It would cost a fortune, but it would change travel in this country significantly, and it feels inevitable anyway. A country our size is perfect for a maglev operation. We have the money, if we could just stay out of war for a decade. Clinton managed to do it, for the most part.
Hey, at least we have a plan for the Trump Depression, right?
Yeah, it feels necessary and a weird mix of inevitable and impossible. It meets so many of our needs, it gives us a practical every day reason to invest in technology and manufacturing of something we can sell to the world and ourselves, it gives us something to focus our energies on and we can power it with solar these days. And politically It’s a non starter. I don’t know how long the country can remain in one piece. There’s a massive anti infrastructure propaganda system. It would be brutally opposed by the air travel industry. If a democrat starts it a republican will end it before ground breaks. And people are pissed about the California high speed rail’s delays and issues and lack trust in rail.
It requires massive changes in our country’s politics, but any stable position focused on the common good will ultimately come to the conclusion to do it.
And people are pissed about the California high speed rail’s delays and issues and lack trust in rail.
Inspired by this discussion, I mentioned high speed rail to a MAGA business guy I’ve known for a long time, and right away, he brings up California as the reason it will never work and we shouldn’t waste money on it.
And I said “Yeah, I know, we need the money to fight wars for no reason.”
Yeah. I once had a really bad date with a Californian back when I lived in the Midwest where she used that as an example of why trains are a bad investment. Like, there are a lot of issues with California’s high speed rail project, and so many of them are deeply tied to California. And that’s a large part of why I think the west coast high speed rail should come after the new york-chicago despite being a west coaster now.
Large infrastructure projects can’t be sold on the “they say we may be able to do it for as little as $x” they need to be sold on the “we’d like to do a feasibility study for $y” then sell it on the worst case scenario. And then you use your power of eminent domain where needed. But most importantly you have to actually commit to it.
But yeah, I don’t want a California high speed rail type project, I want feasibility studies and accurate projections until we can get what china has done
It would cost a fortune, but it would change travel in this country significantly, and it feels inevitable anyway. A country our size is perfect for a maglev operation. We have the money, if we could just stay out of war for a decade. Clinton managed to do it, for the most part.
Hey, at least we have a plan for the Trump Depression, right?
Yeah, it feels necessary and a weird mix of inevitable and impossible. It meets so many of our needs, it gives us a practical every day reason to invest in technology and manufacturing of something we can sell to the world and ourselves, it gives us something to focus our energies on and we can power it with solar these days. And politically It’s a non starter. I don’t know how long the country can remain in one piece. There’s a massive anti infrastructure propaganda system. It would be brutally opposed by the air travel industry. If a democrat starts it a republican will end it before ground breaks. And people are pissed about the California high speed rail’s delays and issues and lack trust in rail.
It requires massive changes in our country’s politics, but any stable position focused on the common good will ultimately come to the conclusion to do it.
Inspired by this discussion, I mentioned high speed rail to a MAGA business guy I’ve known for a long time, and right away, he brings up California as the reason it will never work and we shouldn’t waste money on it.
And I said “Yeah, I know, we need the money to fight wars for no reason.”
Yeah. I once had a really bad date with a Californian back when I lived in the Midwest where she used that as an example of why trains are a bad investment. Like, there are a lot of issues with California’s high speed rail project, and so many of them are deeply tied to California. And that’s a large part of why I think the west coast high speed rail should come after the new york-chicago despite being a west coaster now.
Large infrastructure projects can’t be sold on the “they say we may be able to do it for as little as $x” they need to be sold on the “we’d like to do a feasibility study for $y” then sell it on the worst case scenario. And then you use your power of eminent domain where needed. But most importantly you have to actually commit to it.
But yeah, I don’t want a California high speed rail type project, I want feasibility studies and accurate projections until we can get what china has done