Should we build High Speed Bullet Trains?

[Patrick Chewing]

Japan's new experimental magnetic levitation Train runs 360 mph (600 kmph), and once the tracks are built, it will take passengers from Tokyo to Nagoya in 40-45 minutes (versus a five hour drive). Older "steel wheel" bullet trains now routinely run at close to 200 miles per hour in Italy, Saudi Arabia, Germany, France, Spain, Belgium, Netherlands, China, etc., with plans on the board for Argentina and Brazil. These bullet trains trains run on dedicated track without slower trains, run on embankments or underpasses (grade separation) to avoid road crossings, and many stop at major airports. The infrastructure is expensive to build, but the future payoff is substantial.

Should the USA invest in these in busy corridors such as Chicago to other Midwest Cities (Detroit, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Indianapolis, etc.), Cleveland-Akron-Columbus-Dayton-Cincinnati, Las Vegas - LA, Boston-New York-Philadelphia-DC and other corridors? Why or why not?

[senelcoolidge]

I think it would be great, but the government owns the rail roads now. I think it would be a cool idea and make it privately owned.

[UK2K]

Yes.

Don't think airline companies wouldn't pay huge money to keep it from happening though.

[ALBballer]

I'm in favor of most public transportation ideas but your republican friends are against such ideas like the one that is planned to be built in California granted it is not a bullet train.

Most republicans do not believe in the government building such projects and think the private sector is the solution.

[DonDadda59]

Didn't President Obama try to get the ball rolling on a national network of bullet trains/high speed rail program back in '08 only for the Republicans in congress to kill it because... f*ck Obama? :confusedshrug:

Just found the article: http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/16/obama.rail/

[ALBballer]

Yes.

Don't think airline companies wouldn't pay huge money to keep it from happening though.

Pretty much what happened in Texas in the 90s.

[Patrick Chewing]

I also want that super highway from the U.S. to Russia to the rest of Europe.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/24/travel/trans-siberian-road/


I haven't flown in over 15 years and don't plan to again. I would like to see my ancestral home of Spain one day.

[shlver]

Yes, long car rides are exhausting.

[DeuceWallaces]

Yeah, yer boys in congress would never let it happen.

[bluechox2]

or a dedicated highway that stops only at each city with no other exits and no speed limits to drive on.

[ThePhantomCreep]

I also want that super highway from the U.S. to Russia to the rest of Europe.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/24/travel/trans-siberian-road/


I haven't flown in over 15 years and don't plan to again. I would like to see my ancestral home of Spain one day.

Wimp

[KyrieTheFuture]

or a dedicated highway that stops only at each city with no other exits and no speed limits to drive on.
That's a terrible idea

[imdaman99]

Yes. In major cities, they should have them going to other major cities within 200 miles. Like NYC to Philly, imagine getting there in less than an hour? Or to Baltimore, less than 2 hours? Or even NYC to Chicago less than 5 hours, NYC to Boston in 2 hours? I guess airlines and bus services would fight to nix it :mad:

Why we gotta be so slow to implement stuff like this?

[BigNBAfan]

You guys really dont know what you're missing out on.

[KevinNYC]

Just rode a couple in Europe and sitting in a first class seat with onboard wifi at 250 kph is pretty nice way to travel.

[DonDadda59]

Why we gotta be so slow to implement stuff like this?

http://38.media.tumblr.com/5eb992c660963697c4e61b9abfce2791/tumblr_n1tdnfsqYQ1rz6f51o1_500.gif

http://www.citylab.com/politics/2013/11/how-republicans-killed-americas-high-speed-rail-plan/7458/

http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/blogs/william-vantuono/did-republicans-kill-americas-high-speed-rail-plan.html

[Cactus-Sack]

Who is "we"?

I'm going to assume you mean the state. Why would a country with 18trillion dollars of debt undertake such an enormous public works project? Japan is not an example to follow.

[Draz]

Just imagine the accidents but fu k yah

[bigkingsfan]

It works for Japan because they already have a good nationwide public infrastructure. When I took the Shinkansen bullet train across several Japan cities, I had to take other train/subway prior to boarding it, never needed a taxi once. We're not anywhere close to ready.

