4 ms·

Less politically-biased information about rail at Wikipedia[1]. Politically biased opinion: the Dems could have done anything from 2008-2010, and they chose he

Less politically-biased information about rail at Wikipedia[1]. Politically biased opinion: the Dems could have done anything from 2008-2010, and they chose healthcare. TSA didn't get any better, nor were trains built. More stringent mileage requirements were handed down, for those eco-friendly types out there, but we are not aggressively pursuing nuclear/fusion power generation like we should. I would love to be able to grab a train from Houston to Dallas, as it would certainly beat the air travel experience, as other comments have mentioned the additional time required for check-in, security, etc. But the cost of new rail is in the billions per route, and we have lots of land to cover in America. We are too cheap for high-speed aircraft, but we can (hopefully) do something to rid us of TSA and the accompanying security theatre, which would make air travel so much better. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_the_United_States#Current_discussion_2008-2013 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_the_United_S...

Gmo 13y ago
What I always find funny with this type of discussion is that, when an article talks about the state of broadband connection in the US, someone (usually more than one person actually) will inevitably use the argument that the country is too sparsely populated and that's why we can't compare to Europe. While when an article talks about a possible train corridor between some major regional hubs, someone will inevitably mention that there are too many houses on the way and it's not practical :)
WildUtah 13y ago
+10 for "the Dems could have done anything from 2008-2010, and they chose healthcare." A decision the nation and the Democratic Party will be kicking themselves for for decades.
- mncolinlee 13y ago
  Compared to the urgency of high speed rail, they made the right choice! I do not agree with the exact details of how they chose to tackle health care, but there is no question that it was the right priority at the time. Healthcare costs were at 18% of GDP and rising rapidly. Even the hospitals and insurance companies recognized that something had to be done very soon. Between increasing poverty and companies dropping health care for their employees, they were losing patients at a record pace. The risk of launching a startup was becoming almost unbearable. Many young entrepreneurs arbitrage the cost of their health risk by betting they won't get seriously ill and make themselves, their companies, and their investor funds go bankrupt. That is NOT a safe bet.

Gmo 13y ago

What I always find funny with this type of discussion is that, when an article talks about the state of broadband connection in the US, someone (usually more than one person actually) will inevitably use the argument that the country is too sparsely populated and that's why we can't compare to Europe. While when an article talks about a possible train corridor between some major regional hubs, someone will inevitably mention that there are too many houses on the way and it's not practical :)

WildUtah 13y ago

+10 for "the Dems could have done anything from 2008-2010, and they chose healthcare." A decision the nation and the Democratic Party will be kicking themselves for for decades.

mncolinlee 13y ago
Compared to the urgency of high speed rail, they made the right choice! I do not agree with the exact details of how they chose to tackle health care, but there is no question that it was the right priority at the time. Healthcare costs were at 18% of GDP and rising rapidly. Even the hospitals and insurance companies recognized that something had to be done very soon. Between increasing poverty and companies dropping health care for their employees, they were losing patients at a record pace. The risk of launching a startup was becoming almost unbearable. Many young entrepreneurs arbitrage the cost of their health risk by betting they won't get seriously ill and make themselves, their companies, and their investor funds go bankrupt. That is NOT a safe bet.