• tehn00bi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      56 minutes ago

      Not in this country. It’s nearly impossible to get the land to make it possible. Then it’s the fact that large districts are far apart. The economics of rail are tough. You take a 4 hour flight, it becomes a 16 hour rail trip.

    • bridgeburner@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Because Big Oil doesn’t profit from high speed trains, since those trains don’t run on fossil fuels (at least not directly). And everyone knows Big Oil rules the US in truth. Every president is just more or less a puppet from them.

    • CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Because there’s zero political will to do so, our nation is huge, and there’s no land to build this rail on without lots of eminent domain seizures.

      • Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        The USSR was a lot bigger, less dense, and less developed. They managed rail.

        As far as eminent domain goes, half our cities are parking lot and road. You can also simply elevate the rail. Or you can do what the chinese do and not build the station in the city center and instead run subways connecting the rail stations everywhere. IMO this is worse than building the train station near downtown.