Sweet Pants Gettin? Speaker Nancy?s Panties in a Bunch!

[Michchamp]

Japan has had high speed rail since the 60's linking their three largest cities (Tokyo, Nagoya, and Osaka) which is a distance of roughly 250 miles.

since the 60's, they've added additional high speed lines connecting more or less their entire country, which included the substantial cost of bridges and tunnels to link cities on different islands.

Germany has them too, as does France. not sure about the UK.

The reason we don't have them in this country, except for Acela - which pales in comparison and funding to high speed lines in those other countries - is that we have big powerful oil companies that dictate transportation policy to ensure we have to drive and fly most everywhere we go.

Driving and flying everywhere sucks. I much prefer trains.

It's not actually cheaper to drive either (see for example here). it's just that the cost of driving is put on drivers themselves, instead of SOCIALIZING it in the form of regional mass transit everyone can use.

 

[Gulo Blue]

The reason we don't have them in this country, except for Acela

A train that averages less than 70 mph shouldn't count.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I think self-driving cars will catch on before we figure out high speed rail.

 

[Spartanmack]

I don't know much about the arguments out there either. I don't really think there is much of an argument going on. I just don't like going other places and being envious of technology or infrastructure.

considering you live in North Carolina, it must be tough for you to go anywhere...but at least now you don't ask people if they want to bbq hot dogs, so there's that.

there's at least enough of an argument to quash Obama's dream (or was it his father's? get it?) of high speed rail all over America. According to the article Tinsel posted, Republican governors in Wisco, Ohio and Fla all shot down his plan and said "no thanks" to a bunch of federal money to spend on it.

 

[Michchamp]

I think self-driving cars will catch on before we figure out high speed rail.

I don't.

 

[Gulo Blue]

at least now you don't ask people if they want to bbq hot dogs, so there's that.

You're so resistant to absorbing facts. I'm not a Spartan.

 

[tinselwolverine]

The reason we don't have them in this country, except for Acela - which pales in comparison and funding to high speed lines in those other countries - is that we have big powerful oil companies that dictate transportation policy to ensure we have to drive and fly most everywhere we go.

So how did the big powerful oil companies fuck up and fail to dictate that to the north eastern seaboard region, where demographics and geography make rail travel vastly more efficient, pragmatic and economical than it is pretty much other regions in the country.

Demographically and geographically, that region is vastly more similar to the nations you mentioned than any other part of the country.

 

[TheVictors]

Colorado has been talking about a (high speed) rail solution up I-70 to alleviate traffic congestion for decades. Why hasn't it happened ...? The oil lobby and all that asphalt!!


So now after a couple Big-Oil friendly governors we have a 3rd, part-time "Toll Road" owned by some Australian company that has revenue guarantees in place should user rates fail to meet said revenue goals.


We got fucked

 

[tinselwolverine]

The city of Los Angeles definitely could use improving itself on light rail system itself.

But we’re talking about two different things here-pragmatic mass transit that helps solve and alleviate problems, and the ability for high-speed rail to make air travel obsolete.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Colorado has been talking about a (high speed) rail solution up I-70 to alleviate traffic congestion for decades. Why hasn't it happened ...? The oil lobby and all that asphalt!!


So now after a couple Big-Oil friendly governors we have a 3rd, part-time "Toll Road" owned by some Australian company that has revenue guarantees in place should user rates fail to meet said revenue goals.


We got fucked

Some kid-or young adult actually, the son of one of my wife?s friends-was telling me something about a train between Denver and Boulder that he took every day. Did I hear him right?

 

[Gulo Blue]

the ability for high-speed rail to make air travel obsolete.

And that ain't happening.



We haven't even hit the age of this stuff yet:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5teocUdNITE

 

[TheVictors]

Some kid-or young adult actually, the son of one of my wife?s friends-was telling me something about a train between Denver and Boulder that he took every day. Did I hear him right?

no, there is no train between Denver and Boulder currently although there are plans for the lightrail to eventually get to Boulder. Right now it's just Bus Service b/w Denver and Boulder although last year there was a TV ad running implying that there was one.

 

[tinselwolverine]

no, there is no train between Denver and Boulder currently although there are plans for the lightrail to eventually get to Boulder. Right now it's just Bus Service b/w Denver and Boulder although last year there was a TV ad running implying that there was one.

Maybe the kid told me that he took the bus then. I just looked it up, it looks like it?s about an hour and 15 minutes each way on the bus. 40 minutes of driving.

 

[TheVictors]

The city of Los Angeles definitely could use improving itself on light rail system itself.

But we?re talking about two different things here-pragmatic mass transit that helps solve and alleviate problems, and the ability for high-speed rail to make air travel obsolete.

There is no more reasonable place to put a train in CO than up I-70 ...it's not the light rail. There was a Ski Train that went from Denver Union Station to Winter Park but for all the I-70 resorts its auto traffic, some buses and other 'carpooling ideas.'

