High speed rail in the NE
05-29-2019, 03:04 PM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Posts: 131
High speed rail in the NE
I never understood why there is not a high speed rail system between Washington, D.C. and Boston, with stops in the important cities in between. The roads, the airspace and the airports in the NE are very congested. It could reduce significantly the number of cars and flights between those cities. I know it's very expensive, but it makes a lot of sense. It would make life easier to a lot of travelers. Other countries have it. Why not here?
05-30-2019, 07:57 AM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,278
Because millions of people don't want to sell their homes to the government, thousands of businesses don't want to relocate, and no one wants to spends hundreds of millions moving the congested urban infrastructure that has built up over the last century in order to lay the straight track lines that high speed rail needs.
Europe had the "luck" to have most of its urban centers bombed to oblivion right as mass transit technology exploded.
Europe had the "luck" to have most of its urban centers bombed to oblivion right as mass transit technology exploded.
05-30-2019, 08:58 AM
#5
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 11,501
The state of California couldn’t afford to build high speed rail on agricultural land between Bakersfield and Merced due to land cost, tunneling cost, environmental protection laws, NIMBY obstruction, and political pay to play contracting, and you expect a better result in the most densely packed and expensive areas in the US?
You dreamer you.
You dreamer you.
05-30-2019, 09:39 AM
#7
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 11,501
Originally Posted by tomgoodman
Any proposal for high-speed rail that might compete with air travel would be immediately quashed by our powerful pilot unions. 
05-30-2019, 11:06 AM
#8
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,275
Originally Posted by 2StgTurbine
Because millions of people don't want to sell their homes to the government, thousands of businesses don't want to relocate, and no one wants to spends hundreds of millions moving the congested urban infrastructure that has built up over the last century in order to lay the straight track lines that high speed rail needs.
Europe had the "luck" to have most of its urban centers bombed to oblivion right as mass transit technology exploded.
Europe had the "luck" to have most of its urban centers bombed to oblivion right as mass transit technology exploded.
.........
05-30-2019, 02:21 PM
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Posts: 131
Originally Posted by Excargodog
The state of California couldn’t afford to build high speed rail on agricultural land between Bakersfield and Merced due to land cost, tunneling cost, environmental protection laws, NIMBY obstruction, and political pay to play contracting, and you expect a better result in the most densely packed and expensive areas in the US?
You dreamer you.
You dreamer you.
In the NE it's a different story. It is a necessity. Sooner or later they'll have to do it.
05-30-2019, 02:27 PM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: Retired
Posts: 404
Originally Posted by Spin
But I think in California it doesn't make much sense; San Francisco and LA are too far apart, and no big cities between them.
In the NE it's a different story. It is a necessity. Sooner or later they'll have to do it.
In the NE it's a different story. It is a necessity. Sooner or later they'll have to do it.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
