't price it. It is priced by marketing specialists who understand that amongst other things people buy the intrinsic utility value of a product or service, which may be much greater than its cost. This is one of the reason that iPads and iPhones are priced way above what it costs to make and distribute them.</p> <p>Most people I know are willing to pay for highway transport even if it costs two or three times what the alternatives cost. They want the convenience, comfort, flexibility, etc. of a car. They don't want to get on a bus, train, etc. and have to potentially share a seat with someone who has not bathed for a week or is shouting into a cell phone. Most politicians, I believe, know this. Except for a few highly congested corridors, this fact is not going to change in the near future.</p> <p>When I am traveling from New York to Hartford, I take the train. But you have about as much chance of getting me out of my car in central Texas as you have of getting cows to fly over the moon. </p>
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy