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.
OK let me try to explain this to you one more time. When assessing the costs and benefits of any kind of transportation system--or any system, for that matter--one MUST look at all the costs and all the benefits. You are intentionally focusing on the former and ignoring the latter. There are real, live cost-savings benefits associated with rail lines, including, but not limited to, reduced pollution, reduced gasoline expenses, reduced vehicle wear and tear, increased traffic throughput, increased property value (this is a big one), increased mobility for those who struggle to afford private transportation, increased safety including fewer emergency room expenses, reduced stress, and I could go on. And I haven't even talked about how much building all this stuff would boost our economy, especially at a time when we could use a boost.
Why are you blatantly, willfully, intentionally ignoring all this, corndog? Why are you so enamored with the price tag and nothing but the price tag?
Reduced pollution - Quantify this. Reduced gasoline expenses - Who does this benefit? The individual who spends that "saved money" on HSR fares? There is no savings here. Reduced vehicle wear and tear - Again, who saves anything? The presence of HSR does not reduce the wear on my car unless I pay for a ticket and decide to ride the train vs. driving my car. Spending money to save money? Ummm... sure. Increased traffic throughput - How many cars would a ATL-CLT rail line take off the road each year? Is it even Increased property value (this is a big one) - A HSR rail line will make property more valuable? What about all of the property along the line that loses value? Funny that you ignore that reality. Increased mobility for those who struggle to afford private transportation - If only there was another method of transportation available... I guess the air travel, which is price competitive with rail and bus travel (which is far, far cheaper than HSR travel) don't count. HSR as a method for moving those with low incomes? LOL. Look at the operating costs and capital expenditures and explain to me how this benefits low income earners. Increased safety including fewer emergency room expenses - Now you are reaching and it is comical. Reduced stress- LOL. The federal government should invest billions of dollars to reduce your stress. LOL. And I haven't even talked about how much building all this stuff would boost our economy, especially at a time when we could use a boost. - So we should print more money and go into more debt for something to boost the economy? Again, you show a lack of attachment to reality with your fanatical love of the choo-choo train loses another thread.
Reduced pollution - Quantify this. Reduced gasoline expenses - Who does this benefit? The individual who spends that "saved money" on HSR fares? There is no savings here. Reduced vehicle wear and tear - Again, who saves anything? The presence of HSR does not reduce the wear on my car unless I pay for a ticket and decide to ride the train vs. driving my car. Spending money to save money? Ummm... sure. Increased traffic throughput - How many cars would a ATL-CLT rail line take off the road each year? Is it even Increased property value (this is a big one) - A HSR rail line will make property more valuable? What about all of the property along the line that loses value? Funny that you ignore that reality. Increased mobility for those who struggle to afford private transportation - If only there was another method of transportation available... I guess the air travel, which is price competitive with rail and bus travel (which is far, far cheaper than HSR travel) don't count. HSR as a method for moving those with low incomes? LOL. Look at the operating costs and capital expenditures and explain to me how this benefits low income earners. Increased safety including fewer emergency room expenses - Now you are reaching and it is comical. Reduced stress- LOL. The federal government should invest billions of dollars to reduce your stress. LOL. And I haven't even talked about how much building all this stuff would boost our economy, especially at a time when we could use a boost. - So we should print more money and go into more debt for something to boost the economy? Again, you show a lack of attachment to reality with your fanatical love of the choo-choo train loses another thread.
There's plenty of evidence showing that HSR is strong economic driver. Look at how it was worked in Europe and Asia. Why shouldn't it work here, in the fourth most populous and possibly the most industrialized country on the planet? Even low speed rail transformed America and it still plays a vital role in how we operate.
It's important to keep the cost in perspective too. For example, it has been estimated that over the last 50 years we've spent around $500 billion to construct the interstate highway system. And it will take three to five times that much more over the next 50 years to rebuild and maintain it.
That doesn't even begin to scratch the surface of what we've spent on other automobile infrastructure such as fuel delivery systems, highways and local roads, recycling and disposal of old vehicles, etc.
Or the countless billions we've invested in airports and other aviation related infrastructure. Or on shipping and waterborne transportation.
So why shouldn't we seek a balanced system like other advanced countries? And one which utilizes all the modern transportation options?
I really don't understand the wisdom of closing ourselves off from the things that the rest of the world is pursuing.
Reduced pollution - Quantify this. Reduced gasoline expenses - Who does this benefit? The individual who spends that "saved money" on HSR fares? There is no savings here. Reduced vehicle wear and tear - Again, who saves anything? The presence of HSR does not reduce the wear on my car unless I pay for a ticket and decide to ride the train vs. driving my car. Spending money to save money? Ummm... sure. Increased traffic throughput - How many cars would a ATL-CLT rail line take off the road each year? Is it even Increased property value (this is a big one) - A HSR rail line will make property more valuable? What about all of the property along the line that loses value? Funny that you ignore that reality. Increased mobility for those who struggle to afford private transportation - If only there was another method of transportation available... I guess the air travel, which is price competitive with rail and bus travel (which is far, far cheaper than HSR travel) don't count. HSR as a method for moving those with low incomes? LOL. Look at the operating costs and capital expenditures and explain to me how this benefits low income earners. Increased safety including fewer emergency room expenses - Now you are reaching and it is comical. Reduced stress- LOL. The federal government should invest billions of dollars to reduce your stress. LOL. And I haven't even talked about how much building all this stuff would boost our economy, especially at a time when we could use a boost. - So we should print more money and go into more debt for something to boost the economy? Again, you show a lack of attachment to reality with your fanatical love of the choo-choo train loses another thread.
