If you pass Columbus, you’d also go through Indianapolis. Or you could go north and pass through Cleveland and Detroit.
Anyway, if you only support building infrastructure in regions of the U.S. that are as densely populated as eastern China, you’d basically never build anything.
> If you pass Columbus, you’d also go through Indianapolis. Or you could go north and pass through Cleveland and Detroit.
Which
1. Already exists
2. Leads to the same problem as before - the population size just does not justify those investments, nor is there any business demand when a flight will always remain faster.
> Anyway, if you only support building infrastructure in regions of the U.S. that are as densely populated as eastern China, you’d basically never build anything
I support building infrastructure that solves an actual problem - and public transit connectivity between NY and Chicago isn't one of those.
It will remain slower than flight transit (so most business and plenty of personal travel will remain flight based) and car ownership remains high in the US, so for personal travel, the independence of driving would still outcompete rail.
Those billions of dollars on such a hypothetical are better spent on plenty of other alternative programs - for example the local transit expansion grants which the Biden admin bundled as part of the IIJA, which helped expand bus and local rail transit instead.
Even China has stopped financing these kinds of mega-projects becuase of tightening financial due dilligence, and tries to tie investments with an actual business case [0]. Heck, now prices are roughly the same between a domestic flight and HSR on the major lines in China.
[0] - https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/13/business/china-bullet-tra...
----------
The only network that could even justify a high speed rail is the DC-Philadelphia-NYC-Boston corridor (so an extended Acela Line), but are you also fine with the federal government expropriating land to speed up development OR spending decades democratically building consensus.
And even then DCA to JFK or Logan will remain time competitive for business travel
> car ownership remains high in the US, so for personal travel, the independence of driving would still outcompete rail.
I mean, this is the catch-22 that prevents a lot of public transit projects from being built. Car ownership is high largely because in most places there is no viable public transit. Then people oppose building public transit because car ownership is high!
> Anyway, if you only support building infrastructure in regions of the U.S. that are as densely populated as eastern China, you’d basically never build anything
Correct.