High Speed Rail in the US

Does Sup Forums like the concept of having a high speed rail service in the US?

What? You don't have a high speed rail service?

No, it's a retarded waste of tax-payer money

What? You don't have a high speed rail service connecting Britain to Greece?

I love the idea, but not if it centers in fucking Chicago

I want hyperloop

Nope

The US rail system is a mixture of old regional rails that are inefficient and expensive.

From Philadelphia to Boston I would have to transit between three different rails and overlay in New York wait for a train there and then head to Boston. All on a 200+ ticket

Biggest issue on that image is that the network goes into Mexico tbqh.

Beat me to it.
Also, don't run it through Pennsylvania. They've got the disappearing railroad blues.

Good idea in theory, horrible waste of taxpayer money in reality

Look how well Amtrak worked out. Granted, it wasn't a bad idea, but unlike Europe America's population density is much lower and a high speed rail system will just have less passengers but require more oil.

I'll tell you what, mate. There is some decrepit freight rail around, and I don't know if that's viable or not.

But you let me drive my car on to a train so that I can relax and you do the few hundred miles and I do the last tens of miles, then we've got ourselves a deal.

It's a great way to fatten up your wallet when you own the contract. Taxpayer raped again.

I don't like the idea of getting high speed rail just for the sake of being able to proclaim "Hey look we're just like the Europe too! We're so progressive!"

Never really understood liberals and their hard-on for trains in the 21st century. There are some areas where it might make sense. Most of the US is way too spread out and sparsely populated for it to be economical, though. Plus we already have pretty good motor vehicle and flight infrastructure.

didn't mean to quote

I like it in theory as long as the price to ride can be kept down. If it will end up being like current long distance rail then it will never get used. The purple line on that map is dumb though. You can't just run a high speed commuter line across international borders what are we Europe?

High speed rail = high speed niggers

The government already got involved in my high speed air service. I'd appreciate it if they didn't "contribute" to the rail service as well.

you know that planes exist now right

Intercity passenger rail is something that only really happens on the East coast. Boston, NYC, Philly, Baltimore, DC. The rest of the nation is too spread out to make it competitive with air travel. It exists in the rest of the country, but it loses money, is sustained on subsidies, and not many people use it.

and unless they can make the price of a ticket lower than airfare, while keeping the speed very high (which means avoiding minor stops on the way, which is politically difficult) I don't see how passenger rail is viable outside the abovementioned corridor.

Yes. Modern technology needs to be implemented, we are a first world nation, even china has more modern transportation. We are VERY far behind in transportation.

How about if public transportation in cities was at the level as it is in Europe or Japan?

why would anyone travel almost 24h to get from NY to LA when they can fly

don't you guys have cheap af flights?

Sure, Sup Forums would love nothing more than to waste a trillion dollars expanding Amtrak.

Thanks ameribro

Not enough shekels for that

china has more population density, too. take a look at the map and ponder the fact that most of the track would be laid in areas where fucking nobody lives

wouldnt this bring food prices down since shipping produce and other items would become cheaper?

Its a dumb idea. The US simply isn't the size of Japan or Sweden.

Here in Califonria we are trying to build a high speed train from San Francisco to LA. I don't know anyone that goes between those places often. We can't even get low speed rail connecting the LA area.

A high speed rail system can reduce costs of flying and make the roads less congested.

Almost 3 times as slow as an airplane? Sign me the fuck up m8!

Well driving in my city sucks, but so does the mass transit. Fine by me if you want to keep it up, especially considering it was about to put the workers out of work when they tried to shut it down.

But that's not the same as long-distance travel. The freight trains near me could easily get stacked up with cars for nearly a mile and still toot along comfortably.

>How about if public transportation in cities was at the level as it is in Europe or Japan?
So tear down the suburbs or do you just want to go full Obama and ship niggers on Section 8 to the suburbs until they die from lack of white taxpayers?

The three coasts could stand to have high speed rails.

>just ignoring a majority of the country
Na, you stupid faggots can drive yourselves like normal adults do. I'm not subsidizing you cucks to go visit other shitty cities and whatever else.

But its the current year!

Chicago has been a significant rail hub for the midwest for 150 years.

There's already an extensive freight rail network in the US.

These would be passenger only rail lines.

The center should be in Indianapolis since every interstate goes through there anyway

I love trains, but the highest-speed passenger train in the US in the best possible route for a passenger train in the US -- the Acela -- is still a money-loser.

There is no evidence these new routes would do any better.

I wouldn't mind seeing Californians try a route LA - SF or LA - LV as long as it's with their own money, but I doubt it will be profitable.

I'm holding out for self-driving cars.

Yes, but only in the NE where it could turn a profit.

here we go again

Rail systems are the darlings of Socialists because they're never profitable, cultivate a large block of self-interested (and unionized) workers, and demand large subsidies in perpetuity.

It's pure socialism.

This.

The only way a high speed rail service would be profitable is to restrict it to the west and east coasts where population density is greatest.

>Implying Sup Forums is capable of contemplating anything that involves increasing taxes.

This is why we have road trips.
Plus transit systems support globalism

If the taxes were worth it, then I'd enjoy paying them.

Unfortunately, it's all lesbians being payed off by the UN to turn my city into literally a shit hole. So you can take that and pack it in your ass.

>Antiquated
>Its a train
>Exploited by terrorists and illegals easily to move freely around US
>Its a train, come on now the only train you should be on is the "Trump train"
>Can't stand taking public transportation, sitting next to the homeless guy for 10 minutes. Now ill have to sit next to him for my 18 hour ride from DC to Cali
>Its a train, come on take a plane
>You think airport security is a bitch, a train is a terrorists dream. A high speed bomb
>Its a train

It will get corupted like the non existant Cali hi seed rail. How many billions have already been blown on that project?

High Speed Nigger Delivery

>US High Speed rail

I'd rather fly if its a more than 6 hour car drive. That would waste so much fucking money. I don't understand why libtards have such a hard on for high speed rail.

Hoboing: Jackass Edition, when?

this

I like this idea, but how come every time I see it brought up people discuss it as if it would inevitably be some kind of taxpayer funded public works project? A private corporation could easily do this and I'd be willing to bet it would work out great and people would love it. As a government project it would be ridiculously inefficient. Is there any practical reason why a private company couldn't do this in the US?

I'd like to see a high-speed railway in my state, NY, but the government's a farce and the mafia skims taxpayer money from the budget

Houston to Dallas is getting high speed rail, and it's thanks to private investors.
High speed rail is great when the government isn't in charge of where it goes.

Acquiring the land

Start here in Texas. Build wall with same tech + Auto guns. Get these fucking semi trucks off the road.

I don't really care I have pretty convenient train routes in my city. I just wish light rail could be expanded and bus systems were actually vaguely competent

yeah like $300 ish across the country, takes 5 hours too so a huge rail system would be a waste.

it would be nice but not very useful. better to have one rail system on the west coast, one on the east coast, and a smaller one on the gulf coast.

yes.

>Charlotte in the completely wrong side of the state
Nice one

Warren Buffet privately bought up the railroads. You know what he did with them?

He loaded the fracking waste water onto tanker cars and let them sit on the rail until according to the regulations he could dump it back into the ground without it being hazardous.

Thanks, Buffet Jew.

Pic related are the only two lines that could exit profitably and the only two profitable. And the west coast is debated. It's an 18 hour drive LA to Seattle or a 2 hour flight.

A train doesn't make sense. Most people have cars, or could at least rent one and plane tickets aren't that bad.

Does Florida really need 3? Seriously who goes to Florida on purpose?

Why are flyovers always so angry

Just the East Coast ones, because Metro and Amtrack are some shit. I can't be bothered to care about the rest of the country.

Build it.

t. Architectural Engineer driving between Houston, Austin, and Dallas all the fucking time, including right now while typing this coming back to ATX.

>Goes through savannah georgia
What the fuck for, that place is a shithole with no appeal whatsever

Florida is rife with NY Jews. So I have no idea.

thats retarded because new orleans and baton rouge do not line up like that at fucking all.

Actually none of the cities fucking line up like that.

that map is about as accurate as a afro-centric beliefs.

No, it's fucking stupid.

Only about 10% of Americans live in the 100 largest cities in the United States. You'd need a fucking ridiculously elaborate HSR network to service those major population centers, travel times wouldn't be dramatically improved over direct flight-times (especially for routes that would need to go around major mountain ranges), and ultimately it would be spending trillions of dollars to benefit only about 1-in-10 Americans.


