this post was submitted on 27 Dec 2025
115 points (98.3% liked)

Slop.

751 readers
657 users here now

For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Someone on Wikipedia added the following a few days ago:

China's HSR system as a whole, however, has incurred massive financial losses.[9] In terms of annual operating revenues and expenditures, only six lines break even while the rest have huge losses.[10] Most of the newer lines suffer from low passenger volumes, as many of their stations are located well outside centers of metro areas and without direct local highway nor light rail connections. Officials have used high-speed rail construction primarily to drive up land value for land sales, especially in third and fourth-tier cities, rather than prioritizing convenience and affordability of ordinary travelers.[11] As of the end of 2023, China's HSR system has an accumulated debt of $839 billion due to opaque financing by local governments.[12]

Here are the sources:

If you look at the sources, [9] is from the "libertarian" Reason Foundation which is pro-car and anti-transit, and the editor presented it as an outright fact. [10] is not true (it's also a dead link for an article from WSJ which is questionably framed); more than six lines are profitable to some extent and the "huge losses" are the exception and not the norm.

What is most problematic is [11], which has been thoroughly rebutted here (this person has great English-language coverage of transit in China, please check them out!).

The person doesn't even acknowledge the controversy that each of the these sources have. I wonder if there's an agenda going on, or if the liberal narratives have been repeated so much such that people just unironically believe them.

top 39 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Dort_Owl@hexbear.net 22 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

GHOST CITIES GHOST CITIES

ELECTRIC VEHICLE GRAVEYARDS

Chinas planning for future growth really confuses westerners, doesn't it? I guess western capitalists are so stuck in the present that they can't learn from the past or plan for the future.

America can't even plan 1 year ahead.

[–] infuziSporg@hexbear.net 3 points 1 day ago

^[dubious^ ^-^ ^discuss]^

[–] Wheaties@hexbear.net 62 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Officials have used high-speed rail construction primarily to drive up land value for land sales, especially in third and fourth-tier cities

Oh my god they're building infrastructure! Stop the presses!

[–] purpleworm@hexbear.net 58 points 2 days ago

Imagine driving up land values by actually making land more valuable instead of artificially sabotaging housing construction like in the US.

[–] Krem@hexbear.net 58 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

Infrastructure that connects a whole country, makes the developed coast and the less developed inland less separated, and reduces the need for car and air travel, needs to make a profit or it is a failure.

Pewpew guns and shooty missiles and vroom vroom tanks and explody bombs and honk honk battleships may cost some amount of money to make and deploy, but any such cost is more than paid back for when, you know, um, we epically own the bad guys or something

[–] Horse@lemmygrad.ml 40 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Infrastructure that connects a whole country, makes the developed coast and the less developed inland less separated, and reduces the need for car and air travel, needs to make a profit or it is a failure.

even from a capitalist perspective this is short-sighted and makes little sense
have they ever heard of the concept of a loss-leader?
make a relatively small loss on the trains, get a shitload of people into the cities to buy stuff

[–] Krem@hexbear.net 32 points 2 days ago

Or just keep rural people out of unemployment, or maybe even improve the economy of small inland cities.

nah better decrease services from 5 trains per hour to 3 per day, and increase ticket prices 50x, so that we make the money back asap

[–] safetyissecond@lemmy.ml 26 points 2 days ago

US capitalists think that AI slop, the imaginary idea of AGI, and accelerating people losing their jobs somehow are better loss leaders than proven transit infrastructure; they're basically trying to sink the ship we're on and build gilded lifeboats for themselves.

[–] Trying2KnowMyself@hexbear.net 21 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Look, it’s just common sense that explosions are cool. That alone is reason enough to bomb some people, no matter the cost. You’ve gotta think about how it would look to walk away from a children’s hospital while the AGM-65 Maverick missile strike you just called in hits, without even turning around to watch.

[–] DragonBallZinn@hexbear.net 4 points 1 day ago

We live in squalor, sure. But here in burgerland it’s gender-affirming squalor.

[–] Blakey@hexbear.net 7 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I mean, defense spending really is necessary, it's just that what the US does is offense spending...

[–] LeninWeave@hexbear.net 18 points 2 days ago

For most of the world, defense spending is necessary because of the US.

[–] TankieTanuki@hexbear.net 10 points 2 days ago

At least they renamed the department to reflect that

[–] xiaohongshu@hexbear.net 27 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

The problem is not that the HSRs are unprofitable (which is to be expected for public transits), the problem is that the central government does not run deficit spending to finance these large scale infrastructure, so the local governments had to take out loans (with shadow banks before 2015, and direct municipal bond issuance after 2015) to invest in these projects.

And because these public transits companies are not profitable, many of them also double as REITs to extract profit from the land value rise. The most famous being Shenzhen Metro who had been transfusing blood to the dying Vanke, a property developer once hailed as a successful model just 2 years ago as Evergrande was imploding under its hyper-financialized operational structure.

It is a neoliberalized model that shares a lot of similarities to Japan’s. This is why a lot of the local governments are in a massive debt bubble right now as the property prices plunge, a problem made worse by the fact that the People’s Bank of China have seemingly “run out of its tools” after the massive 12 trillion yuan debt resolution policy in November last year.

Read my post here about how all these troubles really started with the 1994 Tax Sharing Reform that forced the local governments to tie their budgets to land finances.

