溫哥華老友記討論區 - Powered by Discuz! Board

標題: To 高鐵Peter：一天燒1億京滬高鐵憂錢景 [打印本頁]

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-4-11 00:05 標題: To 高鐵Peter：一天燒1億京滬高鐵憂錢景

http://udn.com/NEWS/MAINLAND/MAI3/6265196.shtml

一天燒1億京滬高鐵憂錢景
【經濟日報╱記者林則宏／綜合報導】

2011.04.11 02:48 am

京滬高鐵將在6月通車，但大陸媒體指出，即便不考慮收回投資、不計算折舊，光運營成本和利息支出，京滬高鐵每日固定開銷就達人民幣2,630萬元（約新台幣1.16億元），未來「錢」途堪慮。

連接北京與上海這兩座中國最重要城市的京滬高速鐵路，從北京南站出發至上海虹橋站，全長1,318公里，貫穿北京、天津、上海三大直轄市及河北、山東、安徽、江蘇四省。通車後，從北京搭高鐵將可在五小時內抵達上海。

京滬高鐵總投資高達人民幣2,209億元（新台幣9,800億元），華夏時報指出，若按大陸鐵道部的計算方式，不將建設投資納入盈虧計算，也不考慮攤提折舊費用，光是日常營運成本和償還貸款利息，每年固定開銷高達人民幣96億元，即每天至少2,630萬元。

以現行大陸高鐵二等艙票價每公里人民幣0.484元計算，京滬高鐵全程票價約人民幣600元（約新台幣2,650元）。京滬高鐵將採用的「CRH380A動車組」共有16節車廂，可搭載1,004人。即便每班列車都客滿且全部乘客都是由起點坐到終點，每號列車的票價收入也才人民幣60萬元。

這代表未來京滬鐵路必須每天滿載營運44趟，才可能應付每天的營運成本及利息等基本開銷。北京交通大學經濟管理學院副教授李紅昌指出，「京滬高鐵這種長、大幹線怎麼可能保證這樣的密度，這是很荒謬的。」

如果再考慮每年折舊率約3%至4%，京滬高鐵每年固定資產折舊費用大約是人民幣66億元至88億元（約新台幣292億元至389億元），且日後維修費用在通車後將會逐年增加。

由於京滬高鐵是委託給鐵路局代為運營，按京津城際鐵路委託費和武廣高鐵的委託費估算，京滬高鐵未來每年還得支付約人民幣30億元（約新台幣133億元）的委託運營費給鐵路局。

隨著京滬高鐵通車日期日益逼近，不少人也開始對大陸未來如何支撐這個昂貴的運輸工具感到憂心。大陸發改委綜合運輸研究所研究員董焰表示，「我覺得它的盈利狀況很難說會好。」

【2011/04/11 經濟日報】@ http://udn.com/

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-4-11 01:09

hahaha, the highspeed railway is good for commerce, tourism and environment. Just look at the highspeed railway between big cities like Tokyo and Osaka, which receive high praise. More highspeed railway still needed to be built. Very well done China again.

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-4-11 01:18

Honestly, I don't think the Chinese government would really care whether this line will be profitable. It will subsidize it anyways. Just like the magnetic train in Shanghai Pudong. It was built never meant to be profitable.

It is considered a strategic development. But you may not like it anyways.

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-4-11 01:57

Honestly, I don't think the Chinese government would really care whether this line will be profitabl ...
rockypath 發表於 2011-4-11 01:18

China just cannot accommodate 1 billion cars on the road. That is the why the long term strategy is to have tens of millions of people using public transit, like railways and subways.
When the oil prices increase more in the future, the US economy will be destroyed since they are too dependent on cars. But the Chinese have electric powered highspeed railway, of which the energy source is much more flexible.

