Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Rail travel in Europe and Japan is very popular, even more than flying. And does not suck by any means.
Population density.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cisco kid
being felt up and degraded by a bunch of power-mad TSA agents
Hyperbole meter pegged at 11.
If you happen to fall into the minority that requires a pat-down and your psych is so fragile as to feel degraded by it then that is your personal self-esteem issues, not an issue to me.
If you happen to fall into the minority that requires a pat-down and your psych is so fragile as to feel degraded by it then that is your personal self-esteem issues, not an issue to me.
Hmm. So what exactly did this 3 year old girl do to deserve a pat-down and getting molested by a TSA agent?
I suppose the toddler fits their profile of a terrorist, eh?
Rail travel in Europe and Japan is very popular, even more than flying. And does not suck by any means.
There are several problems with what you desire. Europe and Japan are made up of much smaller geographic areas than the US is. Rail travel remained popular in both areas while air travel was taking over here. The HSR you are so excited about would have to be up and down our two coasts but tax money from the rest of us would have to pay for it.
Your way sounds so good but how long does it take from one coast to the other by rail today? How many lines are there that go from coast to coast? One poster mentioned that maintenance of runways is a lot cheaper than building and maintaining rails.
Do you have any idea how much it would cost to build totally new lines for your HSRs? Totally new road beds and rails would be needed since what we have can't stand up to 200 mph trains. I think you are thinking like an Obama socialist that those who don't get to use them will have to pay for the HSRs on the coasts.
Well if OP opts to pay for it all the with a massive higher tax rate that He/She choose to pay just to build a national HSR system and infastructure to support mit all....Well then I will ride once and while... if it is cheaper than comimerical flights and gets point A and to point B at about the same time as a jet then I will pay to ride it it once and while when it makes sense to do so..
I mean if a few million people choose to have their taxes raised to build it and other can people can opt out if they want (Ie.. not made a mandatory tax increase to build it by the local State or Federal Govronment) ... then I say go for it and build it...
There are several problems with what you desire. Europe and Japan are made up of much smaller geographic areas than the US is. Rail travel remained popular in both areas while air travel was taking over here. The HSR you are so excited about would have to be up and down our two coasts but tax money from the rest of us would have to pay for it.
Your way sounds so good but how long does it take from one coast to the other by rail today? How many lines are there that go from coast to coast? One poster mentioned that maintenance of runways is a lot cheaper than building and maintaining rails.
Few people have to fly coast to coast. You're using an extreme example as a strawman. The majority of flights are regional, which is ideally suited for high speed rail. Flying is more suited to very long distance trips (ie: coast to coast and international overseas trips).
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy
Do you have any idea how much it would cost to build totally new lines for your HSRs? Totally new road beds and rails would be needed since what we have can't stand up to 200 mph trains. I think you are thinking like an Obama socialist that those who don't get to use them will have to pay for the HSRs on the coasts.
How come every other developed country in the world can afford to build HSR but the richest country in the world can't? I guess we're too busy flushing our money down the toilet of Iraq and Afghanistan. If Bush and now Obama weren't so busy draining the national treasury by fighting endless, useless wars in the ME, we could afford to build a modern national high speed rail system.
Location: planet octupulous is nearing earths atmosphere
13,621 posts, read 12,738,345 times
Reputation: 20050
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrowGirl
I love traveling by rail....definitely my favorite form of transportation. But sometimes time restraints are such that you have to suck it up and fly. Especially here in Florida. At least when I was living in the Northeast you could move around a little by rail (ie. Boston to NYC, DC).
High-speed rail is not feasible in the US other than in the Boston-Washington corridor. Perhaps you HSR fans should compare population density in different areas of the US compared to population density in, say, Europe and Japan.
Between the airsickness, bad food (if it is even offered), cramped seats, poor customer service, endless delays and cancellations, having to remove your shoes at the security gate and who knows what other items of clothing, being felt up and degraded by a bunch of power-mad TSA agents, flying in the US has become a form of sadomasochism and torture.
But people are still largely opposed to high-speed rail? Go figure.
Most people fly when they need too not because it's fun. If you need to get somewhere close they drive their cars. That is until the green kooks outlaw cars. How much fun will it be if everyone started taking rail? You gotta get in the car and drive to the station, find a parking spot, walk to the terminal, go through the screeners that will be moved from the airports to the rails termnals because they are union and will work somewhere, then wait your turn to get on. Then when you arrive at your destination how to you get to where you need to go? This is also why many choose to drive when they want to go somewhere a couple hundred miles from where they start. I also would like to know who will pay for a his speed rail line from LA to NY??
High-speed rail is not feasible in the US other than in the Boston-Washington corridor. Perhaps you HSR fans should compare population density in different areas of the US compared to population density in, say, Europe and Japan.
It would be dumb to build HSR through the midwest. They're not called the flyover states for nothing. But population densities on the west coast and east coasts is more than adequate to support high-speed rail.
Example:
The population density of California is comparable to the country of Spain, which has a large HSR system.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