[falc39]

The answer is no, a great example is California's attempt at high speed rail. It is disastrous for many reasons. The amount of regulatory barriers and cost increases have been astounding. The taxpayers voted on paying for a certain amount and then that amount has tripled (or whatever number it has grown into now). Also, you have to deal with the countless right of way issues and all of the endangered species you will be disturbing. That stuff adds up.

It is highly likely the next revolution in transportation will be the self-driving car. We already have the infrastructure for it. They are already driving around in certain cities. Folks in government are a little slow and keep focusing on bikes and mass transit, both very inefficient in their own ways.

[Levity]

a bullet train from southern california to vegas :eek:

my god, how my weekend life would change.

[UK2K]

The answer is no, a great example is California's attempt at high speed rail. It is disastrous for many reasons. The amount of regulatory barriers and cost increases have been astounding. The taxpayers voted on paying for a certain amount and then that amount has tripled (or whatever number it has grown into now). Also, you have to deal with the countless right of way issues and all of the endangered species you will be disturbing. That stuff adds up.

It is highly likely the next revolution in transportation will be the self-driving car. We already have the infrastructure for it. They are already driving around in certain cities. Folks in government are a little slow and keep focusing on bikes and mass transit, both very inefficient in their own ways.

All government barriers.

Transportation needs to be privatized. Government, especially our government, ****s up everything it touches. The last thing I want is for them to attempt to build a high speed rail.

[ALBballer]

All government barriers.

Transportation needs to be privatized. Government, especially our government, ****s up everything it touches. The last thing I want is for them to attempt to build a high speed rail.

You're the military guy, right? What do you think about the military? You think that should also be privatized?

[knickballer]

Without a doubt. There seems to be this idea to fix congestion and traffic that we should build more roads which will encourage more cars and congested roads(in addition to pollution, death by accident, etc).. This system we have in place isn't sustainable(I'm talking about the NYC metro area) but I suppose the auto/oil industry will squash any major reforms of transportation like they did in the place. In the meantime enjoy all those F150's on the road..

BTW, much of the public transport in NY was built in the ****ing 19th century. Just think about that.. What year is this again?

[UK2K]

You're the military guy, right? What do you think about the military? You think that should also be privatized?

I believe our government has an obligation to protect its citizens. I don't think our government has an obligation to provide high speed bullet trains.

There are already private security firms doing our dirty work for us anyway.

[ALBballer]

I believe our government has an obligation to protect its citizens. I don't think our government has an obligation to provide high speed bullet trains.

There are already private security firms doing our dirty work for us anyway.


I believe our government has an obligation to protect its citizens. I don't think our government has an obligation to provide high speed bullet trains.

There are already private security firms doing our dirty work for us anyway.

That's not the point. You said government ****s up everything how about the military?

[UK2K]

That's not the point. You said government ****s up everything how about the military?

Yes, the military is super ****ed up. Want examples?

Ridiculous rules of engagement.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/26/rules-of-engagement-bind-us-troops-actions-in-afgh/?page=all

Even before the security agreement’s rules of engagement were drafted, troops complained about meeting the requirements of an increasingly burdensome checklist before they can fire. The rules grew stricter in 2010 after a series of mistaken U.S. bombings killed civilians and special operations troops raided villages and homes at night.

Wasteful spending on weapons that are useless and unnecesscary.


The Army has been the biggest offender in recent times, probably because it was awash in money appropriated for fighting ground wars in Asia. It walked away from a mobile cannon called Crusader in 2002 after spending $2 billion on developing it because Army leaders decided it was too heavy to fit with their plans for a more mobile force. Eight years later it canceled a potential successor system after spending $1.2 billion. In 2004 it killed the Comanche next-generation “armed reconnaissance” helicopter, squandering $7 billion in sunk costs, then a few years later it canceled the proposed replacement — incurring hundreds of millions of dollars in additional losses. It also has moved to terminate both of its next-generation air defense systems because threats “didn’t evolve as expected,” and now seems to be getting cold feet about its second try at buying a plane that can identify hostile radio emitters on the battlefield.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2011/12/19/how-to-waste-100-billion-weapons-that-didnt-work-out/

More wasteful spending attempting to train shitty Middle Eastern troops who are nothing but cowards and have no interest in fighting. Your average middle eastern man is complete worthless in combat. Less than worthless really, because you have to arm them.


It was big news last month when 7,000 U.S.-trained and -equipped Afghan security troops failed to defend the northern city of Kunduz against a far smaller Taliban force. Yet the setback is just the latest indication of American-trained foreign troops’ continuing inability to fight effectively on their own.

It should not have been surprising. Washington experienced this last year in Iraq. The United States spent $25 billion training and equipping a large Iraqi force, which then threw down its weapons and abandoned two key cities, Mosul and Ramadi, to Islamic State militants. Between 800 and 1,000 Islamic State fighters defeated 30,000 Iraqi troops.

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/10/05/why-the-u-s-military-cant-succeed-in-training-foreign-armies/

I can go on.

Our military is a shell of its former self. you can thank government and Mothers of America for that. Training has been softened (so everyone gets a chance to play), the lifestyle is soft. Its not the same.

[bdreason]

a bullet train from southern california to vegas :eek:

my god, how my weekend life would change.


I'm not sure if you're joking, but a plan for this just got passed a few weeks ago. It's going to be funded by a Chinese company. I think it's something like $90 a ticket and an 80 minute travel time.

[Sarcastic]

Privatizing something like that would be awful. You'd have competing companies setting up different rails/technologies in different areas. It's the same reason you don't allow competition in areas like power/phones. The infrastructure needs to be standardized across all areas, and you don't want competing infrastructure wrecking localities.

[UK2K]

Privatizing something like that would be awful. You'd have competing companies setting up different rails/technologies in different areas. It's the same reason you don't allow competition in areas like power/phones. The infrastructure needs to be standardized across all areas, and you don't want competing infrastructure wrecking localities.

No it doesn't. Privatizing the railways incentives companies to put out the best product. If a company stands to make (or lose) money, why would they put out a shitty product knowing someone else can come lay down better infrastructure?

Government work is slow, costly, inefficient, and poorly executed.

[Levity]

I'm not sure if you're joking, but a plan for this just got passed a few weeks ago. It's going to be funded by a Chinese company. I think it's something like $90 a ticket and an 80 minute travel time.

for a long while now, ive heard talks about it "its coming SOON, etc etc" but if its official... my goodness.

$90, not too bad at all. though, i sometimes see 1 way jet blue tickets for around that much

[Sarcastic]

No it doesn't. Privatizing the railways incentives companies to put out the best product. If a company stands to make (or lose) money, why would they put out a shitty product knowing someone else can come lay down better infrastructure?

Government work is slow, costly, inefficient, and poorly executed.

What incentives the loser to clean up his railway? Or are we left with an unused rail system that just rots away?

[UK2K]

What incentives the loser to clean up his railway? Or are we left with an unused rail system that just rots away?

You think government would clean up their unused rail lines? :oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

Hold on a second, let me get my breath... :oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

Ok.

We can't even upgrade our roads, sewer systems, electrical grids, water treatment plants or communications infrastructure and you think the government is going to take care of our rail lines? Wow.

[dunksby]

Who is "we"?

I'm going to assume you mean the state. Why would a country with 18trillion dollars of debt undertake such an enormous public works project? Japan is not an example to follow.
Japan has $11 trillion in debt, go back to your hole worm and stop pretending.

[dunksby]

You're the military guy, right? What do you think about the military? You think that should also be privatized?
He is a ****ing Merc, he has no honor, why you asking him?

[Sarcastic]

You think government would clean up their unused rail lines? :oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

Hold on a second, let me get my breath... :oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

Ok.

We can't even upgrade our roads, sewer systems, electrical grids, water treatment plants or communications infrastructure and you think the government is going to take care of our rail lines? Wow.

Why would there be unused rail lines if there are no competitors.


The reason is our infrastructure is so poor is that your buddies in Congress never vote to spend money on it.

It's the old line Republicans have been using for 40 years: "Government doesn't work. Vote for me and I'll prove it to you".

[bluechox2]

we need flying cars more than trains...get er done

[Patrick Chewing]

True Detective Season 2 proved to us that you cannot get rail lines in and out of a city without getting your hands dirty.


Private companies may not be the answer here.

[UK2K]

Why would there be unused rail lines if there are no competitors.


The reason is our infrastructure is so poor is that your buddies in Congress never vote to spend money on it.

It's the old line Republicans have been using for 40 years: "Government doesn't work. Vote for me and I'll prove it to you".

Really....

:facepalm

[BasedTom]

for connecting major urban areas that are reasonably close to each other: of course, it should have been done ages ago

building in the middle of the desert to take you to bum**** nowhere: waste of money no thanks

[falc39]

Privatizing something like that would be awful. You'd have competing companies setting up different rails/technologies in different areas. It's the same reason you don't allow competition in areas like power/phones. The infrastructure needs to be standardized across all areas, and you don't want competing infrastructure wrecking localities.

Having it government-run or privatized has nothing to do with standardization of infrastructure. There are many successful railways being run by private companies. The BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit) system is run by the government, yet each train and track has to be custom built because they don't match any of the US standards for rail, which in turn completely run up the costs for any kind of repair or expansion.

[Derka]

Congress would never let it happen...automakers and airline industries won't brook competition of that sort and since they own a whole big chunk of Washington, it ain't gonna happen.

For my part, I'd love for something like this to hit the scene.

[UK2K]

And for those wondering, private high speed rail is already here.

http://www.chron.com/news/transportation/article/Texas-high-speed-rail-passes-major-milestone-with-6400089.php

Houston to Dallas, coming soon.

[Lebron23]

I also want that super highway from the U.S. to Russia to the rest of Europe.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/24/travel/trans-siberian-road/


I haven't flown in over 15 years and don't plan to again. I would like to see my ancestral home of Spain one day.

Why are you afraid to fly?? I am getting my passport replacement this coming April, and planning to visit my relatives in Chicago next Christmas.

[Patrick Chewing]

Why are you afraid to fly??


This phobia of mine I've developed over the years. I guess it has to do with not being in control of the vehicle. Cause I'll drive a sports car or a motorcycle with no problem.

[Cactus-Sack]

Japan has $11 trillion in debt, go back to your hole worm and stop pretending.
Yes, and their debt to gdp load is completely unworkable. Again, not an example to follow dumbfvck

[DonDadda59]

Yes, and their debt to gdp load is completely unworkable. Again, not an example to follow dumbfvck

The U.S. has cut the deficit by 2/3 during the Obama administration. I don't see why having a public works program that will create jobs and later revenue would have any noticeable affect on the debt or GDP%. :confusedshrug:

[dunksby]

Yes, and their debt to gdp load is completely unworkable. Again, not an example to follow dumbfvck
Keep recycling your stupid BS and pretend you know anything, your ignorant angry shtick needs it.

[Cactus-Sack]

The U.S. has cut the deficit by 2/3 during the Obama administration. I don't see why having a public works program that will create jobs and later revenue would have any noticeable affect on the debt or GDP%. :confusedshrug:


Uhhh... no.... at the end of the 2014 fiscal year, the budget deficit was 33% higher than when Obama took office, although significantly down from the 2011 high.

Further more, the reduction of the deficit 450billion to 350billion (not exact numbers but I'm lazy) doesn't mean it's a good idea to undertake an enormous and unnecessary make work project. It's especially silly because the US is now a AA country, so interest on credit is more expensive.

You should look up something called "the broken window fallacy" might help you understand why it isn't "creating jobs" just shifting them.

[Cactus-Sack]

Keep recycling your stupid BS and pretend you know anything, your ignorant angry shtick needs it.
Nice retort dumdum. I can see you have put an enormous amount of consideration into your opinions on this issue. I yield to your superior intellect.

[Mr. Jabbar]

Weren't there plans for an ULTRA high speed train from LA to San Fran?

[dunksby]

Nice retort dumdum. I can see you have put an enormous amount of consideration into your opinions on this issue. I yield to your superior intellect.
So edgy, so angry, so cool, never leave this forum :bowdown:

[Nanners]

If I was building high speed rail in the US I would not start on the west coast, the geography and population demographics make more sense to build in the midwest or east coast.

Chicago, Detroit, St Louis, Dallas, Houston, OKC, KC, Denver, Cleveland, Indy, Cinci, Columbus, Minneapolis, Milwaukie... the main thing separating these cities is flat and open farmlands. If I was building bullet trains for the US I would start by linking up the midwest.

It would also make sense to run a line up the east side of the appalachians - Boston, NYC, Philly, Baltimore, DC, Charlotte, Atlanta, Orlando, Miami all would be relatively easy to connect.

[dunksby]

Thanks to the geography of the US, it would be relatively cheap and easy to build bullet trains through the midwest compared to a place like Japan.