A lot of people still drive cross-country, or even the hundreds of miles HSR works well over. Even with diesel higher speed rail, you generate reduced emissions per passenger than any other mode. With electrified rail, you produce very few emissions. Thermal inefficiencies in engines mean that although power plant output must increase due to more use, the pollutants produced will be far less than those produced sending electricity to trains.
The IRS considers the cost of driving MINUS GASOLINE to be $0.55 per mile. Or about $110 for Atlanta to Charlotte. Even on Amtrak's Crescent, looking a short time out (higher cost), a ticket is only $70 to go to Charlotte. Now let's add in the gasoline. At 25 miles per gallon, and $3.30/gallon fuel cost, it costs an extra $26 to go 200 miles (most cars don't get that good).
ATL-CLT would take a lot of cars off the road. Enough to make a difference in congestion, particularly at rush hour when a handful of extra intercity drivers can clog things up even more.
Whatever property values are lost along the line, will be more than made up for by the property value increase nearer the stations. This is a case of the good of the many outweighing the good of the individual. It's how society works. Don't property values also go down when roads are expanded, and airports built and expanded???
Decreased ER visits is not stretching by any means. There are dozens of accidents PER DAY requiring hospitalization. It's rare when a rail incident requires a trip to the ER. Cars also don't have in-cab signaling, centralized routing control, with the people operating them only operating them over very familiar routes under extremely strict rules (1mph over the limit only might be allowed on some railroads).
Yes, the government should invest in the health of their people (remember that general welfare clause in the Constitution?).
Building HSR is hardly printing money, nor are the costs as severe as haters like you want us to believe. The interstate highway system had to be funded somehow too, and continues to be funded despite not having enough money.
What if the south invested in HSR? Could you imagine having Atlanta, Orlando, Miami, Jacksonville, Tampa, Charlotte, Nashville, DC etc. all connected? I honestly thing the region would benefit tremendouly by bringing it in.
What if the south invested in HSR? Could you imagine having Atlanta, Orlando, Miami, Jacksonville, Tampa, Charlotte, Nashville, DC etc. all connected? I honestly thing the region would benefit tremendouly by bringing it in.
Why? What crying need does it fulfill other than thrilling the HSR romantics? Are all those places unconnected and inaccessible now? What are the benefits to the region? Are we promised very low fares without the need of subsidies? And if subsidies are needed, why add another stream to drain money from things that are self-supporting?
The fact that Amtrak and the other railroads aren't building this system suggests that its very risky. Why not wait for the California system to be built so we can see how viable it is? California HSR would be more similar to our situation than the Northeast Corridor.
Why? What crying need does it fulfill other than thrilling the HSR romantics? Are all those places unconnected and inaccessible now? What are the benefits to the region? Are we promised very low fares without the need of subsidies? And if subsidies are needed, why add another stream to drain money from things that are self-supporting?
Yes, they are virtually unconnected and inaccessible now. Driving and flying to these places are both tantamount to a huge sojourn whereas riding a train is little more than getting to the station, and jumping on. Subsidies are needed for highways too, especially now that the fuel tax can no longer pay for maintenance (if it ever really could). Even when (if) it could, subsidies were still needed to build the roads in the first place. Adding a robust transportation system to the region would pay the costs back in increased economic activity even if the fare recovery ration is less than 100%.
Quote:
The fact that Amtrak and the other railroads aren't building this system suggests that its very risky. Why not wait for the California system to be built so we can see how viable it is? California HSR would be more similar to our situation than the Northeast Corridor.
Oh good grief. I guess since private companies didn't build the Interstate Highway System you want it ripped up and all subsidies stopped?
What if the south invested in HSR? Could you imagine having Atlanta, Orlando, Miami, Jacksonville, Tampa, Charlotte, Nashville, DC etc. all connected? I honestly thing the region would benefit tremendouly by bringing it in.
I can fly to each of those locations in under an hour and a half for $300 round trip.
I can drive to each of those locations in under 6 hours (Miami and DC excluded) for about $70 round trip.
I can take a bus to each of those locations in under 8 hours (Miami excluded) for even less than that.
Why spend tens of billions (likely hundreds of billions ala California) to build a transportation system that likely won't be heavily utilized given the multiple either faster or cheaper alternatives? What is the HSR benefit that air travel and driving/bus don't provide?
HSR is like a mix between flying and driving. People who have flying fright won't be nearly as afraid to travel because they are on ground and it's much faster then driving and you don't use gas. You also get to see the sights(if there are any). Imagine a HSR through the Apps or Rockies or the Sierra Nevada or the California Coastline with the juxtaposition between the mountains and coastline. Beautiful, just Beautiful.
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.
