Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

dew2459 t1_izzols7 wrote

Reply to comment by JohnnyGoldwink in High Speed Train by JohnnyGoldwink

A few comment:

- The high speed rail discussion had nothing to do directly with MA. It was a general US discussion, with a later talk about the north-south rail link. I didn't hear anything about something being overcrowded.

- The reason China can do rail like they do is because China can have someone knock on your door and tell you to get out by next week so they can tear down your house to make a rail line. It is disingenuous bordering on dishonest to randomly compare us to China on things like that without qualifying the comment. Around 1.5 million were evicted just to make space for the Beijing Olympics.

- Dukakis was a lying sack of crap in 1991 on the cost of the "big dig". Why anyone would believe him (or even bother to quote him) on lower cost estimates of a north-south link is eye-rolling. I'm no Republican, but I'll go with Baker's numbers.

- There are several good reasons to complete the north-south rail link. But so that someone in Salem can get a job south of Boston probably isn't one of those good reasons. In fact I think it is a pretty dumb reason considering the huge cost, but it was a north shore politician saying it. Yes, it may open up some job opportunities, but it won't reduce much car traffic. What it really does is allow the MBTA to shrink the rail yards at North/South stations, have better commuter rail scheduling, and allow Amtrak to connect NYC to points north much more easily. If Amtrak pays for half, it might be a good investment. If it is just for a few easier commutes, a regular free shuttle between north and south station will be $billions cheaper.

- I was a impressed that Moulton mentioned 500 mile rail distance for HSR. The "green new deal" numpkins go on about nationwide high speed rail. In the US, very few will ever use trains for any long distances. Concentrate on where it will really work, which are those places where HSR can be time-competitive with air.

- Unfortunately if they were being honest and competent about high speed rail, they would directly address the various articles (including in the NYT) of why train projects cost 3x-4x in the US vs. pretty much everywhere else in the world, including western Europe, rather than just "blame congress". The HSR mess in California is an example of that.

3

JohnnyGoldwink OP t1_izzuln5 wrote

I meant overcrowding in terms of car traffic. Although the HSR convo was about the US in general I was thinking about how the HSR running to Boston would help solve some of Massachusetts problems if it were to happen. Thanks for taking the time to listen and generate some solid feedback outlining why it’s not all that simple. It would be a much more balanced show if people like you would call in and challenge some of their talking points. I agree with all the points you make here. I’ll look into the NYT article that explains why it would cost 3X/4X more in the US.

2