 

[TheVictors]

Maybe the kid told me that he took the bus then. I just looked it up, it looks like it?s about an hour and 15 minutes each way on the bus. 40 minutes of driving.

The drive can be up to 90-mins with traffic ...unless you use the Express Lane, which I do when going up for work and then it is about 45-mins door/door.

 

[Gulo Blue]

really? you think it's because of big oil and irrational fears of socialism and not the fact that our country is 9.5mm square miles and the next biggest country on your list (France) is 640k (smaller than Alaska) followed by Japan at 377k and Germany at 357k?

In Japan, they can link the 3 biggest cities w/ roughly 250 miles of track, that will get you to Dallas from your town. But it's big oil that's killing our socialist utopian dreams.

by the way, the cost of driving should be put on drivers just like the cost of high speed rail, should we ever get it, should be put on the users of high speed rail.

The US is big and all, but there's no requirement that we'd have to go coast to coast (or whatever the rule is that might make the area of a nation a big factor). Between closer population centers would be allowed.

 

[Spartanmack]

Japan has had high speed rail since the 60's linking their three largest cities (Tokyo, Nagoya, and Osaka) which is a distance of roughly 250 miles.

since the 60's, they've added additional high speed lines connecting more or less their entire country, which included the substantial cost of bridges and tunnels to link cities on different islands.

Germany has them too, as does France. not sure about the UK.

The reason we don't have them in this country, except for Acela - which pales in comparison and funding to high speed lines in those other countries - is that we have big powerful oil companies that dictate transportation policy to ensure we have to drive and fly most everywhere we go.

Driving and flying everywhere sucks. I much prefer trains.

It's not actually cheaper to drive either (see for example here). it's just that the cost of driving is put on drivers themselves, instead of SOCIALIZING it in the form of regional mass transit everyone can use.

really? you think it's because of big oil and irrational fears of socialism and not the fact that our country is 9.5mm square miles and the next biggest country on your list (France) is 640k (smaller than Alaska) followed by Japan at 377k and Germany at 357k?

In Japan, they can link the 3 biggest cities w/ roughly 250 miles of track, that will get you to Dallas from your town. It's 502 miles from San Fran to the Whale's Vagina and that job has already doubled in price and been pushed back at least another decade. But it's big oil that's killing our socialist utopian dreams.

by the way, the cost of driving should be put on drivers just like the cost of high speed rail, should we ever get it, should be put on the users of high speed rail.

 

[Michchamp]

really? you think it's because of big oil and irrational fears of socialism and not the fact that our country is 9.5mm square miles and the next biggest country on your list (France) is 640k (smaller than Alaska) followed by Japan at 377k and Germany at 357k?

In Japan, they can link the 3 biggest cities w/ roughly 250 miles of track, that will get you to Dallas from your town. But it's big oil that's killing our socialist utopian dreams.

by the way, the cost of driving should be put on drivers just like the cost of high speed rail, should we ever get it, should be put on the users of high speed rail.

Huh.

It's surprising someone so fond of always accusing others of misreading his posts would misread mine like that...

i said the initial Japanese high speed line - built 50 years ago - was only 250
miles. Since then, like I said, they've connected their whole country with high speed lines, for over 2,000 miles of high speed rail. NYC-PHI-DC is only ~200 miles and we can't even do that right. wonder why?

guess our country is just that stupid?

oh, and China only started building high speed rail in the last 20 years, and now has over 18,000 miles of high speed rail. Damn.

We could build a whole national network with that kind of mileage.

 

[Spartanmack]

The US is big and all, but there's no requirement that we'd have to go coast to coast (or whatever the rule is that might make the area of a nation a big factor). Between closer population centers would be allowed.

sorry, had to delete and repost this. I know there's no requirement to go coast to coast, but if you pick the 3 biggest cities in just about any region in the US, you're talking about a much bigger project than linking those entire countries and if you're not talking about going coast to coast, you can forget about making air travel obsolete.

I'm not arguing against high speed rail - just the notion that it's big oil and "irrational" fears of socialism that are the impediment. Is the big oil to blame for the doubling (so far) of the cost of the rail project in California?

 

[tinselwolverine]

The US is big and all, but there's no requirement that we'd have to go coast to coast (or whatever the rule is that might make the area of a nation a big factor). Between closer population centers would be allowed.

???

It?s allowed. It?s been allowed since the beginning of the country.

There is some amount of commuter rail travel in pretty much every region of the country.

As crappy as the city of Los Angeles light rail system is, it?s light years ahead of where it was when I first came here, when it pretty much didn?t exist at all. It?s getting better and hopefully one day Los Angeles will have a rail system that is city of its importance deserves.

But high-speed rail for Transnational travel is not going to make your travel obsolete. That?s just crazy.