BEIJING (AP) - A Chinese passenger train hit a record speed of 302 miles per hour (486 kilometers per hour) Friday during a test run of a yet-to-be opened link between Beijing and Shanghai, state media said. The Xinhua News Agency said it was the fastest speed recorded by an unmodified conventional commercial train. Other types of trains in other countries have traveled faster......
BEIJING (AP) - A Chinese passenger train hit a record speed of 302 miles per hour (486 kilometers per hour) Friday during a test run of a yet-to-be opened link between Beijing and Shanghai, state media said.
The Xinhua News Agency said it was the fastest speed recorded by an unmodified conventional commercial train. Other types of trains in other countries have traveled faster......
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20101203/D9JSBBLG0.html
Faster than a slow boat to America.
Now let's see...the so called "backward" Chinese nation somehow manages to develop and build a 300 mph (plus) passenger train and do so in the fastest growing economy in the world (at this time)...AND while buying up much of our infrastructure (tollways and high-rise buildings in Illinois and New York). All of this while our politicos are rejecting more and faster passenger rail? What's wrong with this picture folks?
The French TGV hit 357 three years ago. I'll be impressed by anything China does sometime between yesterday and never. Unless they can build a train that runs 500 mph on nothing but air, is totally silent, and costs about $1 to build and ride that is. Anything else I'd want to say about that country and the politics would get this thread locked, and go way off topic.
Dan
eolafan Now let's see...the so called "backward" Chinese nation somehow manages to develop and build a 300 mph (plus) passenger train and do so in the fastest growing economy in the world (at this time)...AND while buying up much of our infrastructure (tollways and high-rise buildings in Illinois and New York). All of this while our politicos are rejecting more and faster passenger rail? What's wrong with this picture folks? [emphasis added]
Now let's see...the so called "backward" Chinese nation somehow manages to develop and build a 300 mph (plus) passenger train and do so in the fastest growing economy in the world (at this time)...AND while buying up much of our infrastructure (tollways and high-rise buildings in Illinois and New York). All of this while our politicos are rejecting more and faster passenger rail? What's wrong with this picture folks? [emphasis added]
What's wrong? You only need to look at the negative and xenophobic sentiments expressed on this thread and this forum to answer that question.
In fairness, and pointing out some of realistic opposition to HSR, here's a link that discusses a recent opinion in the Chinese Academy of Science:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/12/should-china-rethink-high-speed-rail/67282/
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
eolafan Now let's see...the so called "backward" Chinese nation somehow manages to develop and build a 300 mph (plus) passenger train and do so in the fastest growing economy in the world (at this time)...AND while buying up much of our infrastructure (tollways and high-rise buildings in Illinois and New York). All of this while our politicos are rejecting more and faster passenger rail? What's wrong with this picture folks?
You can’t get the cart ahead of the horse. China is economically strong, so they can afford anything they want. The U.S. is on the verge of insolvency, so it is nonsense to waste money on things we can’t afford just to keep up with the Jones’s. Wasting money is what got us into this mess. Saving our pennies and holding off on HSR now is how we will get it in the future. Otherwise we will end up with a derelict country with some fast trains parked in the weeds.
I presume you're taking issue with my post and the language within, as I was one a couple of replies. xen·o·pho·bi·a–noun an unreasonable fear or hatred of foreigners or strangers or of that which is foreign or strange. (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/xenophobic)Comparing what the Chinese are doing with passenger rail to what the US is doing with passenger rail is apples to oranges IMO. Everything being State run or operated in China versus private enterprise in the US will yield different approaches to problems like what to do about passenger rail. They have access to funding options for whatever project(s) are deemed important seemingly irregardless of cost and scale. That does not seem to apply in this country. A large network of publicly accessible highways and a history of personal freedom of travel (US) versus the opposite and a society historically geared towards mass transit & less personal freedom (China) means the same solution that works there may/will not work here and vice versa. I have no 'dog in the fight' as to what China does within its own borders-build all the trains you want, rock on. But to accuse people of xenophobic tendancies for reasons I can't grasp? I could care less what other countries do but agree with Bucyrus...we should be spending wisely and HSR seems (at the time) like an unwise fiscal move.
xen·o·pho·bi·a–noun an unreasonable fear or hatred of foreigners or strangers or of that which is foreign or strange.
This is a 'one-of' event. It's nice to know that it can be done - yet again - and this time with someone else's (China's) 'off-the-shelf" equipment and track, and that maybe a new nuanced 'world record' of some kind happened there. And that the 'envelope' of the performance of 'steel wheel on steel rail' technology has been pushed out maybe a little farther - it still can work at ever higher speeds. But it's not technically significant until it can be done 'day-in and day-out' with maintenance requirements for both the track and equipment that are acceptable both in terms of time out-of-service and costs - and not commercially significant until that speed attracts a sufficient ridership that's willing to pay at least most of the incremental cost of providing it.
