High Speed Rail 2050 Question
- Thread starter farecoal
- Start date
Euphod: I disagree with that..We need HSR, I don't think we will have it like Europe because for the most part it was the Government of each Country that built it..Besides the Americans love their cars..Now it was the Oil Barons that got us on that track.
We have to have Transportation system that will compete with Airlines, because they are getting to big for there own good..Look what they use for fuel..
I guess really you can say that about a lot things we have..Diesel guess what it uses..I think in all fairness its easy to say things against oil..
We have to have Transportation system that will compete with Airlines, because they are getting to big for there own good..Look what they use for fuel..
I guess really you can say that about a lot things we have..Diesel guess what it uses..I think in all fairness its easy to say things against oil..
I have to disagree with you. HSR is a good idea, and should be presured. Now trying to get HSR to replace overnight routes, that is a bad idea, but taking a more or less flat, and straight route, say Chicago to Milwaukee, Chicago to St. Louis, maybe even as far as Chicago to Denver, I think HSR has a place there, it could cut down the travel time, it could get people off the interstate, and keep people off planes.
You can only expand airports so far before you need to build a new one, you can only spend so much money on highways and expand them so far, if you need more people on a train, add more cars.
In the long run, HSR for those kinds of routes would cost less then expanding an airport or rebuilding a highway. Think how many bridges span I-80 between Denver and Chicago. All would have to be replaced to expand the Highway, and would have to be replaced again to be expanded again.
Highway's make no money at all other then taxes, Airports and airlines have always had a history of losing money, then gaining money, then losing it again. And Trains lose money too
Its not about what turns a profit, its about whats the cheaper alternative in the long run, and what brings the most benefit for the dollar.
Fine,... you guys pay for it then. Maybe each taxpayer will be permitted to obtain a waiver to opt out.
It's not about profit as long as taxes will pay for it? Nonsense, there's enough taxes now, and they only ever want more. Profit is completely required for any venture to become self sustaining, and most of the HSR in the world cannot turn a profit. They only nurse at the government teat, and short sighted peoples the world over pay the bill for their government's ambitions.
How very successfully the indoctrination has permeated...
I will take my leave of this well intentioned, yet completely ridiculous thread now so you can discuss HSR (again), maybe Windmills (snort!), solarpower (oh please!) and any other unicorn fairy dust butterfly foolishness you wish without getting the thread locked...:hehe:
It's not about profit as long as taxes will pay for it? Nonsense, there's enough taxes now, and they only ever want more. Profit is completely required for any venture to become self sustaining, and most of the HSR in the world cannot turn a profit. They only nurse at the government teat, and short sighted peoples the world over pay the bill for their government's ambitions.
How very successfully the indoctrination has permeated...
I will take my leave of this well intentioned, yet completely ridiculous thread now so you can discuss HSR (again), maybe Windmills (snort!), solarpower (oh please!) and any other unicorn fairy dust butterfly foolishness you wish without getting the thread locked...:hehe:
That one can be thrown in both directions...
Didn't the US senate recently discuss removing $6bn in subsidies to the oil and coal industries? Your tax dollars pay for that too.
Most HSR worldwide runs an operating profit, just not enough to give a commercial return on capital. However, the same is true of road and airport investments.
As for the OP's question - generally upgrades to existing infrastructure are the less effective way of delivering HSR. The upgrade of the West Coast Main Line in the UK cost almost as much as a new high speed line, but at much lower speeds and line capacity.
In general, exisiting routes will be adapted for the entry to cities, as new corridors in urban areas get really expensive, but new alignments work better in open countryside.
Paul
jayinatlanta
New member
I would gladly choose to pay for High Speed Rail than many other things that my taxes buy, but we don't have the choice to be selective.
To your second point I snipped, I have a real problem with some of these efforts to privatize things like the Interstate Highway System. If profit were the motive, who's to say that necessary repairs won't wait even longer, while corporations responsible to their stockholders squeeze every dime out of the ROI?
paulzmay, thanks for the insights on the OP's question about new routes versus upgrades to existing routes.
So what is the profit that the Interstate Highway system makes? My hard earned tax dollars are paying for that too. Or the Military?
Back on topic.
There are two versions of HSR currently being introduced. One is your classic HSR, akin to the Shinkansen & TGV. The other is a sort of mid-ground.
the proper HSR lines will run on their own HSR tracks while occasionally going onto the existing (but upgraded) lines for some stations. The dumb-ed down HSR lines will run on upgraded existing lines. While the dumbed-down HSR is cheaper to build it cannot reach the same speeds as the proper HSR can.
The Cali HSR will be on it's own ROW, whereas the (now canceled) Wisconsin HSR would have used the existing ROW.
peter
peter
True, though I don't think you'd get away with calling the Wisconsin plan HSR outside the USA.
The problem that private companies usually have with big infrastructure projects is that they typically have pay-back timescales that are simply too long for invetors, and/or the benefits of the project are not all measured in revenue to the owner. A private company building it's own HSR would make some money on farebox revenue, but it doesn't benefit directly from the reduced traffic congestion, the reduced centre to centre journey times, the increased land values and business levels around stations, or the benefit to the economy as a whole. Ultimately that's one reason why we have government - to pay for the stuff that benefits all of us, but that no-one else is prepared to pay for.
Of course, that still means that anyone proposing such a scheme still needs to ensure that it will be money well spent - HSR is no use to anyone if no-one rides it. The USA could do with one really successful and well implemented project that shows that what works in Europe and Asia really could work in America.
Paul
The problem that private companies usually have with big infrastructure projects is that they typically have pay-back timescales that are simply too long for invetors, and/or the benefits of the project are not all measured in revenue to the owner. A private company building it's own HSR would make some money on farebox revenue, but it doesn't benefit directly from the reduced traffic congestion, the reduced centre to centre journey times, the increased land values and business levels around stations, or the benefit to the economy as a whole. Ultimately that's one reason why we have government - to pay for the stuff that benefits all of us, but that no-one else is prepared to pay for.
Of course, that still means that anyone proposing such a scheme still needs to ensure that it will be money well spent - HSR is no use to anyone if no-one rides it. The USA could do with one really successful and well implemented project that shows that what works in Europe and Asia really could work in America.
Paul
One way...or the another...
Since the fifties-sixties we have subsidised the airline industry by your taxpayer dollars...when did you last get your money's worth out of that?
If you took tax payers money away from federal & state highways, we would all be riding on toll roads.
It's not the cost of running public transport, that's done well by Atlanta's MARTA system for example. Florida HSR is far from dead, as can be read on my Facebook page.
It's the start-up costs that need to be considered whilst overhauling public transportation(rebuilding infrastructure).
Since the fifties-sixties we have subsidised the airline industry by your taxpayer dollars...when did you last get your money's worth out of that?If you took tax payers money away from federal & state highways, we would all be riding on toll roads.
It's not the cost of running public transport, that's done well by Atlanta's MARTA system for example. Florida HSR is far from dead, as can be read on my Facebook page.
It's the start-up costs that need to be considered whilst overhauling public transportation(rebuilding infrastructure).
My answer to the OP's question in post number 1 is..... neither will be selected at this time.
Why?
1...Until the Wall Street Barons decide that HSR can be made profitable for them.
2...If Wall Street Barons see a profit, they will TELL the Federal and State governments to proceed with HSR.
3...Did you know that the state of Indiana has sold its toll roads (privatization) to a bank (foreign) for 75+ year lease, and the lease says that NO major repairs or updates can be done unless an appropriate increase in tolls is generated to offset these repairs?
4...Other states in the USA are also considering this, to help the states reduce their debts.
5...HSR can only be supported by tax increases to support the projects, for both construction and maintenance.
6...HSR in other countries is supported by their governments.
Do not discount what Euphod has posted, he is correct.
Regards,
Why?
1...Until the Wall Street Barons decide that HSR can be made profitable for them.
2...If Wall Street Barons see a profit, they will TELL the Federal and State governments to proceed with HSR.
3...Did you know that the state of Indiana has sold its toll roads (privatization) to a bank (foreign) for 75+ year lease, and the lease says that NO major repairs or updates can be done unless an appropriate increase in tolls is generated to offset these repairs?
4...Other states in the USA are also considering this, to help the states reduce their debts.
5...HSR can only be supported by tax increases to support the projects, for both construction and maintenance.
6...HSR in other countries is supported by their governments.
Do not discount what Euphod has posted, he is correct.
