|
|
| Re: Phila Inquirer: Gas prices, global warming renewing interest in high-speed rail (487848) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Phila Inquirer: Gas prices, global warming renewing interest in high-speed rail |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Sat Sep 8 19:05:20 2007, in response to Re: Phila Inquirer: Gas prices, global warming renewing interest in high-speed rail, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Sep 8 18:44:54 2007. That's very true, but that one line is also fairly usless for intranational travel, and the UK's draconian immigration policies on that line limit its utility for that role. IMHO if the first British HSR line had been say London to Birmingham/Manchester then there would be a bigger push for other lines. Instead it can be written off by the conservative MoT folks as an invasion of French thinking which won't be allowed to expand.Here in the states I think once politicians realize the incredible number of jobs they generate, as well as the 'wizz-bang' element to these projects, they'll come around very quickly. HSR should arguably be one of the sexiest transport infrastructure projects a politician can get funding for. Nobody likes highway construction and it never has a big enough effect to make anyone happy anyway, bridges are essential, but invariably overlooked outside of major crossings, and airports are a black hole of money which breed misery. Conversely high speed rail is something which really can make inroads on clearing air and road congestion without placing onerous demands on those who take advantage of it. If properly done it can also be a great propoganda victory, giving the politician's constituents a great amount of notoriety and potentially a lot of good will for the politician who fights for them. Finally it employs a whole lot of people, so even before the line is open the politician who fights for funding may see benefits for his or her actions. Sure, this is all pork, but the same applies to highways, airports, and everything else. Between potential benefits I'd think the costs would really be fairly minor and any politician who doesn't have some silly bias against them would jump on the potential for matching money from the feds. |
|
|
|