Schlimm, thanks for that link. That was a well-written article - probably the most economic common sense on a single page I've seen in a long time. Which leads to a further comment:
A few weeks ago on NPR's Morning Edition I heard a report on a new Chinese HSR line, based on an interview with 1 passenger. As I recall, 10 years ago, he was a peasant or farmer - now he's a pet food salesman, 'living the good life' and riding on an HSR on a salary of something like $160 a month. [EDIT: Tuesday morning, November 16, 2010 - "China Leads World In High-Speed Rail Tracks", by Rob Gifford - here's the link to a transcript of it, and an audio is also available: http://www.npr.org/2010/11/16/131351045/china-leads-other-nations-in-high-speed-rail-tracks ] This caused me to think of the dichotomy between the polar extremes on the theoretical 'economic continuum' of the Chinese centralized economic system and our capitalistic one - especially why they have HSR and we don't and maybe won't - and here's what I concluded the dilemma is, in a nutshell:
In the Chinese system, the government plans almost everything, and takes or keeps most of the economic wealth. It makes the decisions, and so it can then aggregate and then allocate the money where it thinks that will do the most good - such as $Billions for new HSR systems as here. The people get what's left over - the $160 per month. But in the US, most of the economic wealth is left to the people - such that even the 'poverty level' is well over $1,000 per month - who make individual decisions as to how to spend their money. As a result, our system is almost anarchic in nature, with the money flowing in thousands of different directions according to how each person thinks it will suit their needs the best. As a result, the liklihood that enough people will vote for any HSR system with enough of their discretionary money at the same time to accumulate the 'critical mass' that is needed to create such a system is vanishingly small, it seems to me. So unless we either: A) become more like the Chinese economic system (which I'm not advocating); or, B) do a much better job of persuading our fellow citizens and/ or politicians and economic gurus, etc. of the merits of HSR, it'll be a long time coming.
Actually, I advocate a variation of B) - the 'incremental' approach of build a little better Amtrak towards HSR at a time and let the people see for themselves what its mertis are, and then let them vote with their ticket money to support it. Maybe some government grants and/ or subsidies to 'jump-start' the more worthwhile systems, and/ or matching funds to reward use and effectiveness - but no 100% funding of HSR on an untried and not currently existing corridor.
- Paul North.
IIRC, the new Chinese HSR equipment uses European Technology...
"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock
CNW 6000 But to accuse people of xenophobic tendancies for reasons I can't grasp? I could care less what other countries do...
But to accuse people of xenophobic tendancies for reasons I can't grasp? I could care less what other countries do...
I'll explain why I believe your statement was (though perhaps unintentionally) xenophobic. Pretty clearly from the linked article which makes an even a stronger case against HSR than Bucyrus, I am not such an HSR fan that I am unwilling to look at reasoned arguments against it.
You seem constrained from giving credit to China for its real accomplishments in HSR in a very short time. Yes they used/stole Siemens technology, but they still had to build most of the equipment and all the RoW. They broke the world record, period, for unmodified equipment. You resort to sarcasm (a sharply ironical taunt; sneering or cutting remark; an indirect expression of underlying anger or contempt):
"I'll be impressed by anything China does sometime between yesterday and never. Unless they can build a train that runs 500 mph on nothing but air, is totally silent, and costs about $1 to build and ride that is. Anything else I'd want to say about that country and the politics would get this thread locked, and go way off topic." I would say your comment is obviously contemptuous and is a classic example of xenophobia (a fear and/or contempt of strangers or foreign peoples)
I am not against HSR...when we can afford it and people will use it. My commentary towards how that country does business and conducts itself is sarcastic, definately. I have contempt for anyone who steals ideas and does business as they appear to do because I believe the ends don't justify the means. So maybe you were right in the textbook sense...but I come back to the apples/oranges argument-big picture. If money and public/popular opinion don't matter then just about anything can be built anywhere.
I won’t speak for CNW 6000, but I think that one could justifiably be critical of China for imposing a political system that denies their people freedom, without being xenophobic toward the people themselves.
carnej1 eolafan: Now let's see...the so called "backward" Chinese nation somehow manages to develop and build a 300 mph (plus) passenger train and do so in the fastest growing economy in the world (at this time)...AND while buying up much of our infrastructure (tollways and high-rise buildings in Illinois and New York). All of this while our politicos are rejecting more and faster passenger rail? What's wrong with this picture folks? IIRC, the new Chinese HSR equipment uses European Technology...
eolafan: Now let's see...the so called "backward" Chinese nation somehow manages to develop and build a 300 mph (plus) passenger train and do so in the fastest growing economy in the world (at this time)...AND while buying up much of our infrastructure (tollways and high-rise buildings in Illinois and New York). All of this while our politicos are rejecting more and faster passenger rail? What's wrong with this picture folks?
