High Speed Rail Is Key to Economic Development

Reader Comments
Back to article

I agree with the Mayor. I was recently in the Little Rock area promoting my book on this subject, A.N.T.S., the American National Transportation System about a national level project that transports Energy, Communication, and People on a new transportation grid that operates above the surface. It is a remedy to the unemployment problem and uses 3P funding to build it. See additional information on website: www.ants-status.com. Keith Felix

Keith Felix of MO 9:10PM August 09, 2012

The author of this article sends a message that most of America agrees with; We need a means of moving great masses of people through out this great country. By, rebuilding our infrastructure with high speed rail, we add a great deal of jobs to the economy. Job's that would benefit many families in need through out society. Having traveled abroad in Europe, I have seen their impressive rail system work and work well. It is time, for the engineers to get to work, and the labors to lay a vast amount of rail. Let's get started America, our prosperity depends upon that we get our act together.

Dennis Wayne Cramer of MI 9:55AM February 11, 2012

I hate waiting planes in airports. It takes so much time for check-in, security gates, and delays.
I want Japan's Shinkansen in US because Shinkansen's average delay is just 6 sec although other high-speed rail's average delay is 5 min. Also Shinkansen does not have any serious accidents in 50 years, while other famous rails killed many people.

Blasius of FL 11:18AM July 08, 2011

Local, metropolitan area light-rail trains (on-grade) that connect disparate suburbs to each other, to airports and to the urban core make lots more sense than High-speed rail will in parts of the US outside of the Northeast and Chicago.
In Florida for example, there is a great need for inter-urban transportation systems that allow people to commute to work in other suburbs, or downtown without using their cars. Very few people need to travel to other cities within Florida. Places like Orlando, Miami and Tampa are in fact more demographically and economically connected to big cities far away like New York, Chicago or Washington, DC, than they are to each other. And airports already serve the need to travel far out-of state better than any high-speed rail system ever could.
If the Federal government wants to spend money on rail projects in Florida, then it would make more sense to spend it on connecting all the surrounding suburbs in some sort of rail beltway, with lots of spokes to downtown neighborhoods. This would allow people living in say Weston, a bedroom suburb 35 miles northwest of Miami to board a local minibus in the morning next to their home, exit at a nearby train station, and ride to work in say Boca Raton, Downtown Miami or Fort Lauderdale, or to Dadeland south of Miami in about 40 minutes without driving for an hour and a half on crowded freeways.
This is what "greener" civilized people do (have done for decades) in most big, older cities: Washington, DC, New York, Boston, Chicago, Philadelphia, etc.
High speed rail is only key to economic development in cities that already have good local transit systems.....It is not a universal economic remedy!

Sol Mejia of FL 5:18PM February 17, 2011

Through out history the nature of economic reality vs. transportasion reality is tough. The pros and cons are these:
* Transportation pros:
> Getting any where to any where in 1/2 the time automatically gives the
users double the saved time on a round trip. Multiply times the frequency
of trips per year. Convert to hours saved in traffic.
> Saved time of commute = more time for other things. If the other things
were family & friends, how much less crime would there be? If Mom & Dad
are home earlier, so will the kids who would otherwise get into trouble.
> This equates to less prisoners and kids in trouble.
> This equates to less child care costs up front and more loved children
who don't get into trouble and know their parents.
> Both parents and children benefit from better diets cooked at home.
> It equates to help with home work kids get from Mom & Dad .
Therefor, more kids finish school and find good jobs which becomes less
of a financial burden on our overwrought government.
> BUILD A BETTER CHILD & YOU BUILD A BETTER WORLD. It raises the GNP.
> TIME IS MONEY is still very true. Every hour we spend learning, teaching,
reading, using computers and the internet improves our population in
general. Even non-violent video games force the users to use logic,
progressive thinking and learn correct progressive outcomes. These
things all improve economics, social skills, life style and the GNP.
> Businesses will be able to ship more goods at less cost in 1/2 or less time.
> This makes the GNP rise by using less foreign oil in long distance trucking.
> Slowing changes in weather disasters due to global warming will save
money for emergency funds and therefor, the GNP improves.
> The USA will reclaim it's standing in the world by improving infrastructure
that is not moving on foreign oil and is commenserate with other
countries that already have high speed rail,- improving our GNP.
> New jobs across the country as we connect the cities anew.
> If we put up wind farms along the rail line we get nearly free power to
run it and the excess can be used to lower electric costs along the line.
> WIN! WIN! WIN! LET'S NOT THINK SHORT TERM.
> The average family is currently receiving less for what it earns due to the
price of oil. It only gets worse from here.
* Cons for high speed rail?
> Up front costs.
> Maybe some land purchases or condemnations.
> A relatively few ruffled feathers compared to the needs of many.
PAY ME NOW OR REALLY PAY ME LATER IS ABSOLUTELY TRUE.

Bernadette J. Mirowsky-Gantz of FL 12:35PM February 10, 2011

Either you are for creating jobs or you are for against creating jobs. So far House Republicans have not done anything to create jobs, rather they have been pushing bills that would lay-off more Americans.
If we can afford the billionaire welfare tax cuts then we can afford to invest in our infrastructure. Hi-speed rail is fine, slow speed rail is fine, too. How about rebuilding some of our hiways and bridges, while we are at it.
In December Republicans gave away $700 bill in billionaire bonuses /tax cuts to people who don't need the money and who aren't spending it in our economy (their swiss bank accts get fatter at least).
Where are the jobs Republicans promised? So far the republicans have bee talking bills that would kill job, like cutting Amtrak's budget, instead of creating jobs like investing in Amtrak and Hi-speed rail.
I'd rather take a train any day, it'd be great if we caught up with modern countries to have hi-speed rail.

Roger of GA 7:37PM February 09, 2011

Our love affair with the automobile is dysfunctional in the extreme. People spend way too much time behind the wheel. We've paved our world. Change is overdue! With peak oil here light rail is the wave of the future.

steven Lemle of NM 2:10PM February 08, 2011

When I was commuting to college from home in the 70's, it was a 20 minute drive on Baltimore's more-lanes-than-needed Beltway.
When I drove to work after college on I-97, there was little traffic.
Now, it takes 35 minutes to make the same trip on the Baltimore Beltway. My cousin got his job to transfer his coverage area to Western Maryland because it took too long to reach Baltimore from his home in a distant northern suburb.
When I retired in 2006, I often couldn't get out of the slow lane from the time I got on I-97 until I got to my exit.
The Washington D.C. Beltway is much, much worse. If I travel from the Baltimore area (north of D.C.) to my cousin's in Fredericksburg, Virginia (south of D.C.) it takes and extra 90 minutes if I hit the D.C. area around rush hour. There are people living south of D.C. who hitch rides as designated spots to D.C. with strangers in the morning-and are picked up by them- so they can save 45 minutes getting into D.C. on the fast (passengers only) lanes.
If we don't improve our mass transportation systems, the only alternatives are cyclical rings of Beltways around cities - and that's going to cost a lot in construction and maintenance -Bush left us $650,000,000,000 behind in Federal highway maintenance.
We might as well spend it on a more energy efficient system like rail.

The Mickm of MD 11:26PM February 05, 2011

I fear that America may be way over-educated in the liberal arts, if those like Ryan can read the above piece, and only come away with a dangling participle count. It is no wonder that the U.S.A. is losing our ability to accomplish anything, and it is showing in our world standing.

Mark Henderson of OR 4:04PM February 01, 2011

RL, the private railroads of long ago did run passenger service, only as long as the ICC made them. They lost their shirts, the same as any mode of transportation would and has, given the huge amounts of coin needed to prop up the airline industries and roads.

Bill of PA 2:07PM February 01, 2011