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.
I think the way I think about it. I am just unhappy with the current system in place. I still don't understand how it would be a bad policy. Why not just take out the amtrak trains and replace them with high-speed rail, and add some additional stops to them. We could keep the current routes and add some extra ones. There is a route called the Empire Builder for Amtrak. It goes from Chicago to St.Paul to Portland and Seattle. It goes across open space. If it can be done for Amtrak, why not do it for HSR? Amtrak - Routes - Northwest - Empire Builder
Given that the government doesn't own the rail lines on which most Amtrak trains run (the Northeast Corridor being the notable exception; I believe there's another on in Pennsylvania that the government owns), how do you propose that the government obtain right-of-way from the freight-hauling owners for high-speed trains and in a way that can ensure they run on time with all of the stops you wish?
Given that the government doesn't own the rail lines on which most Amtrak trains run (the Northeast Corridor being the notable exception; I believe there's another on in Pennsylvania that the government owns), how do you propose that the government obtain right-of-way from the freight-hauling owners for high-speed trains and in a way that can ensure they run on time with all of the stops you wish?
It doesn't have to be government rail lines. It can start with subsidies to upgrade Amtrak to get rid of the current trains and replace them with high-speed trains. Maybe more people will use it.
Even if you ignore the problems of funding and implementation, there isn't enough demand for regional or national highspeed rail imo even in the Bos-Wash corridor or LA-SF.
It doesn't have to be government rail lines. It can start with subsidies to upgrade Amtrak to get rid of the current trains and replace them with high-speed trains. Maybe more people will use it.
Are the current tracks being used able to handle high-speed trains? If not, who pays for the upgrades? Will the freight haulers who own the lines allow the trains the run that fast and have priority over their own trains?
Even if you ignore the problems of funding and implementation, there isn't enough demand for regional or national highspeed rail imo even in the Bos-Wash corridor or LA-SF.
Even so, I can still use HSR. I am also an advocate of other forms of rail, such as commuter rail. If I understand correctly, New Jersey have a commuter rail. I wish the state of Georgia(or Atlanta at least) would make a commuter rail in addition to MARTA.
This is the thing. I am willing to pay a tax for it. It would benefit me in the long run. Unfortunately, like you say, not everyone is demanding it. To be honest, I'm kind of angry about this. Stuff I would benefit from isn't in demand. In some ways it is aggravating to me.
Are the current tracks being used able to handle high-speed trains? If not, who pays for the upgrades? Will the freight haulers who own the lines allow the trains the run that fast and have priority over their own trains?
The fact is, I'm still willing to give it a go. The way I see it, I don't have a car, so I have nothing to lose. Neither do some of my car-deprived friends. Interesting thing is, I have friends who come to the Atlanta area from other nations. One thing many seem to notice(especially if they went to New York first) is how lacking high speed rail, and local mass transit it. Many people tell me the buses are a joke. Personally, I feel the same way. I tried to organize some people to get in some demand. I had a hard time doing so. I am going to try again. As long as I am here, the best I can do is organize people to get things rolling.
Even if you ignore the problems of funding and implementation, there isn't enough demand for regional or national highspeed rail imo even in the Bos-Wash corridor or LA-SF.
Theres a very big demand for Rail travel....there just isn't the funding for it or there is the funding for it but its diverted to other lines at in the Bos-Wash. Rail and Transit has surpassed 1960s levels , that was before the Automobile really became popular...
Would there be enough demand to operate highspeed rail lines at a profit without gov't subsidies? The way I see it is that if highspeed rail was profitable in the Bos-Wash corridor, Amtrack would've secured the capital and political approval needed to make it happen. I'm not totally against the idea of the gov't using some funds to help make this happen, but someone is going to have to make a very convincing case that they'll be able to operate this thing on a profit without subsidies.
Would there be enough demand to operate highspeed rail lines at a profit without gov't subsidies? The way I see it is that if highspeed rail was profitable in the Bos-Wash corridor, Amtrack would've secured the capital and political approval needed to make it happen. I'm not totally against the idea of the gov't using some funds to help make this happen, but someone is going to have to make a very convincing case that they'll be able to operate this thing on a profit without subsidies.
I still don't understand why rail is the only form of transportation in the US that is expected to run at a profit, or without government subsidies.
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.
