3 ms·

I really don't buy this oldness argument. We have to build new alignment you say? That makes it like greenfield elsewhere. Connecticut is dense you say? That's

I really don't buy this oldness argument. We have to build new alignment you say? That makes it like greenfield elsewhere. Connecticut is dense you say? That's just much parts of Europe. What that leaves your argument with is that existing rail only makes things harder because of a sunk cost facility. Let's improve our bean counting then. Maybe America is one big sunk cost fallicy, being an older republic. Time for some creative destruction I guess.

hprotagonist 5y ago
>Connecticut is dense you say? That's just much parts of Europe. those parts of Europe, let's not forget, were rather thoroughly flattened to a wet paste about 80 years ago, and were rebuilt with nice, straight, quick rail lines by people who knew how fast trains that weren't built in 1840 could go.
- twic 5y ago
  I think you overestimate the extent to which the war ravaged the countryside. Some cities were destroyed. Most (most!) of the rest of Europe, the towns and villages, wasn't.
  - jcranmer 5y ago
    It's the cities (and their suburbs) where acquiring new ROW is expensive.
    - allturtles 5y ago
      For the most part, the cities in France that could fairly be said to have been 'flattened' during WWII were in Normandy. Paris was scarcely touched. Yet they have a high-speed rail network covering the whole country. Spain was untouched by WWII, yet they have a high-speed rail network. The U.S. somehow managed to build an interstate highway system through every major city in the decades after WWII without being bombed flat. The WWII argument seems weak.
      - mastax 5y ago
        > The U.S. somehow managed to build an interstate highway system through every major city in the decades after WWII without being bombed flat. The U.S. has essentially stopped building urban interstates since the late 70's, when opposition from residents became too strong to ignore. I don't foresee this changing in the near future. My understanding is that construction costs in Europe are rising as well due to (among other things) increased use of tunnels in urban area due to opposition from residents.
  - FromHoiPolloi 5y ago
    I'd say that the Western cities were barely touched. When compared to the destruction along the Eastern Front.
- bobthepanda 5y ago
  LGV operation started in 1981, long after any WWII reconstruction would've wrapped up with several decades of interim land development.
dheera 5y ago
Yeah, I don't buy this either. China builds thousands of kilometers of new high speed rail every year.
- SteveNuts 5y ago
  Are they doing so by offering the existing landowners a fair market value for their properties?
  - Clewza313 5y ago
    To a surprising extent, yes. I know the popular Western image of infrastructure development in China is jackbooted thugs forcing farmers off their land, and there's some of that as well, but most people are reasonably happy with the compensation they get. The Shanghai-Hangzhou maglev project (below) is also an instructive case study of an ambitious rail project that was cancelled largely thanks to (sadly unwarranted) public concern. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai%E2%80%93Hangzhou_maglev_line https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai%E2%80%93Hangzhou_magl...

hprotagonist 5y ago

>Connecticut is dense you say? That's just much parts of Europe. those parts of Europe, let's not forget, were rather thoroughly flattened to a wet paste about 80 years ago, and were rebuilt with nice, straight, quick rail lines by people who knew how fast trains that weren't built in 1840 could go.

twic 5y ago
I think you overestimate the extent to which the war ravaged the countryside. Some cities were destroyed. Most (most!) of the rest of Europe, the towns and villages, wasn't.
- jcranmer 5y ago
  It's the cities (and their suburbs) where acquiring new ROW is expensive.
  - allturtles 5y ago
    For the most part, the cities in France that could fairly be said to have been 'flattened' during WWII were in Normandy. Paris was scarcely touched. Yet they have a high-speed rail network covering the whole country. Spain was untouched by WWII, yet they have a high-speed rail network. The U.S. somehow managed to build an interstate highway system through every major city in the decades after WWII without being bombed flat. The WWII argument seems weak.
    - mastax 5y ago
      > The U.S. somehow managed to build an interstate highway system through every major city in the decades after WWII without being bombed flat. The U.S. has essentially stopped building urban interstates since the late 70's, when opposition from residents became too strong to ignore. I don't foresee this changing in the near future. My understanding is that construction costs in Europe are rising as well due to (among other things) increased use of tunnels in urban area due to opposition from residents.
- FromHoiPolloi 5y ago
  I'd say that the Western cities were barely touched. When compared to the destruction along the Eastern Front.
bobthepanda 5y ago
LGV operation started in 1981, long after any WWII reconstruction would've wrapped up with several decades of interim land development.

dheera 5y ago

Yeah, I don't buy this either. China builds thousands of kilometers of new high speed rail every year.

SteveNuts 5y ago
Are they doing so by offering the existing landowners a fair market value for their properties?
- Clewza313 5y ago
  To a surprising extent, yes. I know the popular Western image of infrastructure development in China is jackbooted thugs forcing farmers off their land, and there's some of that as well, but most people are reasonably happy with the compensation they get. The Shanghai-Hangzhou maglev project (below) is also an instructive case study of an ambitious rail project that was cancelled largely thanks to (sadly unwarranted) public concern. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai%E2%80%93Hangzhou_maglev_line https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai%E2%80%93Hangzhou_magl...