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 hear this all the time. I heard that NYC was able to build its vast network because of the huge supply of immigrants who were willing to do dangerous work and that it couldn't be built today. I'm sure there are plenty of people in this world today from poorer nations will accept that kind of work just like the poor European immigrants of that time. So why doesn't the government encourage them to come? Is because of protectionism and regulations? Who loses in this situation? If people are willing to do the work, let them do it.
OK, but people still have to be employed. So labor costs aren't an issue, you're saying?
Manual labor is almost always more expensive than machines and that's besides the fact such work is very hard and dangerous. A tunnel boring machine does the whole process. It breaks down the material, removes it and places the structural walls. When it's done you only need to lay the track and they have machines for that too.
Manual labor is almost always more expensive than machines and that's besides the fact such work is very hard and dangerous. A tunnel boring machine does the whole process. It breaks down the material, removes it and places the structural walls. When it's done you only need to lay the track and they have machines for that too.
Tunneling costs in Europe are comparable to the US. They are just willing to spend the money on mass transit instead of mass military.
Construction costs in the rest of the world are lower because the contractors and owners are willing to use imported near slave labor as is done in the Arab world and China.
Infrastructure construction costs in the U.S. are comparable with those in Spain, German, Italy, Japan and surprisingly Saudi Arabia. With costs in France being lower using Great Britain as the standard.
You can't build a safe tunnel just anywhere.....NY has bedrock under the surface...many places don't....
Then, there are places where a subway simply won't work....neither will rail or busses.....some places are just too widespread to make it feasible for folks to use that service. Compact cities...sure. Suburbia...no way.
Who said subways can't be built today? San Francisco is building one to connect Chinatown to the downtown streetcars and BART. A second cross-bay BART line is being planned for SF, due to run out to the beach from downtown. Subways can be built. But how long will they remain free of water, with the ocean levels rising?
Location: When you take flak it means you are on target
7,646 posts, read 9,944,809 times
Reputation: 16466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth
Who said subways can't be built today? San Francisco is building one to connect Chinatown to the downtown streetcars and BART. A second cross-bay BART line is being planned for SF, due to run out to the beach from downtown. Subways can be built. But how long will they remain free of water, with the ocean levels rising?
Yeah, build a subway in SF. That's really smart in earthquake country. Kind of like building a high speed train between LA and Vegas - it will take three hours to embark, disembark and transit. Uh, you can drive it in 3 1/2 hours and have a car when you get there. Duh.
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.
