A Good, Well-Connected High Speed Rail System Would Give A Huge Boost To Property Values

[Yavin4]

Think of what a true (not slow ass Amtrak) high speed rail system would do to home property values. Someone could live in Chicago and work in Indianapolis, and vice versa. That would increase home values in both cities and give residents in each city a new job market to target. The new Japanese bullet train can get up to 361 mph. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinkansen), at a distance of 184 miles between CHI and Indy, the average commute time could be no more than 45 minutes or so. Both cities would see increase tourism and new business opportunities.

Take this example and multiply it by other cities across America, like Houston and New Orleans, or Atlanta and Miami, or Phoenix and Las Vegas, and you can see the huge boost in total economic growth that this country would see from a relatively small investment.

[rucky]

1. They're proposing this in Ohio

sadly, it'll go 40 mph on average. 10 hours from Cleveland to Cinci

[NewJeffCT]

3. why so slow, may i ask?

just curious

[glinda]

5. might have to do with what rail and land they cross. Some areas are not good for high speed.

[rucky]

7. Ohio's rural population is deceptively large.

You can't go 5 miles without running into a town of 20,000+, along the freeway corridors. Existing rail lines will have to slow down to next-to-nothing when they pass through.

[farmout rightarm]

2. Back in the 1970s I frequently traveled to Japan and rode on their 'Bullet' trains...

often: the New Tokaido Line "Shinkansen" that went around 150 MPH back then 35 years ago. I would come back home and wonder how my own country couldn't do something like that. Correction: why WOULDn't we.

[NewJeffCT]

4. Welcome to DU

and, from the 80s onward, getting any sort of major infrastructure spending in the US has been nigh impossible...

[Duende azul]

6. Be careful what you wish for.

If you have the chance to start the whole thing from scratch it might work. But there are some things to consider, before getting too enthusiastic.

Environmentally this only makes sense, if it can significantly substitute flights or longdistance car-trips.
And it should bring cargo from the highway to rail.

If it doesn't do this, it won't make a difference.


Economically it's a mixed bag.
First and most urgent question: who pays for it and who runs it and who will have a chance to use it?

If it goes the usual way: the public will make the investment. (Corporations stand to benefit largely). Later on it gets privatized. Because like we all have learned, the government can't handle these things.
So corporations will run it for profit.
Of course at that moment you can kiss your transport for everybody goodbye. But don't worry, enough of the wealth created by the traveling elite will trickle down.

The high cost demands a certain return on investment. So most likely there will be preference for profitable lines between population centers.
The rest of the country will remain disconnected. And if ever there will be a connecting grid to less populated areas, the government will be stuck with the less profitable local lines.

And the chance to enhance your radius in the job market? Well that has an unwelcome side effect. Your competitors in the market have the same advantage and will show up at your town.
The only result you will have for sure is: more time commuting, less time to be connected at home.

[KharmaTrain]

8. This Is Long Overdue...

I see all these high speed lines being both popular and profitable. If you've ever ridden the Acela, this is just a taste of what can be...and it's a very profitble service. It's cheaper and faster to get from New York to Boston or Philly...especially when you consider the time in driving to and from the airport, parking, the overcharges and security hassles. It was a pleasure to hop on the train at Penn Station, in an hour we were at the 30th Street station in Philly and a half hour later was resting in my hotel. And this is not even a full flegdged high speed system.

I'm in Chicago where driving downtown can take upwards of 2 hours and parking costs $20-40 a day. It's far simpler to hop the Metra, which is what many more people have done in recent years. A Chicago-Milwaukee-Minneapolis line will also be very welcome. not only by the many who commute in this area but in those cities as well...and with a train that can get upwards of 250 mph on a dedicated high speed rail, once again, the travel times would be comprable to taking a plane.

Onto the economics...most of these new rails are covering major population centers and the building of these systems will create many jobs. Besides the construction, there will be a rennesaince in downtowns and other areas where the train travels...and will lure new business as well. The money expended will not be wasted as our roads have become choked with traffic and high gas prices no longer make driving cheaper than rail travel. I don't see this having any affect on any existing commuter systems or routes and may even enhance them as reliable heavy and light rail systems offer an alternative to a conjested and broken air system.

Given the choice of taking a train or flying...even if it means double the travel time, the train wins hands down.

[lib2DaBone]

9. Plus... high speed rail connected with a new computer system...

could start a new overnight mail service like UPS or Fed-Ex.... thousands of JOBS!

Let's take some of that high-tech hardware, and instead of using it for red-light cameras, body scanners and radar traps, use it for something other than to harass the shit out of law abiding Americans.

How about creating some JOBS? Now there's a novel idea.