Chicago, Detroit, St Louis, Dallas, Houston, OKC, KC, Denver, Cleveland, Indy, Cinci, Columbus, Minneapolis, Milwaukie... the main thing separating these cities is flat and open farmlands.
US in debt, shouldn't improve infrastructure though, don't be stupid :no:

[dunksby]

Weren't there plans for an ULTRA high speed train from LA to San Fran?
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-high-speed-rail-construction-20150615-story.html


Crews in Central California have started construction on the first visible piece of the state's $68-billion bullet-train system from Los Angeles to San Francisco, officials said Monday.

A viaduct in Madera County that spans the Fresno River is part of the first slate of construction projects for the state's long-planned bullet train, which has faced years of political, legal and funding challenges.

The 29-mile construction zone from Madera to downtown Fresno will see two other viaducts and a dozen grade separations. The lead contractor is Tutor Perini. The California High-Speed Rail Authority has not yet selected a contractor to lay track and build electrical systems for the route.

Gov. Jerry Brown broke ground on the first phase of the bullet train six months ago. Officials say that once the full system is built the trip from San Francisco to Los Angeles would take about two and a half hours.

Although construction has begun, the project still faces funding challenges: The project has roughly $26 billion in potential state and federal money over the next 14 years, about half of the amount needed to complete the 500-mile route.

[Nanners]

US in debt, shouldn't improve infrastructure though, don't be stupid :no:

do you know how the us debt works?

investing in infastructure like a bullet train would be a great long term investment that would no doubt have positive ripple effects throughout the economy for decades to come.

[DonDadda59]

Uhhh... no.... at the end of the 2014 fiscal year, the budget deficit was 33% higher than when Obama took office, although significantly down from the 2011 high.

No shit. At the time Obama took office our entire financial system was on the verge of collapse. Whole industries (Banking, Auto) were going under and could only be saved through the stimulus program. Since then the deficit has been cut by 2/3 and is at the lowest percentage of GDP since '07, before the economic meltdown.


Further more, the reduction of the deficit 450billion to 350billion (not exact numbers but I'm lazy) doesn't mean it's a good idea to undertake an enormous and unnecessary make work project. It's especially silly because the US is now a AA country, so interest on credit is more expensive.

The Obama administration already had the funding in place to begin the first phase of the National Bullet train network but Republican governors like Scott Walker and Rick Scott turned it down solely for political reasons.

That public works project would create a ton of jobs and then revenue when completed. It would have a negligible effect on the deficit or GDP at best.


You should look up something called "the broken window fallacy" might help you understand why it isn't "creating jobs" just shifting them.

So you're telling me that a National rail network that would require thousands of engineers, construction workers, etc would not create jobs for many industries? :biggums:

In Walker's State of Wisconsin alone, it was estimated that his inexplicably turning down federal funds lost his constituents 13,719 jobs (10K permanent) (http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2010/nov/15/sierra-club/sierra-club-says-killing-high-speed-rail-project-w/)

[StephHamann]

Those high speed trains make no sense whatsoever, i have a german documentary about it, but i guess it makes no sense to post it here.

Some basic points:

The little time you safe is not worth the high costs of the trainticket. In the documentary you had to pay 100€ for 70 minutes time basically.

It's obiously not good for the environment and people that live near the railway because of the huge noise.

The high speed trains get stopped by slower trains that use the same railway.

There were even more points i don't remember now.

[NumberSix]

Uhhh... no.... at the end of the 2014 fiscal year, the budget deficit was 33% higher than when Obama took office, although significantly down from the 2011 high.

Further more, the reduction of the deficit 450billion to 350billion (not exact numbers but I'm lazy) doesn't mean it's a good idea to undertake an enormous and unnecessary make work project. It's especially silly because the US is now a AA country, so interest on credit is more expensive.

You should look up something called "the broken window fallacy" might help you understand why it isn't "creating jobs" just shifting them.
These people don't understand the difference between creating wealth and shifting credit from one place to another.

[NumberSix]

No shit. At the time Obama took office our entire financial system was on the verge of collapse. Whole industries (Banking, Auto) were going under and could only be saved through the stimulus program. Since then the deficit has been cut by 2/3 and is at the lowest percentage of GDP since '07, before the economic meltdown.
I really don't know what world some of you are living in.

