4 ms·

Isn't it kind of obvious? The US has a ton of infrastructure already in place, and in heavy use. It's not such an easy thing to build new infrastructure on top

Isn't it kind of obvious? The US has a ton of infrastructure already in place, and in heavy use. It's not such an easy thing to build new infrastructure on top of old infrastructure with heavy traffic. It requires notices, permits, diversions, schedules, tons of money, etc. What it boils down to is that it is extremely inconvenient to build transit projects in the US for everyone involved - the builders, the government, the taxpayers. On the other hand, it's not too bad to build things in places where there's nobody, or no infrastructure. Because it inconveniences nobody. Nobody cares if some new building or railway is erected in a spot where there was previously nothing. This is why Europe's infrastructure is so much better than the US's - because most of it was destroyed in WW2, and Europe was able to essentially start from scratch. It's the same deal with China, which was previously unindustrialized, and has had no problems erecting massive cities and transit networks in all these rural places. I see no way for the US to get out of this quandry short of a couple things: - Some kind of weapons or terrorism scare that causes massive city depopulation - Major transportation revolution that enables mass transit without infrastructure, think flying cars - Building brand new cities, which honestly probably will not happen unless climate change really fucks things up So buckle in to your carseats folks, because we're gonna continue to be a car nation for years to come.

whimsicalism 4y ago
China is able to build massive projects in the context of there already being heavy use of pre-existing infrastructure. Your take is just absolutely wrong when it comes to China - the US just has no cheap ways of managing competing interests like this.
bombcar 4y ago
US cities have spread and sprawled, and there's no planning except for freeways. Somehow we can acquire land for massive multi lane behemoths riding over the fields, and build them before the developments come in, but building or extending a train line before that is completely impossible.
andbberger 4y ago
no it's not at all obvious and your take is way off the mark. the first TGV line opened in 1981... france had quite a bit of infrastructure then, it wasn't some freshly cratered hellhole. > Major transportation revolution that enables mass transit without infrastructure, think flying cars no, please god no. steel on steel is a modern, mature and extremely effective technology. the only serious attempt to "innovate" in recent memory, the chuo shinkansen, an ongoing effort by the world's second most competent builder and operator of rail systems has been a massive shitshow. in addition to being far more expensive than conventional HSR, it has an order of magnitude less capacity. there's a word for this: gadgetbahn. just say no to gadgetbahns if steel on steel sounds too simple to you and isn't scratching some techy itch for technological complexity it's because you're not looking deep enough. there's an entire journal devoted to studying the dynamics of the wheel-rail system [1] [1] http://interfacejournal.com/ http://interfacejournal.com/

whimsicalism 4y ago

China is able to build massive projects in the context of there already being heavy use of pre-existing infrastructure. Your take is just absolutely wrong when it comes to China - the US just has no cheap ways of managing competing interests like this.

bombcar 4y ago

US cities have spread and sprawled, and there's no planning except for freeways. Somehow we can acquire land for massive multi lane behemoths riding over the fields, and build them before the developments come in, but building or extending a train line before that is completely impossible.

andbberger 4y ago

no it's not at all obvious and your take is way off the mark. the first TGV line opened in 1981... france had quite a bit of infrastructure then, it wasn't some freshly cratered hellhole. > Major transportation revolution that enables mass transit without infrastructure, think flying cars no, please god no. steel on steel is a modern, mature and extremely effective technology. the only serious attempt to "innovate" in recent memory, the chuo shinkansen, an ongoing effort by the world's second most competent builder and operator of rail systems has been a massive shitshow. in addition to being far more expensive than conventional HSR, it has an order of magnitude less capacity. there's a word for this: gadgetbahn. just say no to gadgetbahns if steel on steel sounds too simple to you and isn't scratching some techy itch for technological complexity it's because you're not looking deep enough. there's an entire journal devoted to studying the dynamics of the wheel-rail system [1] [1] http://interfacejournal.com/ http://interfacejournal.com/