Regards,
cascaderailroad
New member
There have been at least 2-3 threads all similar to this thread ... but I fully support HSR projects ... I even use the PRR-TGV Freight 375722:1215:1 and 375722:1216:1 TGV locos on my Horseshoe route. Search: Username: cascaderailroad http://www.auran.com/TRS2004/DLS.php
In my opinion, a dedicated frieght only ... dedicated passenger only ... separate rail lines are the way to go. Electrification is probably the best eccologicly speaking.
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showpost.php?p=411903&postcount=4
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showpost.php?p=444102&postcount=37
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showpost.php?p=459974&postcount=41
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showpost.php?p=487013&postcount=53
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showpost.php?p=502743&postcount=59
In my opinion, a dedicated frieght only ... dedicated passenger only ... separate rail lines are the way to go. Electrification is probably the best eccologicly speaking.
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showpost.php?p=411903&postcount=4
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showpost.php?p=444102&postcount=37
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showpost.php?p=459974&postcount=41
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showpost.php?p=487013&postcount=53
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showpost.php?p=502743&postcount=59
Last edited:
So what's your explanation as to why the PRR still exists in this alternate history world of yours? haha
Gandalf0444
FVRR member
Sounds like the people who plug there electric cars in at night to the power grid powered by a coal power plant.
You cannot be green if you are still using power from a fossil fuel. Trading 1 for another does not work. It just does not make sense.A HSR system maybe more green then say 10,000 more cars on the roads, however it is still far from green. Each and every inch of the line must be powered by something, and since the largest overall number of power plants are powered by coal it will be just that.
The U.S. highway system allows commerce, which generates tax funds through the buying and selling of goods. All sales and federal taxes have a portion to go towards maintaining the road system.
Railroads dumped moving people years ago because of the loss of revenue.
We are way to spread out to make public transportation viable without massive subsidies.
Uncle Sugar makes more per gallon of gas than the oil companies. How do you suppose they make up the loss if we park our cars?
Everyone wants electric cars, what are you going to plug them into?
When you shut the airlines down, what do all those people do for work to pay taxes? Pilots, mechanics, fuel, all those thousands in support roles from ticket takers to the schmo who loads the bags. Not to mention the restaurant across the street where they eat lunch.
HSR works in Europe because of the closer population densities. Compare all of Britain, for instance, to just the Northeast Corridor here to get an idea.
Can you imagine all the people who would be put out of work, where the tax money comes from, if we switched to HSR. We are in a money crunch now because of the high unemployment, what happens when it's permanent.
Regional rail is fine and doable. The rest will never benefit from it and a lot will lose jobs to pay taxes to fund it.
Dave.........
Railroads dumped moving people years ago because of the loss of revenue.
We are way to spread out to make public transportation viable without massive subsidies.
Uncle Sugar makes more per gallon of gas than the oil companies. How do you suppose they make up the loss if we park our cars?
Everyone wants electric cars, what are you going to plug them into?
When you shut the airlines down, what do all those people do for work to pay taxes? Pilots, mechanics, fuel, all those thousands in support roles from ticket takers to the schmo who loads the bags. Not to mention the restaurant across the street where they eat lunch.
HSR works in Europe because of the closer population densities. Compare all of Britain, for instance, to just the Northeast Corridor here to get an idea.
Can you imagine all the people who would be put out of work, where the tax money comes from, if we switched to HSR. We are in a money crunch now because of the high unemployment, what happens when it's permanent.
Regional rail is fine and doable. The rest will never benefit from it and a lot will lose jobs to pay taxes to fund it.
Dave.........
To all who say they are delighted to pay more taxes to have high speed rail, I say, "Who is stopping you?" And they don't have to be taxes. You can put out the money voluntarily.
I suggest that instead of laying on another huge tax burden for a speculative benefit, just take up a collection. Most other toy train and model railroad clubs are funded in that way. And if HSR is such an urgent necessity, selling the idea of voluntary contributions toward it should be no problem.
Those of us who do not care to contribute can be banned from using the HSR trains. Everybody gets what they want.
Bernie
I suggest that instead of laying on another huge tax burden for a speculative benefit, just take up a collection. Most other toy train and model railroad clubs are funded in that way. And if HSR is such an urgent necessity, selling the idea of voluntary contributions toward it should be no problem.
Those of us who do not care to contribute can be banned from using the HSR trains. Everybody gets what they want.
Bernie