作者: soli 時間: 2011-4-11 05:04

本帖最後由 soli 於 2011-4-11 05:06 編輯

報紙個名就叫經濟日報﹐但講既野就一D經濟sense 都無﹐台灣報紙就係o甘既水準? ( 力仔更加沒水準係人所共知的啦~

)
首先一日來回22趟﹐即是差不多45分鐘才一班﹐會很困難嗎? 我們說的是北京去上海呢。
仲有﹐鐵路收入就淨靠車票?
仲有﹐還款利息真是這麼高嗎? 還是沒扣除通脹? 我之前看﹐鐵路部貸款都是超低息的。不算投資回報的話﹐為甚麼算還款利息?
京滬高鐵會虧本的唯一原因是斗不過民航客機﹐但除著燃油價大幅上脹﹐再加上國民消費力上升﹐運輸需求增加﹐高鐵前景都算樂觀的。

作者: sheep 時間: 2011-4-11 06:05

運輸需求增加.
soli 發表於 2011-4-11 05:04

有腦筋
高鐵做埋貨運

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-4-11 09:43

本帖最後由 rockypath 於 2011-4-11 09:47 編輯

有腦筋
高鐵做埋貨運
sheep 發表於 2011-4-11 06:05

高鐵完全應該做埋貨運。速遞服務成本就可以大大降低和提高效率，好多大件貨品都可以得到速遞服務。速遞服務對提高社會經濟效率有好多幫助。

一個直接的效果就係可能促進 Online Business 的繁榮。到時你應該考慮下是否要投資淘寶網。

作者: somewhereintime 時間: 2011-4-11 10:03

物流?

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-4-11 10:06

Honestly, I don't think the Chinese government would really care whether this line will be profitable. It will subsidize it anyways. Just like the magnetic train in Shanghai Pudong. It was built never meant to be profitable.
rockypath 發表於 2011-4-11 01:18

擺明蝕水蝕到嘔血都要做，阿爺真係天才。而你條粉腸明明係擦鞋擦到出晒面都仲要死坳自己係「中立」，你亦都係天才。

（當然，如果你所講嘅「中立」係指「站立於中方」果一便嘅話，咁就自然順理成章，而你亦更順理成章地無恥。）

-力

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-4-11 10:19

本帖最後由 rockypath 於 2011-4-11 10:25 編輯

擺明蝕水蝕到嘔血都要做，阿爺真係天才。而你條粉腸明明係擦鞋擦到出晒面都仲要死坳自己係「中立」，你亦 ...
Lik 發表於 2011-4-11 10:06

Why don't you say the same thing to your God Father - the US government?

Didn't the US government decide to build a spider-web highway network to cover the whole US for its strategic needs and developments last century? Why don't you question how it would make the roads profitable?

How often did you drive on those roads? Just try on the roads especially in states which are in the middle of the US map. You often will find you are one of only a few cars on the road. But the roads were maintained under very well condition. Why don't you accuse the US government for 浪費民脂民膏？

真係想用粗口鬧Ｘ你。想正正常常討論下都要來搞事。

作者: ricrick 時間: 2011-4-11 10:48

阿爺大把錢掉落海，都吾會搞好平民百姓民工的真實實際需要，總之，做奴隸的人們，含X啦

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-4-11 10:58

阿爺大把錢掉落海，都吾會搞好平民百姓民工的真實實際需要，總之，做奴隸的人們，含X啦 ...
ricrick 發表於 2011-4-11 10:48

你不如問下當年台灣搞的十大建設對成就台灣成為亞洲四小龍之一有何意義？

沒有經濟發展，你去邊混錢搞好民生？唔通靠印銀紙？就算中國想做都唔得！人民幣唔係硬通貨。

如果沒有投資，何來經濟發展？得閑補充下經濟知識先出來講野啦。

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-4-11 11:35

Why don't you say the same thing to your God Father - the US government?

Didn't the US government decide to build a spider-web highway network to cover the whole US for its strategic needs and developments last century? Why don't you question how it would make the roads profitable?

