• CrimeDad@lemmy.crimedad.work
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    2 days ago

    Yes, but for passenger service rather than cargo. Passenger jets are too fast, too uncomfortable, and cause too much pollution.

      • CrimeDad@lemmy.crimedad.work
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        Because I think it’s bad economics to try to transport finished goods over long distances quickly. It’s better to transport raw materials long distances slowly (ship and rail) and employ people to manufacture things near where they are needed.

        • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          What’s the advantage to transporting raw materials as opposed to finished goods? You’re giving up economies of scale and support infrastructure, I’m not clear what you are getting in return.

          • CrimeDad@lemmy.crimedad.work
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 days ago

            When our clothes and electronics or whatever mostly or exclusively come from the other side of the world, I don’t think it’s because corporations are taking advantage of economies of scale so much as they are doing arbitrage for labor and environmental protections. If we bring production closer to the people who need the products, then we get jobs, autonomy, and accountability. We can still have economies of scale at the regional level. Not every town needs the same set of factories of course.