• Jiral@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    15 hours ago

    But that’s a non issue. If you want to get from LA to NYC, you fly. If you want to get from Chicago to NYC or from LA to San Francisco, you take the HSR… I mean you would if the US had a fully developed transport infrastructure.

    • whatstatersprecious@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      I mean sure but it’s the same issue, smaller scale at that point. You slashed the distance, but also the demand.

      The big problem is always going to be getting the land anyway

      • Jiral@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        The corridors I mentioned are perfectly fine HSR corridors, the population numbers and distances are great for HSR, perfectly suitable. That is absolutely not the propblem. Developed countries would have already HSR along those corridors, heavily used HSR, that is transformative for the places along it.

        The problem is not getting the land, the problem is politics and legislation that is hostile to it and as a consequence it is nigh impossible to get that land for critical infrastructure like that (hostile legislation is also the reason why multiple the times of construction costs have to be paid for non-construction expenses, not even counting land acquisition). Curiously enough it is not impossible to ever widen highways or even build entirely new ones.