If we really got behind high speed rail, couldn't we then afford to throw GM under the bus or under

[RB TexLa]

the train so to speak.

?????

[leftstreet]

1. Mass public transportation, yes. High speed rail? Not so much n/t

[RB TexLa]

2. True, a combination of the two.

[Captain Hilts]

14. With dedicated track, current Amtrak railstock can really haul ass.

But, without it, they stop a lot, have to wait out freight trains, etc.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

3. GM made the cities rip up the street car tracks after WWII.

They worked perfectly well, but GM wanted to sell cars.

[Captain Hilts]

17. Yes, along with the tire and oil industries they bought up the systems ....

and destroyed them.

Washington DC's streetcars are still plying the streets of...Sarajevo. No kidding.

[backscatter712]

4. We could be putting GM to work...

building passenger trains, commuter trains, subway trains, busses & so on.

[Captain Hilts]

12. They already do make commuter trains. nt

[Hello_Kitty]

5. Not at all. We could put a lot of the autoworkers back to work on it.

Auto plants could be refit to manufacture trains and associated equipment. Of course, the work would be more temporary in nature than making new cars all the time but remember with a sustained investment in alternative energy there will also be a market for electric and alt-fuel vehicles of all kinds.

[dkf]

13. It took them like 3 years to get the Camaro out.

I highly doubt they can turn out trains on a dime like that.

[Hello_Kitty]

18. Sure they could.

American workers got a fleet of ships, tanks, and planes built almost overnight in WW2. We've got to frame this as a war for our very survival.

[dkf]

22. So what is all this todo about retooling plants, etc?

I think back in the WW2 days it was more manual and so it was easier to adapt.

Of course I've never worked at one of these plants, although I did visit one in Japan.

[Hello_Kitty]

23. Supposedly American auto plants were built to be repurposed if necessary.

Of course, since they've been allowed to deteriorate along with other major parts of our infrastructure it won't be as easy as it should be but I'd think it can still be done. I'm not the expert on this but maybe there's someone in the industry who can give better insight.

[K Gardner]

6. IF such a mass transit/high speed system would be available nationwide in a

decent amount of time, yes. But just think of how many decades it will take to get this implemented everywhere. As of now, people below the Mason-Dixon line have to drive up north to catch AmTrak and mass transit is a pipe dream in many metropolitan areas. Where I live, we don't even have sidewalks.

Its a mess. And a shame !

[KamaAina]

19. Amtrak has routes to the Carolinas, Florida, New Orleans, and Texas

generally one train daily, to be sure, but it beats driving to Washington, DC.

[Captain Hilts]

20. I took the overnight train from DC to Atlanta and back for a biz trip. Great! nt

[Warpy]

7. Only on the coasts and in a few big cities

Out in flyover country there will be a continuing need for personal transportation.

[Critters2]

15. I'm not so sure. The inter-urbans used to run between even small

towns here in "flyover country" :eyes: when the population was much smaller than it is now. My hometown still had inter-urban tracks running down Main Street when I was a kid, but the trains stopped right away after WWII.

With an aging population, many areas should see public transit as a way to prevent population loss.

If they're smart.

[Warpy]

28. I live in NM

and there are too many mountains in the way. We do have high speed rail for 100 miles or so between Belen and Santa Fe. Extending it any farther south or north will be extremely expensive--the Rockies are in the way.

However, it doesn't do a whole lot for all the small towns all over the state that are served by 2 lane roads. This is a very rural state and personal transportation will always be necessary here.

[YOY]

8. Just the airline companies that have flights to those spots.

That is "if" it can be done effectively and affordably.

Granted it can be used for commuters but only on the lines mentioned and would have to be cost effective.

[Captain Hilts]

9. They make rail cars also. The GO trains outta Toronto are GM-made.

Give them a piece of the pie and they won't fight it.

[RB TexLa]

11. Fight it? From their knees? They are not in position to fight anything.

[Captain Hilts]

16. Don't bet on that. nt

[pinto]

10. I've read that inter city high speed actually replaces short haul plane travel, more

than car travel. Unfortunately don't remember the citation, but it looked at high speed rail between European cities. Maybe high speed rail coupled with effective, efficient local mass transit could cut into car use more significantly?

[bananas]

24. Maybe this: "Filling the Transportation Efficiency Gap: High-Speed Rail"

http://www.america2050.org/2008/06/filling-the-transportation-eff.html

Filling the Transportation Efficiency Gap: High-Speed Rail



<snip>

[TheWraith]

21. Oh hell no. Do you think we can put rail lines to everywhere in the country?

We have a LOT of open space in this nation. Even if it were practical to run rail lines to someplace like Fargo, North Dakota, what about the people who live a couple miles outside Fargo?

We need cars as a nation. That's simply non-negotiable, even aside from the economic aspects of dropping manufacturing.

[emmadoggy]

29. I get what you are saying...

I am in rural Iowa myself. However, think about that person who lives a couple miles outside of Fargo who needs to go to Minneapolis one day. They could drive the couple miles to Fargo and then hop on the train to MSP instead of driving the whole distance themselves (along with a bunch of other people who would otherwise be doing the same thing). That would be a big improvement.

It may not be feasible EVERYWHERE, but there are a LOT of places/ways that this could be utilized in this country.

[RB TexLa]

30. We would still have cars and automakers, just not GM.

[ThomWV]

25. Hell, it would be GM building the rail cars

[sufrommich]

26. No,it would be the thousands of real human beings who work

for GM building the rail cars.

[Mugweed]

27. Here's a Florida perspective

Way back when we Floridians voted for a high-speed rail system, our then Governor...Jeb Bush...actually said that he thought the people should rethink that vote. He also said that about a classroom size limit referendum, but stayed silent on the pregnant pig pen size increase and smoking ban both put into our State Constitution (duh).

Anyway, if this goes anything like the light rail fiasco in Central Florida did it will go like this:

Rail line from Port of Tampa through Orlando to Port Canaveral is again on the table. Disney offers to participate in funding, but only if the train stops at Disney and no other parks. Sea World and Universal protest. Oil and auto industry stooges claim that the train will be a playground for criminals preying on tourists. CSX decides to hold the state hostage for hundreds of millions of dollars for the use of some of their corridor right-of-way. Republican politicians are caught purchasing property along the proposed rail line using insider information. There is so much arguing, fighting, false claims, alarmist propaganda, and delays that Florida loses federal funding for lack of action. High-speed rail in Florida dies another slow agonizing death at the hands of special interests.