High-Speed Rail in the U.S.

There has been some talk about funds going to certain states to begin high-speed rail projects in major areas to connect heavily populated city centers with each other.

Wisconsin and Ohio refused the funding, being against the idea of high speed rail, so the money was distributed to California and Florida - which increased the amount of money for their projects.

Here's the Huff Post article: States move ahead with high speed rail project

I like the general idea of a high-speed rail system. Having lived in Japan, public transportation is integral in a metropolitan area, and I love public transportation (at least back home). I can see how this would benefit certain parts of the U.S. but I don't know that it's really a good idea just yet. I think the country needs to improve existing systems of public transportation before they go embarking on a multi-billion dollar shiny railway project.

Not to mention, I think they also have to look at the socio-demographic use of such transportation. People who work in the cities rely on the train, which is fine because they can afford to take the train all they want. But people who are poorer take rely on the bus, which is generally cheaper than the train. If the way we perceive public transportation doesn't change from "poor man's ride" to "public transportation", I think the high-speed rail will suffer in the long run. But of course, I'm hopeful that perhaps I'm wrong in my thinking and it will not only be successful, but also reduce the number of cars on the road helping the environment in some way.

What are your thoughts? Are you for high-speed? Against, don't care, don't know? Talk amongst yourselves.

Foblentz wrote:I like the general idea of a high-speed rail system. Having lived in Japan, public transportation is integral in a metropolitan area, and I love public transportation (at least back home). I can see how this would benefit certain parts of the U.S. but I don't know that it's really a good idea just yet. I think the country needs to improve existing systems of public transportation before they go embarking on a multi-billion dollar shiny railway project.

Public transportation fails in this country time and time again and it's simply because of everyone's cars versus high prices. The subway is great for New Yorkers, but in other places not owning a car is just not an option. Even here on Long Island buses are cutting routes and hiking the prices, and a train ticket isn't worth it when you're working an hourly job.

I love this idea, but only if it is backed by a solid attempt to drive down prices and educate on the pros of public transportation.

I believe that part of this comes from the need of the US to compete with the new high-speed rail China is building. Infastructure increases trade and tourism, no matter which side you look at it.

I have also had the pleasure of taking advantage of Japan's railway system, and I have no hesitation in saying that Japan has the most reliable railways in the world. However, Japan has the advantage (or disadvantage) of having everything so close together that railways make the most sense for public transportation anywhere in the country. Before, the United States has made the excuse that everything is too far apart to facilitate the need for high-speed rail.

Eventually, I believe this is where we as a nation need to end up. However, whether we are simply flexing our muscles and saying '0h yeah, well we can build one too...', or if there is an actual current need that this will fill is questionable.

I say do it. There is no time like the present to make transportation cleaner and safer... who cares what the real reason is for.

I'm with Ephe on this one, if you go to a big city like Chicago, San Fran, or LA (the ones I've been to) you can hoof it around on foot and take the subway or buses (or trollys for San Fran) easily and be fine in the city.

That transport is also cut off from the rest of the world though as it doesn't go very far and it's not cheap.

I support the idea 100% though.

Living in St. Louis you have to deal with blind bias towards public transport. So any thought of expanding into the suburbs is immediately shot down. And the Suburbs themselves have poor to none public transport for that matter.

The suburbs, in my opinion, are full of ninnies who don't give a damn about other people.

Now that part of my little rant is put to rest. It is upsetting, now that you mention it- China's doing it? Oh shits! We gots to do it toos!

We're going to tear up the environment just so we can stay near the top....

If you live in the city, I can see how regular subway and bus makes more sense, but what about people who travel from city to city on business? I think it would be easier to just pay for a train ticket and go, rather than relying on your own car or the company's car to get you there. (avoid congestions, etc).

the United States has made the excuse that everything is too far apart to facilitate the need for high-speed rail.

That's the first thing I thought when I first moved here: "Why the fuck is everything so far apart?!" It was unbelievable, and it's still unbelievable. I hate having to rely on my car, but at the same time I can't rely on public transportation here because it sucks.

I love this idea, but only if it is backed by a solid attempt to drive down prices and educate on the pros of public transportation.

This is a biggie - but with the education part, there will be a huge fight against it because certain industries will cry about losing their business (and profits!). You know how our country works: solar energy? well, we can't have that! People need oil! Oil is good!

same thing will probably happen with educating the pros of public transport: "public transportation shmation. Having your own car means success and independence! Having your own car keeps you from mingling with lowlifes, and will protect you from people who wish to harm you and rob you of your personal items!" "American Dream!" etc. etc.

I swear, this country....

we need a bullet train system from New York to Chicago to Saint Louis to San Francisco. there was a time in this country where entire fucking wars were fought over where the rails should lie, and now we just think of them as "too expensive" to build. Fuck that, a train between Saint Louis and Chicago alone would pay for itself within a year of being open.
As far as train vs bus goes, in Chicago its a flat rate between the two, so there is no "cheaper" option, and I think that's the way it should be. It gets you better busses and the El to run on time. I rely solely on public transportation, and goddamn do I wish it extended between cities. But the distance involved isn't the real issue, its getting those who have the money to see that it is a worthwhile investment.

High speed rail isn't meant to replace subways.. high speed rail connects cities together, not blocks. Just clarifying..

Coren wrote:High speed rail isn't meant to replace subways.. high speed rail connects cities together, not blocks. Just clarifying..

I'm unsure as to why you chose to clarify this. We all understand what is meant by it. But my point is because our public transit is so poor already it's... eeeeeh.

Yeah, we were just addressing that in the US all forms of public transport, within the cities, and extending outside of them; are not that good.

From what i heard they are building one from Chicago to Saint Louis. So maybe this is what they are doing for other states as well.

Well, they are apparently willing to lay down over a billion dollars towards the project. I have high hopes, but I won't hold my breath for it.

A high speed rail system, such as what Japan and Europe possess, wouldn't necessarily compete very much with inner-city public transportation systems, What it would be competing with would be the airlines and the highway system/personal cars.