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.
You are assuming that a high speed network is even wanted . That's generally what drives changes in infrastructure. What percentage of Americans use public transportation compared to Chinese? You'd likely have to limit those numbers to major metropolitan areas as well.
That is true, unfortunately we live in a country that clearly doesn't care about its own infrastructure. And unfortunately we will watch the Chinese surpass us as the economical engine of this planet as we continue to sit on our hands and act like there is nothing we can do here.
I highly doubt I will ever see HSR in this country in my lifetime because that drive we once had for advancing our country has been dead for a while now.
That is true, unfortunately we live in a country that clearly doesn't care about its own infrastructure. And unfortunately we will watch the Chinese surpass us as the economical engine of this planet as we continue to sit on our hands and act like there is nothing we can do here.
I highly doubt I will ever see HSR in this country in my lifetime because that drive we once had for advancing our country has been dead for a while now.
You live in a country that doesn't care about unreasonable and over priced pet projects that burden the majority at the benefit of a very small minority (mainly politicians that will line their pockets and their friends pockets). Ever wonder why so many politicians are married to developers?
It's never actually been profitable, as in self-sustaining without government subsidy, but twice since it's inception 1971, the total of subsidy + revenue actually covered cost based on accounting tricks.
Using normal definitions of profit however, AmTrak has NEVER BEEN PROFITABLE, and typically costs $2 for every $1 in revenue.
And all this "high speed" rail plan really amounts to is a big expansion of AmTrak. Currently, AmTrak runs trains at ~100mph, and the "high speed" set by the FRA for this new plan is 110. So, nothing new here, and it will just be a big fat bonus to the least profitable government enterprise currently going.
The subsidy for passenger rail, per 1,000 passenger-miles is $237.53 (as of 2006), for commercial aviation it's $4.23, and for automobiles, it's -$1.01. Airplanes cost little, autos are actually profitable, and passenger rail costs a ton.
It's a sinkhole of taxpayer waste. Period. And all this plan does is expand how wide and deep that sinkhole is.
You live in a country that doesn't care about unreasonable and over priced pet projects that burden the majority at the benefit of a very small minority (mainly politicians that will line their pockets and their friends pockets). Ever wonder why so many politicians are married to developers?
And if it had some utility or profit potential...private industry would have jumped into the passenger rail game back in 1980. That they did not, but happily did for freight, is pretty much all you need to know.
Yes, there are some freight rail companies thinking of building their own passenger lines in a few spots, and good for them. If they fail, I don't have to pick up the tab for it. Not so with this uber-expansion of AmTrak, where I bet the subsidy per 1,000 passenger-mile doubles if they actually build any of it.
It's never actually been profitable, as in self-sustaining without government subsidy, but twice since it's inception 1971, the total of subsidy + revenue actually covered cost based on accounting tricks.
Using normal definitions of profit however, AmTrak has NEVER BEEN PROFITABLE, and typically costs $2 for every $1 in revenue.
And all this "high speed" rail plan really amounts to is a big expansion of AmTrak. Currently, AmTrak runs trains at ~100mph, and the "high speed" set by the FRA for this new plan is 110. So, nothing new here, and it will just be a big fat bonus to the least profitable government enterprise currently going.
The subsidy for passenger rail, per 1,000 passenger-miles is $237.53 (as of 2006), for commercial aviation it's $4.23, and for automobiles, it's -$1.01. Airplanes cost little, autos are actually profitable, and passenger rail costs a ton.
It's a sinkhole of taxpayer waste. Period. And all this plan does is expand how wide and deep that sinkhole is.
Maybe the train portion needs to be outsourced to private companies and only the rails are publicly owned. Though I don't buy the whole "autos are actually profitable" part though, except for the fact that one could say that the car owner is the one picking up the tab on everything.
Status:
"Let this year be over..."
(set 22 days ago)
Location: Where my bills arrive
19,219 posts, read 17,095,590 times
Reputation: 15538
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78
That is true, unfortunately we live in a country that clearly doesn't care about its own infrastructure. And unfortunately we will watch the Chinese surpass us as the economical engine of this planet as we continue to sit on our hands and act like there is nothing we can do here.
I highly doubt I will ever see HSR in this country in my lifetime because that drive we once had for advancing our country has been dead for a while now.
Please get over it, in the 70's the Arabs were buying up all of the buildings in Manhattan, the Japanese were beating us in Steel, Cars and overall economy in the 80's. Korea emerged in the 90's as a production power house, since the millennium Vietnam and China have been developing at a rapid pace, there will always be someone who has a better whatever or a new method but through it all we are still here.
I won't argue areas of our infrastructure need updating but unlike China we can not divert 1/2 our GDP to create HSR.
Please get over it, in the 70's the Arabs were buying up all of the buildings in Manhattan, the Japanese were beating us in Steel, Cars and overall economy in the 80's. Korea emerged in the 90's as a production power house, since the millennium Vietnam and China have been developing at a rapid pace, there will always be someone who has a better whatever or a new method but through it all we are still here.
I won't argue areas of our infrastructure need updating but unlike China we can not divert 1/2 our GDP to create HSR.
This is a forum where we discuss topics, HSR is a topic I am interested in. Will it happen in this country in my lifetime, nope, but that doesn't change my interest. If you do not wish to talk about HSR, you are welcome to skip over this thread.
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.
. That's generally what drives changes in infrastructure. What percentage of Americans use public transportation compared to Chinese? You'd likely have to limit those numbers to major metropolitan areas as well.