How often did you drive on those roads? Just try on the roads especially in states which are in the middle of the US map. You often will find you are one of only a few cars on the road. But the roads were maintained under very well condition. Why don't you accuse the US government for 浪費民脂民膏？

真係想用粗口鬧Ｘ你。想正正常常討論下都要來搞事。
rockypath 發表於 2011-4-11 10:19

仆街，

Interstate 係美國全國運輸同交通網絡嘅命脈，而且亦係國防建設，你攞來同高鐵呢啲洗腳唔抹腳嘅假大空面子工程來比例簡直係天大笑話。

而且高鐵嘅工程監管有嚴重問題，偷工減料嘅情況嚴重，我地又睇吓過多幾年佢開始變舊嘅時候會爆啲咩屎渠出來？

可憐嘅係最後又只係肥咗啲 cap 水嘅幹部，但卻害咗啲無辜嘅百姓。

-力

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-4-11 13:13

本帖最後由 rockypath 於 2011-4-11 13:16 編輯

仆街，

Interstate 係美國全國運輸同交通網絡嘅命脈，而且亦係國防建設，你攞來同高鐵呢啲洗腳唔抹腳嘅假 ...
Lik 發表於 2011-4-11 11:35

不學無術的白癡仔仲出來獻醜？

首先，中國從建國以來就已經明確發展鐵路是建設貫通全國交通命脈的選擇。公路網只能做為鐵路網的補充。中國鐵路為提高運力提升速度幾次了？如要繼續提高運輸能力，發展高鐵是唯一的選擇。

第二，國家的發展計劃不會也不應因有貪污腐敗問題就不進行，因為這是涉及到國家和人民的將來的事情。如果你把貪污腐敗當成計劃中的額外附加成本，那你就可以分辨輕重緩急。

第三，所有國家的發展計劃不論是中國、美國、英國或日本；不論是國家發展計劃或跨國公司的發展計劃，他們都會預留一些預算給 "black-hole"。有些開銷他們是知道的，有些成本是消失在 ”黑洞“而沒法跟蹤的。我家的一些世交就直接參與過一些公司的超大型的跨國發展項目（幾十億美金）。在印度和台灣他們就領教了不少。那公司是否就應放棄發展？

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-4-11 13:51

鐵路網對中國來講確係比公路網來得合適，但成本咁高、效益咁低嘅高鐵投資又是否值得？響 law of diminishing return 嘅大前題底下，當鐵路嘅速度已經提升到一個水平，需要問嘅係全國鐵路網仲有無須要繼續為咗慳多果少少時間而去投放多咁大筆錢。唔好忘記，高鐵極速根本唔能夠行得耐，因為加減速須時，而每一次停站亦意味住高速持行嘅時間越來越少。再者，鐵路交通最大嘅用家係每年春運同十一黃金周嘅平民百姓，特別係民工。百姓同民公嘅生活近呢十幾廿年生活覺係富裕咗，但高鐵係高消費交通工具，咁又邊度適合呢一批最大用家嘅消費力呢？而鐵路局卻偏偏為咗谷高高鐵乘客率而對削減普通火車嘅班次（呢樣野我之前都講過好多次），咁樣唔係與民為敵又係乜野呢？

你所謂嘅 blackhole costs，響中國大陸因為層層 cap 水層層貪，所以絕對會比其他地方嚴重（咁不過我諗都會好過啲第三世界國家嘅...)。而且，你仲未計當中因為偷工減料而所帶來嘅損失（包括好有可能發生嘅意外而引至人命傷亡）。鐵路路基打得唔好、路軌剛水有問題、監工審核無人理等等全部報紙都有報導過，問題只係睇吓幾時爆煲、爆屎渠而以。而且高鐵行得快，列車一旦出事嘅話，乘客絕對係全部冚包散。我想問你，人命呢個 cost 你又點計？

當然，響中共眼中，人命絕對係唔值錢，除非呢條命係高級幹部又或者係接近權力核心嘅人同家人嘅果條命...