See the recent separate thread here about "Chinese Patent Infringement" or similar . . .
CNW 6000: Very true. My point was that one should criticize others for what they do (without engaging in sarcasm or personal attacks as some -- not you -- engage in), but also that credit should be given for what has been accomplished, which should be beyond dispute. HSR in China is under attack there because tickets to ride it cost too much for many Chinese. That argument may well apply here as well. Can the farebox cover even operating expenses (not including paying off the cost of building and/or equipment)? Those are questions worth a rational, unemotional, non-ideological examination.
As to Chinese business practices, I would only say we are foolish as a nation to continue to believe that the importing of under-priced Chinese goods (all those bargains for the consumer) in the present, that has killed so many good American jobs, is in our interests in the long-term.
schlimm CNW 6000: Very true. My point was that one should criticize others for what they do (without engaging in sarcasm or personal attacks as some -- not you -- engage in), but also that credit should be given for what has been accomplished, which should be beyond dispute. HSR in China is under attack there because tickets to ride it cost too much for many Chinese. That argument may well apply here as well. Can the farebox cover even operating expenses (not including paying off the cost of building and/or equipment)? Those are questions worth a rational, unemotional, non-ideological examination. As to Chinese business practices, I would only say we are foolish as a nation to continue to believe that the importing of under-priced Chinese goods (all those bargains for the consumer) in the present, that has killed so many good American jobs, is in our interests in the long-term.
I agree with your commentary on cost of ridership etc and business practices as well.
Yes, you are correct IMHO...we are in the state we are in precicely BECAUSE we allowed ourselves to become so enamoured with the automobile in the 1950's and 1960's while the rest of the world was starting to build or continueing to build more and better public transportation. Doing what we wanted as opposed to what was right can be blamed as much on ourselves as citizens as our politicians who let such things (and others) happen when they should have been smarter than us (that's why they are our supposed "leaders"). We need to remember, not all things that are good for us "taste" good to us.
eolafan Doing what we wanted as opposed to what was right can be blamed as much on ourselves as citizens as our politicians who let such things (and others) happen when they should have been smarter than us (that's why they are our supposed "leaders"). We need to remember, not all things that are good for us "taste" good to us.
Doing what we wanted as opposed to what was right can be blamed as much on ourselves as citizens as our politicians who let such things (and others) happen when they should have been smarter than us (that's why they are our supposed "leaders"). We need to remember, not all things that are good for us "taste" good to us.
That sounds like the castor oil approach to transportation.
Bucyrus eolafan: Doing what we wanted as opposed to what was right can be blamed as much on ourselves as citizens as our politicians who let such things (and others) happen when they should have been smarter than us (that's why they are our supposed "leaders"). We need to remember, not all things that are good for us "taste" good to us. That sounds like the castor oil approach to transportation.
eolafan: Doing what we wanted as opposed to what was right can be blamed as much on ourselves as citizens as our politicians who let such things (and others) happen when they should have been smarter than us (that's why they are our supposed "leaders"). We need to remember, not all things that are good for us "taste" good to us.
Are the Chinese, or anybody else, doing anything about higher speed freight rail? Is 125 MPH a profitable speed to move freight?
eolafan [snip; emphasis added - PDN] Doing what we wanted as opposed to what was right can be blamed as much on ourselves as citizens as our politicians who let such things (and others) happen when they should have been smarter than us (that's why they are our supposed "leaders"). [snip]
Well, like the farmers say - "First, you have to be smarter than the mule . . . "
Victrola1 Are the Chinese, or anybody else, doing anything about higher speed freight rail? Is 125 MPH a profitable speed to move freight?
I rather doubt 125MPH being desirable for general freight, but it would be interesting to see express handled by HSR, particularly if the frequent service allowed for same-day delivery. One advantage of express by HSR over air is that security would likely be less of an issue, which could allow for faster handling.
- Erik
You're absolutely right, but you have just opened a huge can of those proverbial worms.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
NKP guy,
The military used to be the prime example of gold plated government spending, but that is “old hat” compared to this current era of bailouts and stimulus. When the president signed the first economic stimulus bill, he spent more money than the entire cost of the Iraq War to that point. We live in a new age where politicians believe that spending is the way to get us out of debt. They have just told us that unemployment benefits are a good way to grow the economy because every one-dollar turns into two dollars. But if we can make something out of nothing like that, then nobody should be lacking for money. They are living in an economic dream world as a way to rationalize the insatiable greed of the governing class.
