So High Speed Rail isn't needed?

[rightwinger]

Highways are a lot different than mag lev. People like senses of freedoms. Inside a vehicle is freedom. Although aggravation for slowdowns in traffic and anything related sucks. There are older cities that have built many public transportation systems, and we still see highway slowdowns in driving also. Upgrading existing track needs linear direction and a reduction of stops.

I have been driving for 50 years
Used to be I saw gridlock around NY and LA
Now, any major city grinds to a halt, not just during rush hour but all day.

Building more highways will not relieve the congestion

We need more light rail and high speed rail between cities

 

[Robert W]

None of those countries are wed to the idea of the automobile because of their physical size. Those countries have large populations over relatively small real estate. Outside the metroplex, that is not the case in our nation.

That is correct. And their fuel prices when i was living in Germany were extremely high. I am talking of 1962-64. I owned 2 cars at the time and one used regular, the other used premium. The Autobahns were not as developed as now. Also rules to construct are not like those in the USA.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

I have been driving for 50 years
Used to be I saw gridlock around NY and LA
Now, any major city grinds to a halt, not just during rush hour but all day.

Building more highways will not relieve the congestion

We need more light rail and high speed rail between cities

.


Lol! We'll keep our traffic problems out here between cities.

 

[22lcidw]

I have been driving for 50 years
Used to be I saw gridlock around NY and LA
Now, any major city grinds to a halt, not just during rush hour but all day.

Building more highways will not relieve the congestion

We need more light rail and high speed rail between cities

That may be right. Older cities have to live from the past. The public transportation grid built was cheap when it was done a century ago. Not now. Newer cities may have that opportunity. The older ones do not. New York city had two major water sources pipelines form a long distance from the city that was built fast near a century ago over a couple of decades. There are leaks in the system that affects water to a degree. They have been building a third pipeline for over 30 years, and it is still not finished, and it will help to renovate the other pipelines. We are spoiled.

 

[Robert W]

I have been driving for 50 years
Used to be I saw gridlock around NY and LA
Now, any major city grinds to a halt, not just during rush hour but all day.

Building more highways will not relieve the congestion

We need more light rail and high speed rail between cities

There are few major cities as you describe them in the entire USA. Take our capitol Boise, It is a low population capitol. In fact the city still has a train station that is not used for Trains. Tourists get a chance to see an old train station so it is preserved. We travel by cars here and those traffic jams you speak of seldom happen unless there is a major wreck. Boise might now be up to 236,000 population.

I once worked constructing railroad tunnels and bridges and saw then how hard it is to build them. And it takes what seems to be forever to build them. Take the CA rail system now being created; it started in 2008. 17 years later it seems about to come to a complete stop.

Although the state has spent roughly $14 billion on the project, it needs more than twice that amount to complete the Merced-to-Bakersfield segment, which officials hope to finish between 2030 and 2033.

At the budget hearing on Wednesday, California Assemblyman Steven Bennett criticized the bullet train project, warning that the state has no clear plan and faces a short window to address worsening issues. Assemblymember Cottie Petrie-Norris echoed the concerns, calling the project review process poorly timed and comparing the state's repeated missteps to insanity, urging a new approach.

 

[westwall]

Amtrak makes money on the Northeast Corridor between Boston, NY, Philadelphia, Baltimore and DC
I have taken it many times including the Acela

It is far from a modern rail system

We can do better, other countries manage to do it

In that one region yeah. But nowhere else.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Amtrak makes money on the Northeast Corridor between Boston, NY, Philadelphia, Baltimore and DC
I have taken it many times including the Acela

It is far from a modern rail system

We can do better, other countries manage to do it

There is no need for the country to spend tax dollars to benefit only a few people.

 

[Robert W]

Amtrak makes money on the Northeast Corridor between Boston, NY, Philadelphia, Baltimore and DC
I have taken it many times including the Acela

It is far from a modern rail system

We can do better, other countries manage to do it

AI Overview
Learn more

Amtrak has consistently operated at a loss, with FY2024 showing an adjusted operating earnings loss of $705.2 million, though this represents a 9% improvement from the previous year. Despite record ridership and revenue increases, Amtrak relies on federal subsidies to cover operational costs.