-力

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-4-11 13:58

本帖最後由 rockypath 於 2011-4-11 14:06 編輯

鐵路網對中國來講確係比公路網來得合適，但成本咁高、效益咁低嘅高鐵投資又是否值得？響 law of diminishin ...
Lik 發表於 2011-4-11 13:51

第一，又見不到你去問美國當年花那麼多錢建公路網是否值得？他們的成本就低嗎？他們現在每條高速公路都是滿的嗎？

第二，你這個白癡又想混淆視聽。貪污和工程質量是個問題，但這不表明國家的發展方向和策略是錯的。

如果讓你這個白癡當國家主席，中國還不知要沉淪到什麼程度。

P.S. 你憑什麼說中國的黑洞問題一定比其他國家嚴重？你有經歷過嗎？親身經歷過的人都沒出聲，你這個不停侮辱本民族的走狗就敢不停出來亂吠。告訴你，許多國家的貪污要比中國嚴重得多得多。

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-4-11 15:13

第一，又見不到你去問美國當年花那麼多錢建公路網是否值得？他們的成本就低嗎？他們現在每條高速公路都是滿的嗎？
rockypath 發表於 2011-4-11 13:58

仆街，

你唔撚識歷史就咪撚出來拋書包話美國 Interstate Highway 點點點啦！老美二、三十年代果陣連一個全國公路網都無，如果唔係 Eisenhower 又點會大力推薦去起 Interstate？相比之下，中國大陸本身已經有頗巨規模嘅鐵路網，而需要做嘅係廣大服務範圍（例如發展青藏鐵路、帶動大西北等等）同流量，而唔係搞埋啲假大空、無人搭嘅高速昂貴野（高鐵、磁浮等等）。

而且，你條契弟唔好以為我睇唔見你無回應我所指出嘅乘客負唔負擔得起坐高鐵。家陣鐵一般嘅事實就係高鐵普遍乘客量非常低。請你答我，起咗出來，但啲人坐唔起，咁又起來有咩用？

混淆視聽果個係你。無料答唔到我嘅指控就唔該你收皮！

-力

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-4-11 16:04

本帖最後由 rockypath 於 2011-4-11 16:11 編輯

力仔，你有病就快Ｄ醫。

美國Ｄ公路網咩時候起和集中發展的？

長遠來講，高鐵將逐步取代傳統鐵路。呢個係不可逆轉的世界發展潮流和趨勢。請問想當年平民老百姓會唔會估到如今可以坐得起飛機？

美國現在都要發展高鐵網絡，你點解唔同你的主子講－你地已經有左好龐大的公路網，唔洗再浪費納稅人的金錢啦。。。仆街。。。。。。。！

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-4-11 17:00

本帖最後由 peter236 於 2011-4-11 17:02 編輯

報紙個名就叫經濟日報﹐但講既野就一D經濟sense 都無﹐台灣報紙就係o甘既水準? ( 力仔更加沒水準係人所共知 ...
京滬高鐵會虧本的唯一原因是斗不過民航客機﹐但除著燃油價大幅上脹﹐再加上國民消費力上升﹐運輸需求增加﹐高鐵前景都算樂觀的。
soli 發表於 2011-4-11 05:04

Taking the highspeed railway is a lot more convenient, because of the security checks at the airports.

China just cannot accommodate 1 billion cars on the road. That is the why the long term strategy is to have tens of millions of people using public transit, like railways.

When the oil prices increase more in the future, the US economy will be destroyed since they are too dependent on cars. But the Chinese have electric powered highspeed railway, of which the energy source is much more flexible.

作者: mcjohnjohn 時間: 2011-4-11 21:14

平又話人平而會有虧損, 貴又話人貴令d 小市民負擔唔起.
就可以隔離屋陳師奶尋日見到張師奶買條紅衫就話人cheap, 今日見到張師奶買條星斑就話人扮富貴, 其實都只不過係睇張師奶唔順眼之麻. 哈哈~

其實rockpath 兄真係慘, 下下都比人jer 住哂, 搞到打d 野都開始亂黎, 越來越多破綻.
學下人地soli 兄咁, 打左一篇反駁既野都冇乜人敢回應, 呢d 先係高招!

