Of course not. High-speed and low-price, low-speed and low-price, everyone can get what they need. This has once again settled the controversy over high-speed rail. It has greatly facilitated people’s travel and promoted economic development and industrial transfer. How can it be called a big waste?
When the income of Chinese people gradually matches that of developed countries, low-speed and low-price EMUs will naturally be gradually eliminated.
The point on the first floor is wrong. It cannot be said that because of corruption, roads will not be built. As we all know, if you want to be rich, build roads first. Leaving aside the issue of intellectual property rights for the moment, it is almost impossible to build the road itself without borrowing money. But taking out a loan to build a road becomes a toll road, and once it is collected, it is endless. High-speed rail can run cheap high-speed trains, which is much better than roads. Of course, whether it is a loan to build a road or a railway, the people will ultimately pay the bill, but building a road must be profitable, so the fees are endless. Building a railway is a public welfare, as long as it does not cause a loss. In this way, it is self-evident that whether building roads or railways is more beneficial to the people. Of course, you can say it’s a big deal if we don’t build roads. Then, there is no need to develop the economy. People in ancient times can still survive, right?