Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-26-2015, 07:22 AM
 
Location: Home is Where You Park It
23,856 posts, read 13,749,968 times
Reputation: 15482

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo View Post
What is the population density per square mile of Japan versus the USA?
High-speed rail competes with flying, not buses, light rail, or regular rail. Because it takes miles to decelerate and accelerate, high-speed rail travels from population center to population center, and makes very few, if any, stops in between. Hence, it would probably work better in the US than in Japan.

A complete guide to China's high-speed rail | CNN Travel
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-26-2015, 07:26 AM
mm4
 
5,711 posts, read 3,978,721 times
Reputation: 1941
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
Trains would be more convenient if they went where I want to go.

O, wait - that's impossible even after spending hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars.
But they go to where a lot of people want to go.

It would be nice if foundry workers or service workers could work wherever they wanted to work. Why do both employers and employees locate in population centers? What else do many, but not necessarily all, residents of population centers at any given time benefit from?

What makes a city? Or a bigger city? Do variations in density need to emerge when one becomes bigger?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2015, 07:38 AM
 
78,416 posts, read 60,593,823 times
Reputation: 49699
We spend the money because it's a HUGE pork-fest for some parts of the country and is used in our dense urban corridors.

The insistence to use it in other parts of the country at huge financial losses is more of the pork issue.

On top of that, any cost savings initiatives is shot down by the union.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2015, 07:39 AM
 
Location: Home is Where You Park It
23,856 posts, read 13,749,968 times
Reputation: 15482
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz View Post
Rail gives them what they're really after: control. Control over where and how people live and working, and the ability to social-engineer the masses.

I never forget a few years ago I heard a discussion w/ the guy who is now King County (Seattle) executive. Somebody had drawn up a list of numbers comparing bus, rail, light rail, etc. Light rail came out looking miserable almost every time. Busses were better, and van pools blew everything away. The guy angrily blurted (paraphrase, this was over 10 years ago): "NO rubber-tire solution is going to ever be able to do for us what rail can."
Are you sure he was talking about social control? I've met a couple traffic planners, who said similar things to me. But what they were talking about is destroying business districts and neighborhoods - almost always poor neighborhoods - to widen existing streets or add new ones in order to increase the capacity for "rubber-tire solutions". Light rail replaces a single lane of an existing street to carry more people.

Efficiency also does not measure the costs of increased congestion and pollution caused by adding more cars, busses and/or van pools.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2015, 07:40 AM
 
26,143 posts, read 19,841,434 times
Reputation: 17241
Thumbs down *

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003
Rail technology is more than 200 years old and still has lots of value, but mostly just for freight. But politicians still love to pump billions into passenger rail rather than look toward newer technology. Rail is very costly, if not impossible, to change or move.
Yes but its QUITE USEFUL!!!!!!

Im glad they havent abandoned everything from the past...... THE PAST IS BETTER!!!!!!!! (Better things)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2015, 07:52 AM
 
14,292 posts, read 9,678,440 times
Reputation: 4254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
Rail technology is more than 200 years old and still has lots of value, but mostly just for freight. But politicians still love to pump billions into passenger rail rather than look toward newer technology. Rail is very costly, if not impossible, to change or move. Rail only goes where there are (almost) permanent rail lines, not where people choose to go. On the other hand, busses can go anywhere. Bus routes can change overnight to meet the changing needs of the people. And now that driverless vehicles are right around the corner, bus transportation will become much cheaper, safer and able to meet the needs of the people.
-----------------
“It’s like they’re designing the pony express in the world of the telegraph,†Florida State Senator Jeff Brandes (R-Dist. 22) told Fortune, explaining his opposition to a plan to build a light rail system in Pinellas County. "I absolutely believe that technology is going to transform mass transit in a way that very few people can see...It'll definitely be within 15 or 20 years, which is right when the light rail system…would be coming online."

Self-Driving Cars Are Coming Fast, So Why Should We Spend a Dime Rebuilding Amtrak? - Hit & Run : Reason.com
I'm all for thinking outside the box, but how will adding buses on the roads replace all of Amtrak? If you use buses on the road to replace the busiest Amtrak lines, you'd probably bring the rush hour traffic in those areas to a standstill.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2015, 08:11 AM
 
Location: Dallas
31,290 posts, read 20,740,494 times
Reputation: 9325
Quote:
Originally Posted by OICU812 View Post
I'm all for thinking outside the box, but how will adding buses on the roads replace all of Amtrak? If you use buses on the road to replace the busiest Amtrak lines, you'd probably bring the rush hour traffic in those areas to a standstill.
Don't replace Amtrak. Just stop subsidizing it.

One bus can carry 50 - 60 people. That's pretty efficient and studies have shown that driverless vehicles can increase road capacity by a big number.

And guess what? They can change their route overnight or as often as people need to. They are not bound by permanent rails.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2015, 08:13 AM
 
25,849 posts, read 16,528,639 times
Reputation: 16026
Well, wheels are thousands of years old tech and we still use those.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2015, 08:19 AM
mm4
 
5,711 posts, read 3,978,721 times
Reputation: 1941
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
Don't replace Amtrak. Just stop subsidizing it.

One bus can carry 50 - 60 people. That's pretty efficient and studies have shown that driverless vehicles can increase road capacity by a big number.

And guess what? They can change their route overnight or as often as people need to. They are not bound by permanent rails.
Basic kinks in their ability to stay on roads and avoid collisions have yet to be worked out.

Again, if you see a sign up ahead for something that results in an impulsive change of plans, why in the world would you give up silent control of a wheel for having to issue new commands by speaking into a microphone, or having to work through a new GUI upgrade? Who works that way?

Let alone have to expect the server's interpretation of a programmers evaluation and myriad (and likely unanticipated) variable-covering of the viability of your command--if the connection works, and digitizer doesn't freeze.

Last edited by mm4; 05-26-2015 at 08:32 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2015, 08:30 AM
 
25,849 posts, read 16,528,639 times
Reputation: 16026
RK, to be honest I believe that rail is the future once again. I believe the destruction of the rail network was pushed by GM/Ford and the Teamsters (yes, the union man blaming a union). Once upon a time in America there was a railroad to every single town. Now we have these ridiculous trucks clogging our freeways. With today's and tomorrow's tech imagine what can be moved on rails by driverless trains. An entire transportation network completely automatic run by super computers that save fuel and time and our highways.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top