Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
Another big difference I believe we should take into account is difference in priorities.The biggest expenditures this country has made have all been "Defense" related.  Not neccessarily so in Europe.  I don't want to open up a can of worms or political anger, but simply put, the money for design, funding, and operating an HST has to do a lot with priorities Americans see fit to employ.The reason the Interstates were built was Defense related.  Eisenhower had personally led a convoy coast to coast in a vehicle, plus he had also seen the Autobahns in Germany.  The Interstates were built to facilitate rapid movement of military vehicles over terrain.  (In fact, I have heard that one of the specifications of an Interstate highway is that they had to have straight sections built in, to act as emergency runways for fighter aircraft.)That kind of engineering costs a lot of money- to the point of excluding other means of transportation.You don't have to worry about ancilliary costs of purchasing real estate, or environmental protection, if your country is laid flat to start with.  A theory I have is that the reasons Germany, France, and continental Europe are so "modern" is because they literally had to start over from scratch.  They didn't need to worry about large standing armies, the latest technology for aircraft, or whether running the railroad through John Gotbuck's back yard might be a concern.  John Gotbucks was probably dead, and his mansion was flattened.If you bomb a country back into the Stone Age, you should not be surprised when that country takes the technology you have unleashed on them and improves on it.  Especially when you tell them that you will guarantee their safety, at your own expense.  While you are busily and happily cranking out billion dollar bombers, your "protectorate" is taking the same money they would have spent on a Luftwaffe, an Imperial Navy, or a hundred division Army, and building up a balanced infrastructure.You won't get an HST in the United States until a couple of things happen.  First, you will have to empower the government far beyond what it is now.  The governments of Germany, France, and even the UK are much more willing to run over civil "entitlements" if they see a positive, lasting impact on the country as a whole.  So, to build an HST corridor implies, in my mind, granting the Federal, State, or even local governments the power to confiscate land under "emminent domain".  That won't happen- in fact, the current feeling of most Americans is that the government has too much power to do that already.The second point is that you have to take away choices.  That's another kind of emminent domain.  Oltmann, living here just south of you, I know what driving through Atlanta is like.  What do you suppose would happen if the state government said, "We aren't going to build a highway into Atlanta.  Instead, you must use a train."I would suspect the rail system, from MARTA to AMTRAK, would improve dramatically in terms of capacity- not neccesarily comfort.  I've been on regular commuter trains in Japan that were fast, clean, efficient, and run on time.  They still required rail employees to herd the crowds onto the train, and made the ride as comfortable as a hot, steamy summer day on the New York subway.To build ridership, you have to take away the choices of a self indulgent society that believes it's neccessary to get into their SUV and drive 45 minutes into work 18 miles away.  Not going to happen in this country.We have the technology to build an HST network.  We just haven't been forced into doing it... Europe has, and so has Japan.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag