Quote:
Originally Posted by Craven Morehead
To be fair, I have no idea about the financial viability of such a project. It just bothers me to create an endless need for subsidized support. As I stated, I am in favor of a mass transport overhaul in the US however we have already have an Interstate road system that is the envy of most other countries and a very robust air transport network. High speed rail will need to compete with both but is it wise to do so if the only way it can compete is with governmental subsidies? We're only creating a taxation need that will continue for generations when there are already two other forms of transportation that essentially do the same thing.
|
Define 'compete.' What are we competing with here? The Interstate highways are, to my knowledge, paid for almost entirely by public works programs. That would count in my book as a government subsidy. Airlines may be efficient for long trips, but for regional or statewide travel, rail can be a cheap and effective solution. Looking at the popularity and utility of the GO system in the Greater Toronto Area, I can only imagine that a high-speed rail system would be that much better.
Furthermore, a rail system will only serve to improve roadways. Moving some of the commuters and travelers to a parallel network decreases congestion and maintenance costs. It's all interconnected.
I'd love to be able to get from Toronto to Montreal (or even Edmonton or Vancouver) via high speed rail. Such a thing would open up travel opportunities for people like me, who prefer to avoid driving and air travel due to the expenses and inconveniences involved.
Building a transcontinental rail system is not an overnight process. This will necessarily start at a smaller scale. Planning for the future and connecting the smaller regional networks via express lines only makes sense.