$8.2 Billion from the President’s Investing in America Agenda to Deliver Transformative Passenger Rail in America President Biden’s Investing in America Agenda – a key pillar of Bidenomics – is delivering world class-infrastructure across the country, expanding access to economic opportunity, and creating good-paying jobs. By delivering $66 billion from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law –…
What about the the last decade (60 years really) has given you hope about our political system? Shit keeps getting worse for people on the bottom and better for the 1%.
Previously even in the highest population corner of the country, big cities that already have significant train systems, somehow we couldn’t get reasonably from one to the other.
Since it opened, I choose Acela over flying from Boston to NYC every time, and over
Driving every time I’m going into the city (still might drive suburb to suburb). Acela runs reliably, not slower than driving/flying, and it’s easier/more comfortable. It works. We can build a working train system!
Problem is when you get outside of the Boston through DC corridor, population drops off a cliff. It starts to get too spread out.
But I’d settle for spreading two forks out toward Pittsburg and Richmond. Then keep getting the forks out further toward Chicago and Atlanta, with the big/growing cities along the way.
Most of the reasonable high speed rail proposals I’ve seen are to start in higher population areas where they make sense, build up feeders, extend as passenger traffic rises and eventually connect in places. Focusing on ideas like a new trans-continental railroad may be inspiring but just not practical. Who would ride where there are no cities or where flying or driving is faster and easier?
But the northeast proves it can work, and many of the allocations in this announcement are to upgrade standard rail to support more traffic as feeders, and I believe some could eventually lead to extensions southward
The usual regional centers proposed include:
northwest- Vancouver, Seattle, Portland
California- la to sf (being built)
Houston, Dallas, Austin (I’m not convinced we’d get them out of their cars)
Florida- brightline
Midwest- connect rust belt cities centered on Chicago
What about the the last decade (60 years really) has given you hope about our political system? Shit keeps getting worse for people on the bottom and better for the 1%.
For me, Acela.
Previously even in the highest population corner of the country, big cities that already have significant train systems, somehow we couldn’t get reasonably from one to the other.
Since it opened, I choose Acela over flying from Boston to NYC every time, and over Driving every time I’m going into the city (still might drive suburb to suburb). Acela runs reliably, not slower than driving/flying, and it’s easier/more comfortable. It works. We can build a working train system!
Problem is when you get outside of the Boston through DC corridor, population drops off a cliff. It starts to get too spread out.
But I’d settle for spreading two forks out toward Pittsburg and Richmond. Then keep getting the forks out further toward Chicago and Atlanta, with the big/growing cities along the way.
Most of the reasonable high speed rail proposals I’ve seen are to start in higher population areas where they make sense, build up feeders, extend as passenger traffic rises and eventually connect in places. Focusing on ideas like a new trans-continental railroad may be inspiring but just not practical. Who would ride where there are no cities or where flying or driving is faster and easier?
But the northeast proves it can work, and many of the allocations in this announcement are to upgrade standard rail to support more traffic as feeders, and I believe some could eventually lead to extensions southward
The usual regional centers proposed include: