• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

CNBC rhetorical question: Why is there no high speed rail in the U.S.

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I would love if we lived much denser as a society and used rail more, but we don’t and likely never will. So there’s no use chasing it as if it would be used.
 
UglyCasanova said:
I would love if we lived much denser as a society and used rail more, but we don’t and likely never will. So there’s no use chasing it as if it would be used.
Click to expand...

80% of Americans live in urban areas. We don't use more rail because we've usually just decided not to because reasons.
 
K1052 said:
Yes. We in America usually build infrastructure in seriously demented ways with an army of consultants and swampy contractors who only live to drive up the price. This isn't remotely limited to rail projects either.
Click to expand...
Definitely, not going through any areas where the wealthy would be impacted.
 
hal2kilo said:
Definitely, not going through any areas where the wealthy would be impacted.
Click to expand...

Heh, the rich NIMBYs in the peninsula are still pissed about the blended HSR/Caltrain plan but could do little to stop it since it's entirely in the Caltrain existing Right Of Way.
 
K1052 said:
80% of Americans live in urban areas. We don't use more rail because we've usually just decided not to because reasons.
Click to expand...

That 80% is dispersed over a large land mass with only 3 major city clusters (NE corridor, SD-LA-SJ-SF, and DAL-HOU-Austin) where HSR even makes sense to serve a large enough addressable market (as CA example shows, no one is lining up for HSR from Fresno to Bakersfield or similarly sized cities in Nebraska or wherever). None of the 3 clusters are realistically connectable to the others via HSR due to distance (it's over 1,300 miles from DC to Dallas for example). That negates the network effects of somewhere like Europe where some from a central point like Lyons or Zurich you're within 600 miles or so (the sweet spot of HSR) from any major continental city in a landmass that is the home of 400+ million people. Compare that to around 50ish million in the northeast corridor, 28mm in all of Texas, and maybe about 30mm or so in coastal CA? At best the CA HSR project would serve about the same population base as lives in Greater Tokyo itself in a country roughly the size of California but with a population of 126mm.
 
glenn1 said:
That 80% is dispersed over a large land mass with only 3 major city clusters (NE corridor, SD-LA-SJ-SF, and DAL-HOU-Austin) where HSR even makes sense to serve a large enough addressable market (as CA example shows, no one is lining up for HSR from Fresno to Bakersfield or similarly sized cities in Nebraska or wherever). None of the 3 clusters are realistically connectable to the others via HSR due to distance (it's over 1,300 miles from DC to Dallas for example). That negates the network effects of somewhere like Europe where some from a central point like Lyons or Zurich you're within 600 miles or so (the sweet spot of HSR) from any major continental city in a landmass that is the home of 400+ million people. Compare that to around 50ish million in the northeast corridor, 28mm in all of Texas, and maybe about 30mm or so in coastal CA? At best the CA HSR project would serve about the same population base as lives in Greater Tokyo itself in a country roughly the size of California but with a population of 126mm.
Click to expand...

I've always advocated for regional HSR, not cost to coast service.
 
WelshBloke said:
The cost isnt a problem with HSR, the cost is a problem with the way you do things in the US (and us as well unfortunately).
Click to expand...

Agree, I think the fact that we are sue happy - and able to sue so easily is the real reason why. Bureaucracy, etc...

Really it just boils down to governments that are overpowered that can say "No fuck you, I'm building it anyway"

I've gone on the high speed rail in Japan from Tokyo all over - You see tons of places where you're basically going through a neighborhood. Who the fuck wants a high speed rail going through their backyard?
 
glenn1 said:
That 80% is dispersed over a large land mass with only 3 major city clusters (NE corridor, SD-LA-SJ-SF, and DAL-HOU-Austin) where HSR even makes sense to serve a large enough addressable market (as CA example shows, no one is lining up for HSR from Fresno to Bakersfield or similarly sized cities in Nebraska or wherever). None of the 3 clusters are realistically connectable to the others via HSR due to distance (it's over 1,300 miles from DC to Dallas for example). That negates the network effects of somewhere like Europe where some from a central point like Lyons or Zurich you're within 600 miles or so (the sweet spot of HSR) from any major continental city in a landmass that is the home of 400+ million people. Compare that to around 50ish million in the northeast corridor, 28mm in all of Texas, and maybe about 30mm or so in coastal CA? At best the CA HSR project would serve about the same population base as lives in Greater Tokyo itself in a country roughly the size of California but with a population of 126mm.
Click to expand...

...so you support the model for HSR that nearly everyone that supports it proposes?

That's great! So then, why do low-thinking conservatives around here only ever argue about this phantom desire of liberals building HSR from coast to coast and nearly every other place where it doesn't make sense, if only to argue against it?
 
zinfamous said:
...so you support the model for HSR that nearly everyone that supports it proposes?

That's great! So then, why do low-thinking conservatives around here only ever argue about this phantom desire of liberals building HSR from coast to coast and nearly every other place where it doesn't make sense, if only to argue against it?
Click to expand...

Welcome to Strawmanistan!
 
s0me0nesmind1 said:
Agree, I think the fact that we are sue happy - and able to sue so easily is the real reason why. Bureaucracy, etc...

Really it just boils down to governments that are overpowered that can say "No fuck you, I'm building it anyway"

I've gone on the high speed rail in Japan from Tokyo all over - You see tons of places where you're basically going through a neighborhood. Who the fuck wants a high speed rail going through their backyard?
Click to expand...


Tokyo station is like right outside Imperial Palace ground in Tokaido... Japan doesn't have a lot of usable land and they have a lot of people.
 
Jhhnn said:
Which doesn't bear on the issue of eminent domain.
Click to expand...
Actually it does. NEPA requires that the government consider the full scope of the impacts of its actions and possible alternatives prior to taking action. Of course for border walls, f' that, just do it.*



*This is literally true. The Defense Authorization Act of 2004 excepted border nazi activities from NEPA and a host of other federal laws designed to avoid colossal fuckups.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top