http://www.physorg.com/news65373596.html

Somebody should send this Smeal person a copy of Economics for Dummies.

Anyone with a room-temperature IQ can see that it is cheaper to fly from Boston to Washington (and much faster) than it is to take the train an equivalent distance in Europe or Japan.

Trains make no economic sense unless they are heavily subsidized. One of the reasons America"s economy is in far better shape than those of Europe is that we have for the most part resisted the socialist disease that provides such subsidies and creates the mass unemployment and stagnant growth you see in France or Germany today.

We simply don"t need high-speed trains.

If all subsidies(that socialist disease) for the airlines were removed , air travel would go out of business overnite.
We have to quit fooling ourselves into thinking that the government doesn't get involved in supporting transportation infrastructure, it definitely does. Without the fuel tax (tax: conservative dirty word) that we all pay, the road system would fail within a few years. The real problem is using that money where it makes sense.
If we continue to build roads, eventually we will be engulfed in traffic going nowhere, which is already happening in places like California.

The first comment was obviously not written by someone who: a.) does NOT live in a larger city b.) doesn't travel often

There are a lot of things wrong with our rail service at the moment. The writer fails to mention the fact that on that train to Boston, you stop in every tiny little town in between. If travelling at 120 mph, stoping only in the larger cities, it would not take a year to arrive at your final destination. Northeast cities have a knack for providing great city rail service, it's easy to connect to an Amtrack station from outside the city.

There are a lot of conviences for riding rail. First and foremost for businessmen is that rail delivers you right INTO the city. Not 20 miles outside. It's much easier and faster to get on the actual train.

I know absolutely no one that commutes from Philly to NYC by air, but can attest to several that do it by rail. If there was a high-speed line in between, the numbers would jump, for both ways.

The economics don't work out for rail because it's so horrible in it's current state. When it takes 12 hours for an 8 hour car drive. I would put my retirement on the fact that if there was high speed rail along the northeast corridor, it would take a bite out of air traffic.

The idea would work from LA to Las Vegas, SF to LA to SanD, etc. Anyplace too close to fly and too far to drive is where this market would rule. Air travel still take a toll on your time when you consider you must get there an hour before, at least, then delays at the big airports are garunteed and by the time you land, the time difference in driving is minimal.

My 2 cents...

Hi everybody.
The economical reason to reduce the passengers railroad is very big ratio
moving weight to the passengers weight:
for railroad 80-95%
for auto and airplanes 40-50%
This means railroad transfer itself on 80-95%, and to support railroad we need much more
metal, energy and other resource, but get economical ineffectiveness.
Cheers

How about more cities invest in local light-rail service? Increasing gas prices change the economics of transportation, and people will look for cheaper ways to get around even if that means more inconvenience. I can attest that in Madison, WI the bus service has seen a dramatic increase in ridership.

The economics of transportation are changing, and one I believe is for the better. Not that increased gas prices are a good thing, but it certainly helps here in the US where we're naive to the concept of mass transit--everyone else in the modernized world seems to understand the benefits. But then again our culture is one of speed, and not that of a more relaxed pace such as in Europe or elsewhere.

However, I agree that bullet trains would make the most sense for connecting cities that fall between the too-far-to-drive case and the too-close-to-fly scenario. People don't want to have to stop in every little town between two major cities, and is a significant deterrent from using an otherwise adequate rail system. Ever heard of express routes?

smoov moov
almost everything you buy and/or used is subsidized. from the food on your table, the gas you put in your car, the road you drive on to get to the airpoirt that's subudized as well, the police that polices the road, the firemen that use the jaws of life after you get into an accident. the stadium/ballpark that hosts your football/baseball games. the millitary to defend the "homeland." the list goes on. if you want to really understand the facts of life in this country, you'll have to dig a little deeper than fox news.

People that are against high speed rail are nothing but fat useless bastards.

America MUST create a high speed rail system that is exactly like Europe and Japan.

I dont *** care if people lose there homes in order for high speed track to built.

Another reason American bastards hate high speed rail is because they like to feel in "control", thats why they like to drive, and they also hate trains going 200-300 mph because they think its un-safe.

The people that made Acela are retarded morons. They should be put in jail.
They should have created a brand new tracks dedicated ONLY to high speed rail, before they can buy the actual high speed trains!!!!!!!!!!.

What Amtrak did is basically make an omlette without breaking the eggs.

America MUST create high speed rail or inter city maglev in order for people to travel 200-300 mph.

America is the biggest economy in the world. It can afford to make a European or Japan style high speed rail system.

By doing so we can reduce the cost of oil, increase compeition with airlines, and we will be less dependent on that *** hole country Saudi Arabia.