[–] Awoo@hexbear.net 42 points 2 days ago

Operational profitability is not important if economic impact far exceeds any difference in profitability to run it.

Long-term benefits of having all of this infrastructure pre-existing are very high. Putting down a HSR line after an area is built up enough to make it profitable means building a line through a highly developed and dense area. This is costly and extremely slow because it's difficult to move people. It also means that lines won't be as straight as they could be if you put them in before the urban development even appeared there.

In the longterm the benefits are pretty obvious to anyone who isn't being a dickhead about the topic.

[–] The_Walkening@hexbear.net 31 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

What if the fast, efficient movement of people enabled more economic value to be created than the amount of money put into it, and in the aggregate would be a net positive economically? curious-marx

[–] Damarcusart@hexbear.net 26 points 2 days ago

You'd think they would learn at some point, not everything needs to be done for profit, and even then, plenty of profitable stuff requires significant investment before it turns any sort of profit, they're so far gone and stuck in this AI pyramid scheme economy mindset that they aren't just twelve anymore, they're two. "Now now now! Profit now! No profit later! Only now!"

[–] robotElder2@hexbear.net 19 points 2 days ago

To the capitalist the ability to plan farther ahead than the next quarterly report is a terrifying and unknowable eldritch magick. They see someone else do it and they get confused, angry, and scared.

[–] 7bicycles@hexbear.net 30 points 2 days ago (2 children)

no you head the guy. every road is a toll road now, it has to break even. no more government handouts

[–] miz@hexbear.net 13 points 2 days ago

no you head the guy

stuff

it has to break even

What is this, socialism? It need to generate profit, and more profit each quarter.

[–] Trying2KnowMyself@hexbear.net 31 points 2 days ago (1 children)

How about making all public transit free so that it all operates at a loss? sicko-hexbear

[–] Orcocracy@hexbear.net 34 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

Yeah, just like highways.

Or better still, make highways have ticketed entry and make the trains free.

[–] Trying2KnowMyself@hexbear.net 27 points 2 days ago

I’ve never heard a better argument for making every road a toll road.

[–] safetyissecond@lemmy.ml 13 points 2 days ago

And in the meantime also please redirect the money used for wars to build some infrastructure for the free high-speed trains.

[–] BGDelirium@hexbear.net 1 points 1 day ago

”make highways have ticketed entry"

This this this this this this this this this this

timmy-pray

[–] plinky@hexbear.net 23 points 2 days ago

my healthcare company only insures profitable (healthy young people, but older than age of unwise decisions) and doesn't provide service to unprofitable people (after 35). this is peak economic efficiency, and i will not take any questions. i don't have any debt and enjoy high application rates among my public.

[–] Strayce@lemmy.sdf.org 21 points 2 days ago (3 children)

many of their stations are located well outside centers of metro areas and without direct local highway nor light rail connections

See, China just builds shit at random, they couldn't possibly be planning for future growth.

[–] Damarcusart@hexbear.net 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Evil totalitarian communist emperor Xi throws darts at a map of China and that's where they have to build a railway line to this week or else a billion people are executed.

[–] Ithorian@hexbear.net 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I know this hyperbole but i swear it feels like some people actually think this.

[–] Damarcusart@hexbear.net 4 points 1 day ago

The most important part of simulated liberalism is to make it just slightly more extreme than what they actually believe.

[–] CloutAtlas@hexbear.net 12 points 2 days ago

The most famous picture of a station in the middle of no where is in fact in the middle of a suburb now (suburb by Chinese standards, not American suburbia)

[–] Spike@hexbear.net 5 points 1 day ago

Also most are next to local highways or connected to metro stations

[–] miz@hexbear.net 18 points 2 days ago (1 children)

the excuses and rationalizations don't have to hold water, they can be obvious falsehoods even. the important thing is for western chauvinists to have ready-made thought-terminating clichés that can be repeated unchallenged in bourgeois media

[–] cornishon@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 1 day ago

Ding ding ding!

[–] newacctidk@hexbear.net 10 points 2 days ago

Maybe I am crazy, but isn't the advantage of operating at a deficit with public transportation that it enables more economic activity as people can justify taking better jobs at greater distances from their homes, and have the money saved on transit to then stimulate the economy? Like you want the money to be _circulating instead of working in order to pay for the transit that you require so you can get to work to pay for the transit that you.....etc

[–] FuckyWucky@hexbear.net 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

It really should be sovereign spending tbf. Like, America's bloated healthcare and military is Federal spending (ofc, no one cares about 'losses' for military since you know, it's the military). When you use non-sovereign entities, you are borrowing from commercial banks (even if state owned), commercial banks give out loans which are supposed to be paid back so the sovereign (central bank + ministry of finance) don't have to recapitalize it (which raises fiscal deficits which the central gov don't like due to 'sound' finance). Obviously, HSR has a lot of utility however the financing debt should be transferred to the Central Govt, I don't care about profitability in money terms, many of the good parts of HSR don't show up on balance sheets. i think they should stop using accounting trickery and have it be an item on Central Govt budget, although the reason they do it this way is to make national debt and fiscal deficit appear lower (for silly reasons).

[–] WokePalpatine@hexbear.net 5 points 2 days ago

Didn't Read + Financial Ls + Low Volume + Land Value (bad) + Cringe + Ratio