It would be worth the cost especially if it reduces emissions and provides public transportation away from highways and air travel.
I have no idea how long it will take to travel, nor how much it will cost.
A VERY short version in California had a cost go from 39 billion to 100 billion. Should give some kind of idea of how unrealistic a nationwide high speed rail system is.
maybe the Federal Government should be doing an audit on California on
more than just the Transportation section.
Cali seems to be draining the Feds funds left and right.
I thought that it was suppose to be a Socialist Utopia though.
I guess not.
Doesn’t the Green New Deal call for a nationwide high speed rail system similar to this mess?
Specifically, the section of the FAQ on transportation calls to “build out high-speed rail at a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary.” The resolution itself doesn’t mention air travel at all but does call for the goal of “investing in … clean, affordable, and accessible transportation; and high-speed rail” as part of a 10-year national mobilization.
It certainly does. can you imagine the cost of high speed rail all cross the country, touching every city that has a major airport, or secondary airport (example on Utah – Salt lake international, salt lake #2, Provo, and St. George are the places with schedule airline service).
And you wonder why I’m praying the Dems run on this.
Please, please, please make the GND your official platform. It’s not that I want Trump reelected…I just want the DNC to self destruct, and this should do the trick. 
How will aoc get around when visiting her celebrity friends?
The US should have built a high speed railroad system 50 years ago.
Might be too late now. There should be more of an emphasis on making our bus system better.
South Korea has an amazing bus system. There is also no stigma against riding the bus. Americans would have to work on that.
Amazing how France has a bullet train and we are still stuck with Amtrak
South Korea is about 1/99th the size of the US.
You beat me to that one. Plus Japan is the size of California and Germany that of Montana. That being said I was kind of hoping it worked in California that would have been neat. Plus another thing people aren’t taking into account in building rail across America is how hard it is to get the land rights. Which Trumps wall was having a lot of push back from land owners. Can you imagine the push back trying to put that across the continental U.S.
Oddly enough we use to be the leaders in Railroad.
Yep, the same leftists screaming over having to use eminent domain to put up border barriers will be flipping over backwards with joy if it is used for their idiotic doomed to fail high speed rail projects.
Hypocrites every one.
Can you imagine how terrorists would be jumping for joy if the US was covered with HSR corridors?
Five minutes work to kill hundreds.
It actually might be smaller than that.
But think in terms of my home state of Georgia. There might be like 4 or 5 buses a day to get from Atlanta to Savannah, Macon, Augusta, or Columbus.
If it were Korea, you would have buses leaving every 15-30 minutes.
We had very intensive bus and train transport through the early and middle part of the last century, it failed miserably and was an economic black hole.
Americans overall don’t like mass transit, it’s used only when there’s no other alternative.
Hence why I said we have to get rid of the stigma of taking the bus. The American culture of everyone having a car is becoming outdated.
If we want to get serious about climate change, we are going to have to heavily raise gas taxes and put expensive tolls on highways.
That’s ridiculous.
There’s no evidence to suggest we could affect the earth’s temperatures in any way if the US eliminated all it’s carbon emissions tomorrow.
It isn’t about stigma, it’s simply that being dependent on mass transit outside of the heavy population centers is utterly impractical and forcing us to rely on it would be an economic catastrophe.
There’s no evidence that the environment will be healthy if we continue to increase carbon emissions. In fact, there’s evidence against it.
If you want to talk about economic catastrophes, rising sea levels and more hurricanes and wildfires are going to be disastrous.
Luckily, with self driving cars, car ownership will naturally go down. But we are going to have to do a lot more than that to reduce the effects of climate change.
You can’t show that increased carbon emissions are responsible for any of those.
What we know is that during every inter-glacial cycle sea levels have risen and that they have in fact been both higher and much lower than they currently are.
You also can’t show that carbon emissions are responsible for the forest fires, hurricanes or droughts.
You could not type on that computer without petroleum. You could not eat without petroleum. Without petroleum most pharmaceuticals would cease to be possible to manufacture, crops could not be grown, and food could not be transported to the cities.
This is nothing but partisan panic mongering.