[DonDadda59]

I really don't know what world some of you are living in.

Nebulon 5 :pimp:

[Cactus-Sack]

US in debt, shouldn't improve infrastructure though, don't be stupid :no:
Cogent point as usual

#BLM

[dunksby]

do you know how the us debt works?

investing in infastructure like a bullet train would be a great long term investment that would no doubt have positive ripple effects throughout the economy for decades to come.
I know, but our resident angry armchair expert doesn' approve so it mmust be bad.

[Cactus-Sack]

No shit. At the time Obama took office our entire financial system was on the verge of collapse. Whole industries (Banking, Auto) were going under and could only be saved through the stimulus program. Since then the deficit has been cut by 2/3 and is at the lowest percentage of GDP since '07, before the economic meltdown.

TARP was a retarded waste of money.

Again the deficit has gone up the last few years, and is projected to keep doing so.

Measuring deficit as a percentage of gdp compared to 07 is useless in this instance, because for one the US isn't in recession, so obviously it won't be as bad, and secondly US is now AA so credit is more expensive




The Obama administration already had the funding in place to begin the first phase of the National Bullet train network but Republican governors like Scott Walker and Rick Scott turned it down solely for political reasons.

That public works project would create a ton of jobs and then revenue when completed. It would have a negligible effect on the deficit or GDP at best.


Maybe they didn't want to do it because it's fvcking shit idea?

It's not creating jobs, again *Broken window fallacy*

Not even the most hardcore Keynsian would argue that just adding a multi trillion dollar make work project would have a "negligible" effect on deficit.



So you're telling me that a National rail network that would require thousands of engineers, construction workers, etc would not create jobs for many industries? :biggums:

In Walker's State of Wisconsin alone, it was estimated that his inexplicably turning down federal funds lost his constituents 13,719 jobs (10K permanent) (http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2010/nov/15/sierra-club/sierra-club-says-killing-high-speed-rail-project-w/)
Again... broken window fallacy

Walker wasn't "turning down funds for his constituents" that's their fvcking money to begin with. Saddling the government with more debt that this generations children and grandchildren are gonna have to work their whole lives to just pay the fvcking interest on isn't the same thing as turning down wealth

[RidonKs]

would have been a fine idea 60 years ago when the idea was initially suggested....

...then deftly undermined and defeated by the automobile lobby...

and so instead of the infrastructure necessary to make commuter and commercial rail viable in a country as large and dispersed as the united states... you have the interstate highway system

a fine suggestion for privileging autonomy but far from cost efficient let alone just pragmatically efficient.

god forbid we get together with a shared consensus and implement a plan that benefits nobody in particular but rather anybody who wants it....

[Akrazotile]

Im a big proponent of more efficient transportation, however I'm skeptical about laying a whole bunch of new rail tracks around America. There are so many logistical obstacles.

Obviously I'm not a civil/transit expert by any means but it seems to me like increasing the efficiency of busses would be perhaps more palatable. Maybe start putting up more bus lanes on major freeways and work on increasing bus capacity, energy efficiency, amenities. Also with emerging auto-piloting technology to assist the driver, and their own designated lanes they can be made faster without sacrificing safety.

Obviously still not as fast as bullet trains but an improvement on what we have available today and probably with far less technical obstacles.

[BasedTom]

Im a big proponent of more efficient transportation, however I'm skeptical about laying a whole bunch of new rail tracks around America. There are so many logistical obstacles.

Obviously I'm not a civil/transit expert by any means but it seems to me like increasing the efficiency of busses would be perhaps more palatable. Maybe start putting up more bus lanes on major freeways and work on increasing bus capacity, energy efficiency, amenities. Also with emerging auto-piloting technology to assist the driver, and their own designated lanes they can be made faster without sacrificing safety.

Obviously still not as fast as bullet trains but an improvement on what we have available today and probably with far less technical obstacles.
busses ****ing suck because they're at the mercy of the same road traffic as everyone else, and on top of that they stop every other block. Taking a train or subway is easily more efficient, more comfortable, more reliable, you name it.

in america, bus systems are mainly there so the local governments can half ass it and be able to say "oh well, we tried" without burning too much of their pockets. The rest of the transport budget then goes to extending and maintaining 20 lane highways which still get gridlocked more often than not, sometimes as a direct result of that aforementioned construction.

[Akrazotile]

busses ****ing suck because they're at the mercy of the same road traffic as everyone else, and on top of that they stop every other block. Taking a train or subway is easily more efficient, more comfortable, more reliable, you name it.

in america, bus systems are mainly there so the local governments can half ass it and be able to say "oh well, we tried" without burning too much of their pockets. The rest of the transport budget then goes to extending and maintaining 20 lane highways which still get gridlocked more often than not, sometimes as a direct result of that aforementioned construction.


I'm talking about busses between cities, not throughout a single city. And as I said, an additional bus lane could be created to allow it to move at greater speeds. Obviously a big undertaking but still not nearly as difficult as brand new bullet trains. Texas already has a decent bus service between cities like Dallas, Austin, Houston and San Antonio. Reasonably comfortable seats, wifi, etc. And it's not like a $1.25 city bus packed full of some questionable elements. It's like 30 bucks a ticket, so riders tend to have a bit better hygene.

That's the kind of thing Id rather expand on than the bullet train idea, much as I do like the idea of transport speeds with the bullet trains. But the environmental issues, the cost, the uncertainty. Not sure it's a sensible thing to commit to at the moment. It's not a concrete opinion, just a loose, general one at the moment based on what Ive heard so far on both sides of the issue.

[fiddy]

US in debt, shouldn't improve infrastructure though, don't be stupid :no:
Cut military budget in half, problem solved

[IGOTGAME]

it would be amazing. We spend money on silly shit all the time. This would actually save time and money. Commuting from NY to DC shouldnt take nearly as long.

[KyrieTheFuture]

I'd rather spend money improving our vital infrastructure, than spend it on a pet project like railways. Besides, a railway across the country is USELESS. We really only need a western loop, and an Eastern straight line, which pretty much already exists. AMTRAK is a thing.

[NumberSix]

would have been a fine idea 60 years ago when the idea was initially suggested....

...then deftly undermined and defeated by the automobile lobby...

and so instead of the infrastructure necessary to make commuter and commercial rail viable in a country as large and dispersed as the united states... you have the interstate highway system

a fine suggestion for privileging autonomy but far from cost efficient let alone just pragmatically efficient.

god forbid we get together with a shared consensus and implement a plan that benefits nobody in particular but rather anybody who wants it....
Why do you think it's the governments place to provide people with affordable travel?

[NumberSix]

Cut military budget in half, problem solved
That doesn't "solve" the problem. The government could cut military spending in half, tax the rich at 100% and would still be running a deficit and growing the debt.

[Hawker]

Houston to Dallas needs to happen. I ****ing hate that drive. Houston to College Station as well. **** it connect all the goddamn major cities in Texas + Houston to College Station.

[Akrazotile]

Houston to Dallas needs to happen. I ****ing hate that drive. Houston to College Station as well. **** it connect all the goddamn major cities in Texas + Houston to College Station.


What's wrong with the Mega Bus?

You too good for the Mega Bus brah?

It's all about the Mega Bus.




Mega Bus.

[DonDadda59]

What's wrong with the Mega Bus?

You too good for the Mega Bus brah?

It's all about the Mega Bus.




Mega Bus.

:applause:

Mega Bus is the shit. Took 2 trips from NYC to Rochester for $1 and the buses are actually really nice, better than Greyhound and other more established bus companies. Free Wifi. :pimp:

I also took some shady Chinatown buses to and from Philly (some of which have been shut down by the Feds because of suspected organized crime links). Pretty sure one time the driver made a detour to do a drug deal in a random parking lot. Didn't even care that there were passengers. :lol

[Hawker]

What's wrong with the Mega Bus?

You too good for the Mega Bus brah?

It's all about the Mega Bus.




Mega Bus.

I'm all about the greyhound.

[tmacattack33]

Yes. In major cities, they should have them going to other major cities within 200 miles. Like NYC to Philly, imagine getting there in less than an hour? Or to Baltimore, less than 2 hours? Or even NYC to Chicago less than 5 hours, NYC to Boston in 2 hours? I guess airlines and bus services would fight to nix it :mad:

Why we gotta be so slow to implement stuff like this?

You're underestimating the speed of mag lev trains. It would take you from NYC to Chicago in less than 3 hours not 5. And that would be amazing :applause: