> (...) for a route that’s already served by air and road options in a state with stagnant population (...) Mass transit systems have some peculiarities that p

> (...) for a route that’s already served by air and road options in a state with stagnant population (...) Mass transit systems have some peculiarities that private transportation systems don't have, such as creating mass demand and concentrating it on specific spots. Each train stop is a natural generator for demand for housing and services in volumes that urban sprawl does not, and this leads to more affordable housing with shorter commutes and with far better services that lead to a far better quality of living. But this potential to be realized needs urban development that takes advantage of it, which require investment. I'm not sure if the figure is $1T but there are examples in the world where railway operators get their main source of funding and incentive to grow their network by being granted favourable conditions to invest in real estate surrounding new train stops. > (...) and declining usage of existing public transit. I'm sorry, the US is notorious for having self-sabotaging public transportation services, designed to pay lip service for the need to provide mobility alternatives,but actually designed to be impactical and outright hostile to commuters. If the US learns basic lessons from the many case studies from throughout the world, nothing stops the US from benefiting from identical adoption rates seen outside of its borders.