Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Business Insider: Obama Wants To Build High-Speed Trains!


China

Recommended Posts

Depends on how you view the future of travel and infrastructure.

Personally, I see it as a smart investment. With the rate of growth in this country, our highways are going to be like parking lots (even more so then they are today).

Was it necessary at the time to build the Interstate Highway System in the 1950s under Eisenhower? No, but could we imagine life without it now?

Yeah but how many people travel via the roads from lets say DC to Pittsburg every day? 1. If they do more than likely they fly 2. if they did travel on the roads they travel pretty much traffic free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah but how many people travel via the roads from lets say DC to Pittsburg every day? 1. If they do more than likely they fly 2. if they did travel on the roads they travel pretty much traffic free.

Isn't that the point for those type of commutes? There is no option other than flying.... where you wait in line to get on the plane longer than the actual trip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will say that we can't just keep building highways and air ports aren't going to be able to handle mass transit on the level that the country will need in the future. In general high speed rail just sounds like a great idea. If we can get trains that go 100+mph from Richmond to NOVA to DC then all the commuting traffic can ease the congestion in the highways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what about roads? Are they profitable? If so why didn't the private companies build them first?

dude the government is our friend maybe obama just wants to give us a better quality of living through sustainable infrastructure

we all win

praise the messiah!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dude the government is our friend maybe obama just wants to give us a better quality of living through sustainable infrastructure

we all win

praise the messiah!

the government is the enemy of mankind, we should overthrow the yokes of our oppressors and free ourselves from slavery

:jerk:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will say that we can't just keep building highways and air ports aren't going to be able to handle mass transit on the level that the country will need in the future. In general high speed rail just sounds like a great idea. If we can get trains that go 100+mph from Richmond to NOVA to DC then all the commuting traffic can ease the congestion in the highways.

Particularly the airports in the NYC area are reaching capacity. The FAA is working on new technologies that will increase efficiency but that's only going to go so far. Rail is a good option for the NE corridor IMO. I don't think it makes any sense for the rural midwest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I missed the part where it said taxes were going to be raised to pay for it.

How did the government get the 13 billion? I'm confused. Did they find buried treasure? Hopefully they keep finding buried treasure to pay for the maintenance as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OTOH, I'd bet that the price of land in metro Houston is a bit higher than it is halfway between LA and Vegas. :)

(But I agree with you. $13B won't pay for a tenth of this system.)

Well, I assume that they will be using existing rail right of ways rather than buying any new ones. That will cut down the cost immensely (13 bil still ain't gonna cut it).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How did the government get the 13 billion? I'm confused. Did they find buried treasure? Hopefully they keep finding buried treasure to pay for the maintenance as well.

Maybe we could spend less on more highways out to distant suburbs. :whoknows:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The red parts of the map are the only "high speed corridors". The grey part is "other passenger rail routes" (ie, regular ol' rail lines).

I'm not sure about exactly how many miles are anticipated, but assuming 3000 miles, and $10 million per mile (a lowball estimate, I've seen estimates upwards of $20 million per mile), you are looking at $30 billion just to lay the rail. This doesn't factor in inflation over the decade it would take to get this done, as well as cost overruns (this IS the Federal government we're talking about). California is looking to do high speed rail in just their own state, and it'll cost at least $10 billion (that's what was authorized during the last election).

This isn't even considering the security you'll have to have on thousands of miles of rail. Any idea of how much easier it would be to sabotage a rail in the middle of nowhere rather than hijack a plane?

I'm sorry, but when cities are spread so far apart, the costs are astronomical. Land going in to and out of cities will be very expensive. You'll have to build bridges over or under each roadway crossing (accidents are bad enough when a train is doing 65mph and hits a car. Can you imagine 150mph?), and you'll STILL have to go slow in metropolitan areas. The train won't be allowed to get up to speed until it is outside the cities. In the Northeast, how often are you outside of metro areas?

This would be a collosal waste of money. The kicker is if it is implemented, and we get 1/4 of the way done and run out of money, guess what? We aren't going to just scrap the whole project.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How did the government get the 13 billion? I'm confused. Did they find buried treasure? Hopefully they keep finding buried treasure to pay for the maintenance as well.

The stimulus bill included money for infrastructure projects, such as high-speed rail. The article says that the 13 billion will come from that money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...