# American High Speed Rail is a Terrible Idea **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 4, 2021, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404 "2021-04-04T21:11:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2021, 5:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404/41 "2021-04-05T05:20:32Z")
> [@PastTense](#): > > In contrast a car only involves one trip. True, if you’ve got a car right at hand at your origin and a place to put the car at your destination. Absent those conditions, you’re still looking at one extra trip to get from the origin to the car (or to bring the car to you), and to dispose of the car at the destination. With a self-driving car there’s still only one trip for the passenger, of course, but the car still has to be moved to and from the passenger. > [@PastTense](#): > > When self driving cars arrive I think people will prefer them for a substantial fraction of the trips done by train especially Absolutely, but again, that’s presuming that all those “people” will be the kind who have one of those cars on hand in the first place, and a place to put it when they get to their destination. Self-driving cars are a great alternative to mass transit for people whose trip requires getting from one suburban driveway or parking lot to another suburban driveway or parking lot several hours away. But it’s never going to be realistic in major transit hubs to replace, say, every 35-person busload of people (which can be driven and parked in the same footprint as two or three cars) with 35 individual cars. If you have fleets of self-driving cars for hire plying back and forth on schedules like minibuses, that would be considerably more feasible, but probably still significantly more resource-intensive and more expensive than genuine mass transit. Thirty-five separate engines instead of one, seventy separate windshield wipers instead of two, one hundred and forty separate wheels instead of six or ten, and so on. Individual-vehicle long-distance (or short-distance, for that matter) travel is intrinsically always going to be wasteful in comparison to multiperson-vehicle alternatives. Its one big advantage, for people who already own an individual vehicle and have ample places to put it wherever they go, is its unparalleled convenience. ---
**Author:** ![asterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4da419/32.png) [@asterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asterion)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2021, 12:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404/42 "2021-04-05T12:39:56Z")
> [@Spoons](#): > > It might be. It approximates the route of Interstate 25, which gets a lot of people into and out of Denver daily, as well as to places up and down the Interstate. Heck, my ex-wife commuted between Colorado Springs and Pueblo daily for a few years, and would have been very happy with an option that didn’t require her to drive, especially in winter. I’m looking at that map and there’s still no proposed service between Denver, Albuquerque, and El Paso. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2021, 12:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404/43 "2021-04-05T12:58:10Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Biden’s story isn’t specifically hsr, but the same numbers apply to the kind of trains he wants. Missed this admission that Biden’s story is NOT promoting high speed rail. So do the same numbers apply to projects specifically chosen to cost effectively improve existing service? Amtrak’s wishlist map is not Biden’s proposal. ---
**Author:** ![Elmer\_J.Fudd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/elmer_j.fudd/32/1211_2.png) [@Elmer\_J.Fudd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elmer_J.Fudd)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2021, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404/44 "2021-04-05T14:50:09Z")
I don’t have a dog in either camp, but this whole discussion seems to be ignoring the great bane of highway travel. Traffic. Even self driving cars aren’t going to solve that problem unless everybody on the road is using them and they are programmed to coordinate with each other and move at one standard speed. Like a train. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2021, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404/45 "2021-04-05T15:44:50Z")
> [@Elmer\_J.Fudd](#): > > and they are programmed to coordinate with each other and move at one standard speed. Like a train. In progress. It would require V2V communication which had been in the works [to standardize, regulate, and roll out](https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/01/12/2016-31059/federal-motor-vehicle-safety-standards-v2v-communications) back in 2017 but somehow got pushed off. > [@](#): > > This document proposes to establish a new Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS), No. 150, to mandate vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communications for new light vehicles and to standardize the message and format of V2V transmissions. This will create an information environment in which vehicle and device manufacturers can create and implement applications to improve safety, mobility, and the environment. Without a mandate to require and standardize V2V communications, the agency believes that manufacturers will not be able to move forward in an efficient way and that a critical mass of equipped vehicles would take many years to develop, if ever. Implementation of the new standard will enable vehicle manufacturers to develop safety applications that employ V2V communications as an input, two of which are estimated to prevent hundreds of thousands of crashes and prevent over one thousand fatalities annually. Combine that with autonomous vehicles and you have essentially autonomous trains that can form ad hoc on the roads and highways, leveraging extant infrastructure in a more flexible manner than rail does. Small steps are being taken with trucking in which a lead vehicle still has an actively engaged human driver but several vehicles behind following as a [platoon](https://www.verisk.com/insurance/visualize/get-in-line-highways-poised-for-platooning---part-one/), closely following, controlled by the lead. > [@](#): > > In racing and cycling, it’s called “drafting”—the practice of a car or bike improving its aerodynamics and energy efficiency by slipping behind another car or bike. In the emerging world of autonomous and driver-assisted vehicles, it’s called “platooning” and usually refers to trucks that line up behind one another at close distances to leverage improved aerodynamics. > > Platooning, which is based on vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communications, has been shown to increase the fuel efficiency of both the lead and following vehicles, saving fleet operators money and reducing carbon dioxide emissions. … > > … follower trucks maintain constant communication with the lead vehicle and have synchronized acceleration and braking, platooning trucks can maintain much shorter distances between themselves as they travel. > > Platooning, which is based on vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communications, has been shown to increase the fuel efficiency of both the lead and following vehicles, saving fleet operators money and reducing carbon dioxide emissions. It’s still early days for platooning technology, and as of July 2019, [20 states](http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/autonomous-vehicles-legislative-database.aspx) have taken action to address vehicle platooning in relation to applicable laws that govern a vehicle’s following distance. … > > … Over the next several years, McKinsey [expects](https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/travel-transport-and-logistics/our-insights/distraction-or-disruption-autonomous-trucks-gain-ground-in-us-logistics) that the trailing trucks in a platoon will be autonomous, but only between designated highway stops. One trucking company [envisions](https://www.ttnews.com/articles/developers-seek-advance-truck-platooning-through-higher-automation-global-demonstrations) “logistics hubs,” where autonomous trailing vehicles can either be dropped off or picked up by human drivers for “first and last mile” rides The vision is a driver enters their destination and the vehicle automatically enjoins an ad hoc virtual train, disconnecting automatically when its your “stop” and taking you door to door. For the autonomous application the highway distance portion with V2V communication is the least challenge. And there is a separate safety argument to made for V2V in any case. