GF named my left testicle thundercles: high speed rail from LA to NY is dumb as shiat for sure. flying will always be faster and better for that route.
muck4doo: You know who else really loved using his train systems?
Babwa Wawa: HSR up and down the east coast would introduce a lot more efficiency into our economy. It would add at least 200 miles to every person's potential coverage area.
slayer199: Babwa Wawa: HSR up and down the east coast would introduce a lot more efficiency into our economy. It would add at least 200 miles to every person's potential coverage area.That makes more sense than a cross-country route...much like Europe (especially western Europe). Cleveland-Detroit-Chicago would make sense as well.Basically, if you're looking at the time to get to an airport, check-in, security, etc...you're looking at 2 hours added on each way. A high-speed train to Chicago from Detroit would take under 2 hours. A flight is 1 hour but add 2 hours to that time and it takes more time to fly.
jtown: cptjeff: jtown: Assuming that's what he meant (and I don't think it is), it contradicts nothing that I said. I said many people will have to drive for hours to get to a high speed rail station. Taking a slow, local train instead would take even longer than driving.Actually, not all that many. Most of the population of this country lives in cities these days, small town America makes up a pretty small proportion of the population. Yes, people without many transportation options would continue to not have many transportation options. Boo-farking-hoo. Don't like it, move to a city with more conveniences.So why should we spend $200,000,000,000 on something that will not provide any kind of advantage for travelers? It's not cheaper, it's not faster, and it's not more convenient.
FlashHarry: in before some conservatard divides the cost by the number of jobs created to come up with: "IT COSTS $300,000 PER JERB!!!!" forgetting, of course, that we also receive a shiny new piece of infrastructure that will generate revenue, facilitate commerce and make life easier for the public for a century afterwards.
Babwa Wawa: slayer199: Let me ask a question.What problem does this solve?Highly inefficient commuter air routes. Give you an example: I used to go down to DC from my home in Hartford for work. A quick hour long flight, but at the right time it's a 5 1/2 hour drive. I would drive more often than fly. The commuter routes were expensive, infrequent, and security lines in conjunction with travel time to the airport made it a wash. Rail was simply not an option, but should have been given the distance between the cities.A train route is different. A route with stops in Boston>Hartford>NYC>Philly>Baltimore>DC route will have an overwhelming number of passengers doing between 1-3 hops, and would be simultaneously competitive on a time basis for relatively long haul passengers. Remember that business travelers can count train travel time as productive time what with cell and internet access. Capacity is easier and cheaper to add with trains rather than planes.Nowadays I travel a lot to Atlanta, Charlotte, Philly, and NYC, DC, Chicago, Dallas, SoCal, and NoCal. For NYC and Philly, I either Amtrak or drive it. It takes far longer to take the train, but I'm productive - I can be on email, do designs, etc. What intrigues me is a potential 8 hour train trip to Atlanta. I may or may not take HSR to Atlanta, but I'm sure that DC folks would take a 3 hour HSR route to Atlanta. I can fly to Atlanta in about 3 hours direct, but I have to pad about 3 hours on that for various crap around the fact of flying. HSR would reduce my total flights about 20%, and would reduce my car travel by about 80%.HSR up and down the east coast would introduce a lot more efficiency into our economy. It would add at least 200 miles to every person's potential coverage area.
Dommo: The big problem is that High Speed rail needs dedicated lines, specifically made for high-speed trains.Our rail is optimized for moving freight, and you'd be talking some epic scale eminent domain and costs to buy up the needed land for high speed rail lines. I don't know how this could ever be done in any area that's substantially built up like Chicago or New York. The costs just for land and right of ways would be astronomical.Airports exist for a reason.
moothemagiccow: And airports must be huge and miles outside population centers. Ever notice there is no convenient airport to NYC? You can't even just slap on chains and start the plane in a snowstorm. Everything has its drawbacks.
bhcompy: LAX, LGB, ONT, BUR, and SNA are all in the major population centers in LA.
imgod2u: doyner: DamnYankees: doyner: DamnYankees: muck4doo: Money doesn't grow on trees.Money is paper. It literally does grow on trees. I've never understood this expression.Actually, US currency is made from cotton and linen....or electrons really.So plants, not paper. I stand corrected.Meh. Most of our money is imaginary anyway.*all* of money is imaginary; it only has value in that people believe it has value.
slayer199: GAT_00: And you can declare it as uneconomical without any knowledge of the cost of a high speed ticket, how?Look at the existing costs. It's already $218 to take a train to LA from NYC. Are you even going to try and argue that it will be LESS expensive with $200billion dollars of new infrastructure?
muck4doo: cameroncrazy1984: muck4doo: My question is how much would tickets cost after spending 200 billion to make it happen? Like others said, this isn't a high speed railway through France or Belgium.Like others have said, why not? Why CAN'T it be like that? Nobody says you have to use the whole system all at once.I'd like it to be like that. I have already said so. Next trip to NY or San Jose I would love to take the train. But face it, 200 billion is a lot of money to make it happen. You can bring up our interstate highways, fact is, they are already there. People can drive or fly as it is. Amtrack is too damn expensive for the time and travel. I would like to see high speed rail, but I just don't see how it will be cost efficient compared to what we have now. This isn't Europe or Japan with a bunch of large population centers close to each other.
slayer199: Of course the bigger issue, which has been brought up by others is that we have a massive deficit and all the libs here are in favor of adding to it.Mind blown.
Dead for Tax Reasons: DamnYankees: Dead for Tax Reasons: Nah too many wasteful stops in the middle. Up and down the coasts is fine, but crosscountry you need express from ny to chicago and maybe stop at denver then on to the left coastDo you know how trains works? There are express lines and local lines. They run on the same tracks (basically). There's very little downside to including more local stops if there's sufficient demand. Once you build the express line the infrastructure is already in place other than the stations themselves, which aren't that expensive."Next stop, west bumblefark, indiana"
Baryogenesis: but the only thing folks like you can think about is the deficit even though borrowing money is dirt cheap right now.
Baryogenesis: We have a struggling economy and slow job recovery, but the only thing folks like you can think about is the deficit even though borrowing money is dirt cheap right now. Maybe high speed rail is a good project, maybe it's not, but we do need to boost our economy and infrastructure is a great way to do that. How about investing in solar, wind and improving our electric grid?
slayer199: And the debt doesn't matter?
slayer199: Baryogenesis: We have a struggling economy and slow job recovery, but the only thing folks like you can think about is the deficit even though borrowing money is dirt cheap right now. Maybe high speed rail is a good project, maybe it's not, but we do need to boost our economy and infrastructure is a great way to do that. How about investing in solar, wind and improving our electric grid?And the debt doesn't matter?
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Jun 28 2017 00:52:13
Runtime: 0.416 sec (416 ms)