Here's a more detailed look at Amtrak's financial performance:
Key Financial Data for FY2024:

• Adjusted Operating Earnings Loss: $705.2 million (a 9% improvement from FY23)
• Ticket Revenue: $2.5 billion (a first in Amtrak's history and 9% higher year-over-year)
• Total Operating Revenue: $3.6 billion (a 7% increase over FY23)
  • Ridership: All-time record of 32.8 million customer trips, a 15% increase over FY23
    

Factors Contributing to Losses:

• • High Operating Costs:
    Amtrak's long-distance routes, mandated by Congress, have high operating costs and generate relatively low revenues.
    
  • Reliance on Federal Subsidies:
    Amtrak relies on significant federal funding to cover its operational losses and capital needs.
    
  • Capital Investments:
    While Amtrak is investing heavily in infrastructure, these costs also contribute to the overall expenses.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Nobody is talking about putting trains in rural America

You want high speed rail and simple geography says it has to be rural.

 

[Robert W]

Nobody is talking about putting trains in rural America

Study this before you keep misinforming the posters here. CA definitely has cost overruns that are excessive putting trains in rural america.

 

[rightwinger]

Study this before you keep misinforming the posters here. CA definitely has cost overruns that are excessive putting trains in rural america.

California is running high speed to major population centers
They go through rural America but don’t stop

 

[rightwinger]

You want high speed rail and simple geography says it has to be rural.

Planes fly over that land and don’t stop either

 

[Robert W]

California is running high speed to major population centers
They go through rural America but don’t stop

What do you mean? They have not started rolling. Fact is they don't even have track to those major population centers suitable for high speed trains.

 

[rightwinger]

What do you mean? They have not started rolling. Fact is they don't even have track to those major population centers suitable for high speed trains.

That is the way things work while you are building something

 

[westwall]

California is running high speed to major population centers
They go through rural America but don’t stop

No, it isn't. They have spent tens of billions and virtually nothing has been done.

It's a scam.

Always has been.

 

[rightwinger]

There is no need for the country to spend tax dollars to benefit only a few people.

More than a few people live in that corridor
It is the most densely populated region in the country.

The roads in that corridor are overburdened
More roads is not the answer

 

[leftwinger]

Takes time to get to speed. 5 stops (every 100 mi) turns it into “light rail”. Load & unload, wait. Back to speed. Can’t go full speed in 40% of CA route (not safe). Ridiculous. Air travel is faster. Parking exists.

Vandals, muslims, bombers, shooters must be kept off trains (like air travel). More time to screen them out. Fights (blacks, mexicans, junkies)), security during route? They don’t need in civilized countries. Good luck with your project waste.

Note: it takes 2-3 hours to drive and park (cost $30/day) “anywhere” in CA. HS rail will not be HS on any overall trip. Quicker to drive to LA. Pound sand home O freaks,

 

[leftwinger]

No, it isn't. They have spent tens of billions and virtually nothing has been done.

It's a scam.

Always has been.

Exactly. A money laundering scheme. Billions doall “studies” one after other taking years, all costly, never ending. Big kickbacks to DNC or Pelosi fund.

 

[leftwinger]

Smh? RW chirping about building more light rail or HS rail up above? Then the joker says “been driving” 50 years. Proving the point for driving alone. Smh?

Watched so many Bus and light rail routes run empty thru CA forever. Bus sits at stops empty 3 min with door open, nobody coming. To stay on schedule. Homeless riding light rail as a shelter,. Violence scaring folks away.

 

[rightwinger]

Takes time to get to speed. 5 stops (every 100 mi) turns it into “light rail”. Load & unload, wait. Back to speed. Can’t go full speed in 40% of CA route (not safe). Ridiculous. Air travel is faster. Parking exists.

I have taken the Acela and it is much like that. Hurry up and wait. There are sections where you may go 130 mph and then you grind to a crawl when you reach city suburbs.
The advantage of taking the train is there is ample parking around the station and you only need to arrive a few minutes before your departure. You carry on your bag and throw it in the overhead. Much more legroom and you can walk around.

I used to fly between NY and Boston and NY and DC.
Used to be easy to arrive just before the flight. Now, with security it takes over an hour