Business
Don’t be fooled by high-speed rail
From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
Rail advocates admit that trains can’t compete with airliners over long distances or with cars over short distances but claim there is a middle distance – supposedly around 150 to 800 kilometers – in which rail has an advantage over its competitors. That would be true only if the trains were almost 100 percent subsidized.
The Canadian government is considering spending $6 billion to $12 billion to introduce what it calls “high-frequency trains” between Toronto and Quebec City. Though some media reports have described these as high-speed trains (which generally means trains capable of going 250 kilometers per hour), they won’t be. Building such a rail line would easily cost $60 billion and probably much more.
Passenger-train advocates argue that Canada needs to join the international race to have the fastest trains in the world. But this is a race Canada can afford to lose because the country has something that is faster and far less costly: jet airliners.
High-speed trains were already obsolete in 1964, when Japan started operating its first bullet trains. Six years before that, Boeing had introduced the 707 and Douglas the DC-8, both of which cruised four times faster than the early bullet trains and twice as fast as the fastest trains in the world today.
Aside from speed, airliners also have a huge cost advantage because they don’t require a lot of expensive infrastructure between cities. While airports are infrastructure, the only infrastructure airliners really need are paved runways and perhaps a Quonset hut for ticket agents, baggage handling, and a waiting room—which is all that some of Canada’s more remote airports have.
Today’s big-city airports with huge concourses, shops, and jetways were built up over time and mostly paid for out of ticket fees. In contrast, rail advocates want taxpayers to put up tens of billions of dollars before a single wheel turns in the hope that trains that are slower than flying, less convenient than driving, and more expensive than both will somehow attract a significant number of travelers.
Rail advocates admit that trains can’t compete with airliners over long distances or with cars over short distances but claim there is a middle distance – supposedly around 150 to 800 kilometers – in which rail has an advantage over its competitors. That would be true only if the trains were almost 100 percent subsidized.
Air Canada and its competitors currently offer more than three dozen flights a day between Toronto and Montreal with fares starting at $118, less than 25 cents per passenger-kilometer. Fares on VIA Rail Canada averaged 68 cents per passenger-kilometer in 2022, and more than half of its costs are subsidized. People are simply not going to ride high-speed trains in large numbers if those trains cost far more than airlines, buses, or driving.
Amtrak’s only high-speed train, the Acela, collected fares of CN$1.80 per passenger-kilometer in 2022, and while Amtrak claims it covers its operating costs, all of its infrastructure costs are paid for by taxpayers. Amtrak brags that it carries more passengers in the Washington-New York corridor than the airlines, but cars and buses in this corridor carry well over 10 times as many intercity passengers as Amtrak.
The other argument rail advocates make is that high-speed trains will offer shorter downtown-to-downtown times than airlines in some markets. But most people neither work nor live downtown. Toronto and Montreal each have three commercial airports and residents are more likely to be near one of those airports than downtown.
Finally, rail proponents claim that high-speed trains will emit fewer greenhouse gases than cars or planes. But as usual they ignore the construction costs—that is, the billions of kilograms of greenhouse gases that would be emitted to build a high-speed rail line. It is likely that operational savings would never recover this cost, especially since it would be far less expensive to power jets and automobiles with biofuels.
One thing is certain: building high-speed or even high-frequency rail will require lots of workers. Far from being a benefit, Canada is currently suffering a labour shortage that is not expected to end soon. If the government decides to spend billions on a rail line, it will only make the costs of housing, cars, and just about everything else rise even faster.
China, Japan, and Spain have practically wrecked their economies by spending too much on high-speed trains. Just because other countries are foolishly building high-speed rail lines doesn’t mean Canada should do so any more than the country should spend billions on other obsolete technologies such as telegraphs, electric typewriters, or slide rules. Taxpayers should tell the government not to waste money on such boondoggles.
Randal O’Toole is a transportation policy analyst and author of Building 21st Century Transit Systems for Canadian Cities. (20 pages) March 12,2024.
This article supplied by Troy Media.
Canadians must consider how closer EU ties could erode national control and economic sovereignty
As Prime Minister Mark Carney attempts to deepen Canada’s relationship with the European Union and other supranational institutions, Canadians should be asking a hard question: how much of our national independence are we prepared to give away? If you want a glimpse of what happens when a country loses control over its currency, trade and democratic accountability, you need only look to Bulgaria.
On June 8, 2025, thousands of Bulgarians took to the streets in front of the country’s National Bank. Their message was clear: they want to keep the lev and stop the forced adoption of the euro, scheduled for Jan. 1, 2026.
Bulgaria, a southeastern European country and EU member since 2007, is preparing to join the eurozone—a bloc of 20 countries that share the euro as a common currency. The move would bind Bulgaria to the economic decisions of the European Central Bank, replacing its national currency with one managed from Brussels and Frankfurt.
The protest movement is a vivid example of the tensions that arise when national identity collides with centralized policy-making. It was organized by Vazrazdane, a nationalist, eurosceptic political party that has gained support by opposing what it sees as the erosion of Bulgarian sovereignty through European integration. Similar demonstrations took place in cities across the country.
At the heart of the unrest is a call for democratic accountability. Vazrazdane leader Konstantin Kostadinov appealed directly to EU leaders, arguing that Bulgarians should not be forced into the eurozone without a public vote. He noted that in Italy, referendums on the euro were allowed with support from less than one per cent of citizens, while in Bulgaria, more than 10 per cent calling for a referendum have been ignored.
Protesters warned that abandoning the lev without a public vote would amount to a betrayal of democracy. “If there is no lev, there is no Bulgaria,” some chanted. For them, the lev is not just a currency: it is a symbol of national independence.
Their fears are not unfounded. Across the eurozone, several countries have experienced higher prices and reduced purchasing power after adopting the euro. The loss of domestic control over monetary policy has led to economic decisions being dictated from afar. Inflation, declining living standards and external dependency are real concerns.
Canada is not Bulgaria. But it is not immune to the same dynamics. Through trade agreements, regulatory convergence and global commitments, Canada has already surrendered meaningful control over its economy and borders. Canadians rarely debate these trade-offs publicly, and almost never vote on them directly.
Carney, a former central banker with deep ties to global finance, has made clear his intention to align more closely with the European Union on economic and security matters. While partnership is not inherently wrong, it must come with strong democratic oversight. Canadians should not allow fundamental shifts in sovereignty to be handed off quietly to international bodies or technocratic elites.
What’s happening in Bulgaria is not just about the euro—it’s about a people demanding the right to chart their own course. Canadians should take note. Sovereignty is not lost in one dramatic act. It erodes incrementally: through treaties we don’t read, agreements we don’t question, and decisions made without our consent.
If democracy and national control still matter to Canadians, they would do well to pay attention.
Isidoros Karderinis was born in Athens, Greece. He is a journalist, foreign press correspondent, economist, novelist and poet. He is accredited by the Greek Ministry of Foreign Affairs as a foreign press correspondent and has built a distinguished career in journalism and literature.
Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country.
From LifeSiteNews
Pornhub has taken down 91% of its images and videos and a huge portion of the last 9% will be gone by June 30 because it never verified the age or consent of those in the videos.
Despite an aggressive PR operation to persuade lawmakers that they have reformed, Pornhub is having a very bad year.
On May 29, it was reported that the European Commission is investigating the pornography giant and three other sites for failing to verify the ages of users.
The investigation, which comes after a letter sent to the companies last June asking what measures they have taken to protect minors, is being carried out under the Digital Services Act. The DSA came into effect in November 2022 and directs platforms to ensure “appropriate and proportionate measures to ensure a high level of privacy, safety, and security of minors, on their service” and implement “targeted measures to protect the rights of the child, including age verification and parental control tools, tools aimed at helping minors signal abuse or obtain support, as appropriate.”
According to France24: “The commission, the EU’s tech regulator, accused the platforms of not having ‘appropriate; age verification tools to prevent children from being exposed to pornography. An AFP correspondent only had to click a button on Tuesday stating they were older than 18 without any further checks to gain access to each of the four platforms.”
Indeed, Pornhub’s alleged safety mechanisms are a sick joke, and Pornhub executives have often revealed the real reason behind their opposition to safeguards: It limits their traffic.
Meanwhile, Pornhub — and other sites owned by parent company Aylo — are blocking their content in France in response to a new age verification law that came into effect on June 7. Solomon Friedman, Aylo’s point man in the Pornhub propaganda war, stated that the French law was “potentially privacy infringing” and “dangerous,” earning a scathing rebuke from France’s deputy minister for digital technology Clara Chappaz.
“We’re not stigmatizing adults who want to consume this content, but we mustn’t do so at the expense of protecting our children,” she said, adding later, “Lying when one does not want to comply with the law and holding others hostage is unacceptable. If Aylo would rather leave France than apply our law, they are free to do so.” According to the French media regulator Arcom, 2.3 million French minors visit pornographic sites every month.
Incidentally, anti-Pornhub activist Laila Mickelwait reported another major breakthrough on June 7. “P*rnhub is deleting much of what’s left of the of the site by June 30,” she wrote on X. “Together we have collectively forced this sex trafficking and rape crime scene to take down 91% of the entire site, totaling 50+ million videos and images. Now a significant portion of the remaining 9% will be GONE this month in what will be the second biggest takedown of P*rnhub content since December 2020.”
“The reason for the mass deletion is that they never verified the age or consent of the individuals depicted in the images and videos, and therefore the site is still awash with real sexual crime,” she added. “Since the fight began in 2020, 91% of P*rnhub has been taken down — over 50 million images and videos. Now a huge portion of the last 9% will be gone by June 30 because P*rnhub never verified the age or consent of those in the videos and the site is a crime scene.”
Mickelwait has long called for the shutdown of Pornhub and the prosecution of those involved in its operation. This second mass deletion of content, as welcome as it is, reeks of a desperate attempt to eliminate the evidence of Pornhub’s crimes.
How Chinese State-Linked Networks Replaced the Medellín Model with Global Logistics and Political Protection
New RCMP program steering opioid addicted towards treatment and recovery
We need an immigration policy that will serve all Canadians
Natural gas pipeline ownership spreads across 36 First Nations in B.C.
-
Crime2 days ago
How Chinese State-Linked Networks Replaced the Medellín Model with Global Logistics and Political Protection
-
Addictions2 days ago
New RCMP program steering opioid addicted towards treatment and recovery
-
Aristotle Foundation2 days ago
We need an immigration policy that will serve all Canadians
-
Business2 days ago
Natural gas pipeline ownership spreads across 36 First Nations in B.C.
-
Business22 hours ago
EU investigates major pornographic site over failure to protect children
-
Courageous Discourse2 days agoHealthcare Blockbuster – RFK Jr removes all 17 members of CDC Vaccine Advisory Panel!
-
Health1 day agoRFK Jr. purges CDC vaccine panel, citing decades of ‘skewed science’
-
Crime2 days agoLetter Shows Biden Administration Privately Warned B.C. on Fentanyl Threat Years Before Patel’s Public Bombshells