Hyperloop was invented to try to kill light rail. It succeeded at killing Maryland's new venture and Illinois'. Neither were built because Hyperloop promised bullshit. Elon hates public transport.
4The mistake is thinking Elon is a moron screwing everything up on accident. He isn’t. He’s an Afrikaner white supremacist Nazi who is causing all this damage on purpose.
Starlink and SpaceX should be nationalized before he gets a chance to weaponize those companies against the western world as well.
4This is misleadingly reductionist. California high speed rail has made consistant progess in that time. That progress has been slower than ourslowest expectations. It demonstrates the void of expertise the US has in rail megaprojects. However, that expertise is being built, slowly and painfully. Its still forward progress for a nation which tore up half its rail overthe last 50 years.
0America invented rail megaprojects.
America still has the largest rail network by far. It's well more than twice the size of China's.
The only interesting note is that it's almost all freight compared to other nations' use of passenger rail.
1Misleadingly reductionist is what /c/memes should be renamed to.
1
China wants unity, even in places where it doesn't make economic sense.
edit: 100% downvotes are coming from people that don't know the situation. The CCP wants fast travel to major population centers even when the rail line isn't profitable.
0Isn't that a good thing? sounds like the rail is being run as a public utility rather than a business. And its still likely profitable if you average the cost over all the lines.
1I never said it was a good/bad thing. I'm saying the Chinese gov. isn't as concerned with profit. Which explains the difference between California and China
1
It makes economic sense but not financial sense. Railways are almost always profitable once considering second and third order effects.
It's the same story with Amtrak, so I'm not sure why people are so confused. Amtrak loses money on every train that's not the NEC.
1
Giant infrastructure projects are a weakness of democracies. It's tough to get everyone to agree and pay for huge projects that take long term vision and planning.
Or you could call it a strength because it's stable and can't be changed too fast by one guy with a short term bad idea.
0Mainly in the US, though. The automobile lobby successfully undermined many attempts at mass transit infrastructure. And the existing rail network is privatized into oblivion.
Roosevelt showed that there is a way of tackling infrastructure in the US. Only his approach has a minute slither of what can be framed to be socialist, so it'll never happen again..
1see NEOM
It's an unbelievably stupid idea that's really going to happen. The prince of Saudi Arabia knows that their oil economy is going to wither away soon, so he's trying to make SA appealing to people with money and have them move there. How? By building a city that's a line 160 km (110 mi) long and 200 m (660 ft) wide...in the middle of fucking nowhere. The whole idea is based on technology that we don't have and is just terrible city planning. Look into it to get a laugh.
0
China has the advantage of not having to care about the citizens' desires in regards to be relocated to make the rail possible.
0I don't think America gives any shits either. They let the world's most useless CEO dictate their future
1They also provide apartments to live in permanently for those displaced in the development.
Meanwhile, the US has not built high speed rail and has tent cities.
In the case of national infrastructure, China wins hands down.
Although it's kind of ridiculous to compare California with an entire country...
0Honestly not that ridiculous of a comparison considering California's size and GDP, we could be doing a lot better
1
https://www.eurasiantimes.com/a-whopping-900b-debt-chinas-once-profitable-high-speed-railways/?amp
It'd be good to have high speed rail but not at any cost.
Queue tankies going crazy to defend the absurd cost...
-1