Ex. My family lives in Davenport, IA. I go to school at Auburn, AL. If I want to take the HSR described in the OP's pic home, I need to
1) Drive two hours to Atlanta
2) Spend an hour or two getting through the HSR security (because of course there will be security)
3) Ride the HSR from Atlanta to Chicago, about 6 hours.
4) Drive three hours from Chicago to Davenport

That's 13 hours assuming no delays. I can drive it in 14, with the added bonus of leaving when I want, stopping when I want, eating where I want, etc.

>what are planes

God no. It would be a field day for bureaucrats taking a cut off the top.
Also literally no one needs it except maybe commiefornia but they're loosing people already.

Yes, but there will need to be more lines than that in the southeast.

No private company would do it because it'd lose money. Plus for the network in op's pic it'd be impossibly expensive to purchase all the land and materials and to keep it maintained. It would be the most expensive thing in this countries history. would probably cost more than the highway system.

>Is there any practical reason why a private company couldn't do this in the US?
Because planes exist.

>Charleston SC gets noticed

thank you

>I don't understand why libtards have such a hard on for high speed rail.
>Never really understood liberals and their hard-on for trains in the 21st century

It's more efficient in terms of fuel burned per passenger-mile. Thing is, most passengers don't care about that, they care about getting to their destination quickly, conveniently, or cheaply, or some combination of these. Greenery isn't a consideration for most. This divergence between what people want and what liberals think they should want is behind a lot of such projects. It's also why liberals hate highways and suburbs, for instance.

Is close. They had nigger in Louisiana fill in their section. Safest and fastest would be strait through don't stop.

Don't want spics and niggers to have high speed access to my state, not supporting that shit. The only thing saving most of the country is cost of travel distance to the surviving white states.

>the most expensive thing
Meanwhile, the local freight rail was renovated almost monthly for a few years back when the Federal Jew had to pump money into "infrastructure" programs while all the while rail traffic was going into the shitter.

gg faggots.

althought they won't be able to build a rail service underground due to our sea level, and they wont be allowed to do it above ground so...

former NYer here.
It's true NY is corrupt as fuck. Used to drive by JFK all the time and some of the simple road construction there has been going on continuously for 30+ years. Literally a Sopranos no-show.

Still, I wouldn't shake the boat too much. I've seen the other side of the coin.
In CA the police and agencies are not as corrupt, but they're mean as fuck. Would rather deal with a fat, content NY cop any day.
And removing mafia style corruption only allows SJW style corruption to dominate. The places where it dominates in NY are the places where the Mafia was rooted out (Manhattan).

No, we have an interstate system.

its a shit map. New orleans and houston are roughly in line, and baton rouge is is 80-90 miles north of the actual city of new orleans.

Because you stupid fuckers expect us to give you money for retarded reasons.

Fuck off and buy your own god damn rail system if you want it so badly. I don't owe you shit.

Pic related is you, faggot.

There's so many stops along the coast that a car would be more feasible. Not stopping? Take a plane. Save more money in the long run.

not if people actually use it

>trains
Is it the 1930s again and no one told me?
Fucking one step up from the Greyhound. Barely.

>Mexicans can now spread faster

No thank u

The east coast line should really stop in Raleigh. Taking it down to Atlanta is a huge waste of money because the cities are so far apart and a plane ticked between Raleigh, Charlotte, and Atlanta isn't that expensive.

You can get high speed rail across Germany, the UK and France. AKA between the places that matter.

Even Russia (twice as big the USA) has high speed rail.

Trains are objectively the comfiest way to travel, if you have a solid network

I'm from LI originally and something like the LIRR is actually useful. I'm not up on the profitability, but it's really fucking convenient and useful, as is the NY subway system.

But that's like if you were to stuff all of your country into one small part of ours. You know what else would be nice? All the unused freight rail running along the Island so we didn't all have to sit it wretched traffic because some asshole jew moron thought if they restricted the roadways then there would be less traffic.

But oh no. Now those fucking jew bastards need all that traffic to drive the tourist economy and build more retarded box stores to give our jobs and money away to the chinese. FUNNY ISN'T IT.

In the us we don't get hiked gas prices and super high registration/licensing fees so we actually get to drive cars here

Enjoy getting fucked by China

low density means rail service is not practical for much of the usa

No poor people need to stay in poor people areas.

the fastest train in the world has an average speed of 251 km/h and cost 1.3 billion USD for 30 kilometres of track
distance from LA to New York is 4490 km
it would take almost 18 hours
it only takes 6 on a plane
it would cost about 195 billion
airports already exist

it's a stupid idea, goddamn Europeans and their train boners