Those that hate or are against high speed rail are useless fat bastards

As someone who worked to try to improve Amtrak the big problem is the out of date labor agreements. There are many people who come to work everyday who don't perform any function except take home a pay check. The realization factor for Amtrak workers is 3.1 hrs for a 8 hr day. I know the government needs to fund Amtrak but not an off the book welfare program

First, it is absolutely true that both competing modes of transport (road and air) are very heavily subsidized in the US compared to rail. Smoov, for your position to be anywhere near logical, government subsidies for hiways should be removed and every road should be a toll road charging 15 to 20 cents per mile to cover it's original capital cost and its ongoing maintenance. Would that change the equations any? Railroad companies have to build and maintain all their own road structure from their own pockets, why not highways?

Second, if things were normal without skewed subsidies influenced by auto and airline industry lobbiests in congress, US medium-haul passenger rail should be far in advance of any European or Asian system. eg if trains in France can do 200 mph then trains in the US should already be doing 300 mph because theoretically technology is better, markets are greater, distances are greater, etc. etc. etc. With non-stop 300 mph trains between say downtown Washington and New York, would anyone still bother to fly the route?

Third, rail transport with electric locomotives is the only readily available means of getting transportation energy off of imported oil and onto more logical sources such as low-emission coal or nuclear or renewables.

Its wierd how all the neo-cons need to do is issue a religious pronouncement that "subsidizing rail would be socialism" or "by not subsidizing rail we are supporting free enterprise" and all the voters' brains just shut down.

Why do we Americans always use some figure somewhere to deprive us of living in the 21st century? If we really have that much of a problem with building a sufficient electric train just call the Germans and have them install mag-Lev's.
Our infrastructure is outdated and/or antiquated. Heck we still hang 13,000 Volt power lines precariously over our heads (so pretty) --but i guess there is some smart guy with an answer to that too. burying them would be the best thing to do!!(which would be better for having an uninteruptable power supply)
All you here is we are the greatest nation on earth evertime you turn on the tube along with the power outages of course and probably the oldest power grid in the western world which I think a foreign company won the contract to upgrade because GE does not have the technical expertise in this area (but it has the expertise in munition guidance systems I'll bet). I think it should be mandatory for all Americans to live in western Europe for 1-3 years to understand what i am talking about. Everything and everybody is a disposable commodity in this country to be used up and thrown away (like our military vets) so that we will be # uno at all costs..but who pays the ultimate price for the USA to be #1? THE AVERAGE JOE---not the elitists. quality of life is not taken into account at all, just perceptions for the sheeple. "we are the best"--as long as we can say that everything is OK. I think what Americans really worry about is how we are perceived in other nations but not necessarily how we truly are, the true state of America. (behind in alot of areas---except those areas that kill massive amounts of people)--oh i am so proud. Have we ever been invaded by a foreign power? It seems our military is always so far away from home does it really benefit the average Joe?? To make a long story short WAKE UP America the 19th century is over. It seems we have pockets of prosperity here and there with a lot of garbage in between (unorganized grab-***) with alot of arrogant a-holes. Heck we can actually find people in this country willing to stand in the street and hold a sign for a job (stop, go)--this job went away in Europe probably twenty--30 years ago. No wonder the unemployment is so high---they don't have a minimum wage job on every street corner (bojangles,pizza hut, MC Donald's oh then another Bojangles)..Building Trains (real trains) not relics of the past would employ alot of people in this country WITH HIGH PAYING JOBS...heck the people working there might be able to get by without working two mediocre jobs..imagine that. The highways in Germany are twice as thick as they are here (the best in the world) as we are so found of saying. They don't employ Mexicans but actually pay real wages for construction workers so that standards are upheld. Some foreigner might think "hell I wont even be here in a couple of months i don't give a rats a..@ if this is done right or not, and my supervisor is not looking ha ha. BUT the bottom line is secure right.. cheaper labor has very detrimental and unforeseeable consequences that shortsighted Americans somehow do not see. "But it looked good on paper...the figures showed... blah blah blah.. EGG HEADS. It is always the bottom line HERE AND NOW not can we build this highway to last 30 years? can we do the best job possible. NO NO NO. Get it done (looks to be done) but is not done right. If it is not done right DON'T DO IT ALL ALL..The financial wizards in this country think they are so smart.. Companies need to be putting the real men back in charge of this country.The engineers and scientists (not financiers and stock holders that don't know jack about engineering principles and economics).

Most of the people on the west coast are wondering when we are going to
get high speed GOOD train service - or maglev - service between LA and
Las Vegas, and maybe also a San Diego - LA - San Fran line.
Surely the southern Cal politicians can not be THAT powerful and influential
[ wanting to keep the money in So Cal] to thwart the efforts of dedicated
Vegas business to help get a maglev or equiv to run LA to Vegas.
Everyone I talk to at work and community and even 'Church' would jump at the
chance to frequently use a fast line from the LA vicinity to Vegas.
Vegas "Business men" supported and built "VEGAS" - now its time to
support and build the bullet train to GET to Vegas.