Both sides must hold their own opinions and have different views on this matter. From the passenger's point of view, the function of dining car should be to provide passengers with a place to eat. There is no reason to use the dining car for other purposes. Passengers should enjoy this right when paying for meals, just as waiters who go to restaurants will definitely not let customers eat standing up or pack away, so they should not use the resources enjoyed by passengers to seek benefits at all. If we consider it from the perspective of the railway department, it must be another way of saying that the daily meal time is relatively short, and fewer passengers come to eat during non-meal time. Since high-speed rail provides high-end services, why not use existing resources to provide better services for passengers? Changing to a "teahouse" is also a voluntary choice for tourists to spend. It is a bit far-fetched to mention compulsory consumption in the news, and professionally trained high-speed rail flight attendants should not do such a thing. As for whether the mentioned price has been approved by the price bureau, it is estimated that it can only be understood through the railway bureau.

Everything has two sides. The setting of the "teahouse" on the high-speed rail also conforms to the market demand. Citizens' consumption is based on the principle of voluntariness. The high-speed train sells "tea houses". If the passengers don't want to sit, the flight attendants won't force them. The railway department needs to further refine the service link on the issue of "teahouse" so that more passengers can enjoy a happy journey away from "teahouse".