Until now, $2-trillion of the tarp bailout was listed, but not accounted for. A few days ago, it was accounted for. The money went to prop up foreign banks, and to a lot of places that nobody can justify. For example, they gave $18-billion to G.E. So you have the fed chairman Bernanke, without the consent of congress, without asking the American people, spending $2-trillion without even a clear explanation. That amount of money is more than the entire annual U.S. budget. For $2-trillion, we could have built infrastructure to the moon and back.
So the problem is not military spending alone. The problem is that spending is the fuel that runs the ruling class, and makes it grow ever larger. If society is not constantly critical of that tendency, the spenders will take it all. Unfortunately too much of society is preoccupied with dance contests to notice what is happening to them.
Phoebe Vet and NKP Guy, I agree. And it's even worse than that. Since the end of WWII, we've been continuously engaged in wars, police actions, "peace-keeping" operations (involving casualties), and occupations. Even now, we spend more on defense than all other nations of the world combined. And it is all non-partisan, lest the moderators determine this is too political, as both parties have kept this up for 65 years. The old Soviet Union collapsed because they spent too much on defense and foreign adventures (Afghanistan!!). Can we learn anything from history to start using our resources more wisely here at home?
And, if all the costs (equipment replacement, pensions, medical care and needless deaths and maiming, etc.) of the Iraq nonsense are calculated, not just the immediate ones, it is likely to cost us over $2 Trillion, most of it wasted abroad rather than invested/spent and wasted in the US. If it were a forced choice, I'd rather waste the money here, than waste it overseas and sacrifice American lives needlessly.
schlimm Phoebe Vet and NKP Guy, I agree. And it's even worse than that. Since the end of WWII, we've been continuously engaged in wars, police actions, "peace-keeping" operations (involving casualties), and occupations. Even now, we spend more on defense than all other nations of the world combined. And it is all non-partisan, lest the moderators determine this is too political, as both parties have kept this up for 65 years. The old Soviet Union collapsed because they spent too much on defense and foreign adventures (Afghanistan!!). Can we learn anything from history to start using our resources more wisely here at home? And, if all the costs (equipment replacement, pensions, medical care and needless deaths and maiming, etc.) of the Iraq nonsense are calculated, not just the immediate ones, it is likely to cost us over $2 Trillion, most of it wasted abroad rather than invested/spent and wasted in the US. If it were a forced choice, I'd rather waste the money here, than waste it overseas and sacrifice American lives needlessly.
NKP guy Bucyrus: You said "Wasting money is how we got into this mess." With all respect, IMHO it's not "government waste" as some political-types feel, but wars. Wars are government waste on a grand scale. In my 62 years this country has been at war for almost half my life. We have 700 military bases around the world. THAT'S what's bleeding us dry and making it impossible to fund anything we need in the way of infrastructure. I seldom, if ever, see in these forums anyone blaming 30 years of constant, unnecessary, unpopular wars. The American taxpayer will get a real break only when his government stops trying to fight two wars at once while being the policeman of the world. In the meantime, other countries are building the infrastructure they need for the 21st Century. In the USA we're just about ready for 1965. Follow the money.
.....A big AMEN to that...!
Quentin
I am all for spending as little on the military as we can, and for not getting into wars unless it is necessary. However, I need a little clarification. Are you guys actually saying that if we reduced military spending to a level that you would approve, we would then have complete fiscal responsibility in government?
Bucyrus I am all for spending as little on the military as we can, and for not getting into wars unless it is necessary. However, I need a little clarification. Are you guys actually saying that if we reduced military spending to a level that you would approve, we would then have complete fiscal responsibility in government?
Of course not, but it would be a giant step in the right direction.
The no accountability clause was in the original TARP bill passed with overwhelming support by both parties during the Bush Administration.
I strongly agree that both parties share culpability for both the fiscal and the military problems.
President Washington warned us not to form political parties, and President Eisenhower warned us about the military-industrial complex.
To put this into perspective, total defense spending by the US (not including separate funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghan) from 1946-2009: 21 trillion, 243 billion dollars. Of course not all was wasted, though it surely subsidized and was a stimulus to the military-industrial complex and thus the economy. And that is the point. We subsidize many endeavors. The questions are: Do we know who is getting the money? How much? Would we prefer to use the money in other ways?
Let's not forget all the money in black budgets for research and development of all those super secret weapons programs.
I, for one, would like to see that money used on our infrastructure. Roads, Air, Rail, etc. Both development and maintenance. When you spend trillions on weapons, there is always too much temptation to use them.
To quote Abraham Maslow: "If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail. "
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.