不過, 睇住rockpath 兄比人丙都幾搞笑既.

作者: sheep 時間: 2011-4-11 21:22

回復 5# soli

廣告收入係可觀
不過係取決於接觸面有幾廣
香港地鐵就揾到啖食
高鐵無人坐
邊個會去賣廣告吖
唔好玩喇

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-4-11 21:26

回復 soli

廣告收入係可觀
不過係取決於接觸面有幾廣
香港地鐵就揾到啖食
高鐵無人坐
邊個會去賣廣 ...
sheep 發表於 2011-4-11 21:22

高鐵無人坐? You went to China to see all the highspeed railway yourself? How do you know?

作者: sheep 時間: 2011-4-11 21:29

高鐵無人坐? You went to China to see all the highspeed railway yourself? How do you know?
peter236 發表於 2011-4-11 21:26

係人都知
十卡九空啦
摷番啲舊post睇吓啦

作者: mcjohnjohn 時間: 2011-4-11 21:37

回復 soli

廣告收入係可觀
不過係取決於接觸面有幾廣
香港地鐵就揾到啖食
高鐵無人坐
邊個會去賣廣 ...
sheep 發表於 2011-4-12 13:22

殊... 高鐵有唔少人坐架, 唔好咁大聲, 不過soli 應該唔會好似rockpath 兄咁針對人地一點而傾盡全力去反撲的. 仲有, 乜soli 兄有話廣告收入多咩?

蝕又好, 大陸唔係蝕唔起, 仲有而定蝕唔代表將來都會蝕, 而且我覺得只要對社會發展有利, 都不失為一項正確既投資. 唔通好似香港政府咁, 為左唔想蝕錢, 就將d 隧道專營權"賣"比私人機構咩? 唔咪仲衰, 乜野control 權都冇哂.

作者: mcjohnjohn 時間: 2011-4-11 21:40

係人都知
十卡九空啦
摷番啲舊post睇吓啦
sheep 發表於 2011-4-12 13:29

"十卡九空"同"十卡九滿"果d 都係騙局黎架乍... 千祈唔好信.
支持高鐵就梗係話"十卡九滿", 反對高鐵就梗係話"十卡九空". o係一千班車, 容乜易搵到一班係"十卡九空"or"十卡九滿", 根住影張相就可以以偏概全. 呢d 屎橋我都識得出賣啦!

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-4-11 21:42

係人都知
十卡九空啦
摷番啲舊post睇吓啦
sheep 發表於 2011-4-11 21:29

係人都知? Is this what you could come up with?
We need to see passengers statistics on every train and every highspeed railway line, over the next 20 - 30 years.

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-4-11 21:50

本帖最後由 rockypath 於 2011-4-11 22:07 編輯

搞到打d 野都開始亂黎, 越來越多破綻
mcjohnjohn 發表於 2011-4-11 21:14

I also want to know what do you mean by saying - "打d 野都開始亂黎, 越來越多破綻"?

The things I said or my Chinese? If there is a problem with what I said, why don't you point out directly?

If it is my Chinese, sorry, it is not perfect anyways. However, I believe my writing shouldn't bee too bad in term of writing skills (style) even though there could be some grammar mistakes.

Just for the sakes of easy reading for those idiots.

作者: mcjohnjohn 時間: 2011-4-11 22:01

I also want to know what do you mean by saying - "打d 野都開始亂黎, 越來越多破綻"?

The things I ...
rockypath 發表於 2011-4-12 13:50

講清楚d 啦, 不過你千祈唔好覺得好hurt wor.

小弟好多時都得rockypath 兄所講既野都冇point 之餘又冇準, 其實冇point 同冇準都冇問題, 但衰在仲要同人拗... 大佬, 冇point 冇準又點會夠人拗wor, 咁就有好多地方比人反駁law.

小弟提議rockypath 真係可以參考一下soli 兄既post, 呢條友仔賤得黎都真係好有point, 真係令對手招架不住, 睇到我呢d 牆頭二打六都不禁拍案叫絕架!

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-4-11 22:12

本帖最後由 rockypath 於 2011-4-11 22:19 編輯

講清楚d 啦, 不過你千祈唔好覺得好hurt wor.

小弟好多時都得rockypath 兄所講既野都冇point 之餘又冇準, ...
mcjohnjohn 發表於 2011-4-11 22:01

Why don't you point out which part of I said is 冇point 之餘又冇準?

In fact, what I wanted to do was actually point out Lik 仔冇point 之餘又冇準。

Whether you like my style or not is not my concern. I am only interested in whether those idiots can answer my questions. Are you calling Lik's 流氓無賴式的答復 rational 反駁? Sorry, I don't think it will fit my appetite.

Why don't you demonstrate what is called "有point 之餘又有準“？ The stage is yours, don't disappoint me.

作者: mcjohnjohn 時間: 2011-4-11 22:19

Why don't you point out which part of I said is 冇point 之餘又冇準?
rockypath 發表於 2011-4-12 14:12

因為我唔想花時間去進入一個無止境既arguement 入面.

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-4-11 22:28

本帖最後由 rockypath 於 2011-4-11 22:31 編輯

因為我唔想花時間去進入一個無止境既arguement 入面.
mcjohnjohn 發表於 2011-4-11 22:19

The more Lik tris to argue with me, the more he will display his stupidity and ignorant.

That is the game I play with him.

By the way, if, in any case, you may feel the thing I said about my family friends' experience in India and Taiwan is fake. It is actually true story but not something I made up just tring to argue with Lik. I was about to share with Lik, but he never asked.

The story about India is actually very interesting. The 所謂民主制度 actually becomes a system to ensure 大家齊齊有分Ｃａｐ水。 It is too bad that Lik never asked.

作者: mcjohnjohn 時間: 2011-4-11 23:07

回復 31# rockypath
我好like 你呢句 - "The more Lik tris to argue with me, the more he will display his stupidity and ignorant."

其實你有冇諗過相同既事情正在發生緊o係你身上?
我唔知, 亦唔想再解釋點解我有呢個睇法, 可能我份人太牆頭, 所以就反正覺得你地好傻好固執啦. 點都好啦, 我完全冇諗過唔比大家講野(我亦冇咁既權), 我只係分享一下我既意見. 如果你係Peter 仔果d, 我真係由得你自生自滅啦~ 嘻嘻!

作者: somewhereintime 時間: 2011-4-11 23:15

I attend and chair board meetings every week,
another 3 meeting scheduled tomorrow; cannot imagine
arguing with pointless people.

作者: somewhereintime 時間: 2011-4-11 23:31

回復 32# mcjohnjohn

You know, I know and everyone know,
only someone does not want to face it.

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-4-11 23:59

回復 rockypath
其實你有冇諗過相同既事情正在發生緊o係你身上?
mcjohnjohn 發表於 2011-4-11 23:07

Sorry, I don't really care what will happen on me. I just speak what I know and what I believe in.

作者: mcjohnjohn 時間: 2011-4-12 00:14

Sorry, I don't really care what will happen on me. I just speak what I know and what I believe in. ...
rockypath 發表於 2011-4-12 15:59

如果人地都係just speak what he knows and what he believes in 呢?
咁有冇問題? 誰是誰非?

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-4-12 08:53

本帖最後由 rockypath 於 2011-4-12 09:07 編輯

如果人地都係just speak what he knows and what he believes in 呢?
咁有冇問題? 誰是誰非? ...
mcjohnjohn 發表於 2011-4-12 00:14

Did I say there is a problem?

I had said before (if you missed it), some people enjoy displaying one side of a story and I just display the counter side of it. People on LYK will make their own judgement.

Some people 借民主自由和社會不公為名打擊其他網友推行一言堂實行討論區專政。 I just enjoy playing with those LYK 惡霸.

歡迎光臨溫哥華老友記討論區 (http://www.loyaukee.com/forum/)