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2021, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404/46 "2021-04-05T15:52:03Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > So you are okay with extra CO2 emissions for decades to wind up with a system no better than alternatives and possibly worse? Dont you know that in many cases the _trains_ will be electric? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2021, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404/47 "2021-04-05T15:54:30Z")
Hard numbers based upon apples to oranges. All the cars in your figures are electric, but the trains are diesel . But not all cars are electric, and they are electrifying the trains. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2021, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404/48 "2021-04-05T15:57:36Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > High-speed rail makes sense for densely populated regions like the Boston-NYC-Philadelphia-DC corridor or the Dallas-Houston-San Antonio triangle. For that, a shinkansen would be great. Not surprisingly, some people agree. [Texas Central Railway is planning on running Shinkansen trains between Dallas and Houston starting as early as 2026.](https://www.texascentral.com/project/) As best as I can tell, the value proposition is that it’s an option that’s in between flying and driving, where cost and time are the tradeoffs. Driving is pretty consistently about 5 hours between the two, and flying is an hour in the air, plus all the associated TSA stuff. Cost is about $200+ for a flight, and driving is however much gas it takes you to drive about 250-300 miles. So if TCR can get you between the cities in 90 minutes for $50-75, they’ve got a winning proposition I suspect. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2021, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404/49 "2021-04-05T16:05:09Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > My view is, the US ought to copy places where rail has been cost-effective and implemented and developed successfully: Japan, Korea, parts of Eastern China, and Europe - places where there’s heavy population density. In places with high population density in the US and in the economic corridors, copy their rail systems and grids, but with more modern and greener tech. One reason Japan has been so effective if that their federal government can do more stuff than ours. The HSR in CA has been handicapped by huge amounts of NIMBYism from private landowners, cities and counties. This have driven up the cost immensely . Whereas Japan can just draw the route, get public, etc input, then go. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2021, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404/50 "2021-04-06T02:03:34Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > The tracks take 30 years to build; I believe the trains are considerably less. The train is a system. Once you design it and start building, you are stuck within certain parameters. For example, if you want an electric train you need different infrastructure. If maglev becomes a great solution in a decade, you’re out of luck. Yes, there is some room for innovation with the locomotives during the time before you need to order them, but there are no really large gains on the horizon for that. Trains already have about as low a rolling resistance as you’re likely to get without maglev, there isn’t a lot of room for aerodynamic improvements, and the engines are simple and efficient. The innovations I see in trains have nothing to do with overall efficiency, but more to do with trying to get diesel out of the mix in favor of fuel cells or some other tech. Efficiency in trains is generally determined these days by the efficiency of the _system_. Delays, trains running empty, scheduling conflicts… That’s what people are trying to improve. > [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > I read somewhere that one of the factors at play is that the standards for passenger rail cars in the U.S. haven’t been revised in decades, and so they’re much heavier than comparable trains in Europe. I haven’t heard if the new proposal includes a revision to those rules, but there are potential efficiency improvements that could be made. Maybe some weight reduction in passenger cars is possible, but it could also be that U.S. trains need heavier cars because they work harder and are subject to harsher environments. Do you have a link to these plans? I’d like to see the details. > [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > The freight trains that you were extolling are diesel powered. All the high-speed passenger trains I’m aware of draw their power from overhead wires, and the infrastructure proposal we’re discussing does include electrification of some routes that currently aren’t. I actually didn’t even include electric vs diesel in the argument. The energy numbers I used were straight up BTU/Mile. I was accused of leaving things out to favor cars, but in fact I didn’t. I left this out, for example, when I could have made the argument that pushing people out of electric cars into trains is pushing them out of zero-GHG vehicles and into ones that burn fossil fuels. Also, I need to clarify something: I started this thread talking about HSR, because when I did all I had read was article after article telling me that the Transportation Secretary had plans to criss-cross the nation with HSR. And so he did. But it appears that Amtrack Joe has pulled the rug out from underneath Buttigieg and opted to expand Amtrack across the nation instead. So I suppose we should really be debating the Amtrack plan rather than HSR at this point. Luckily, the numbers I used for efficiency earlier were numbers for Amtrak. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2021, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404/51 "2021-04-06T02:08:21Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Missed this admission that Biden’s story is NOT promoting high speed rail. See the last paragraph in my response to Robot Arm. > [@DSeid](#): > > So do the same numbers apply to projects specifically chosen to cost effectively improve existing service? > > Amtrak’s wishlist map is not Biden’s proposal. Isn`t it? Amtrack is going to spend $85 billion dollars just to update a few lines to make them more efficient? No new routes at all? ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2021, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404/52 "2021-04-06T02:13:24Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Dont you know that in many cases the _trains_ will be electric? The question is, are they more efficient? Electric is nice in that it gets rid of some fossil fuels, but my original point was that trains simply won’t be more efficient than cars by the time this is done. In fact they are already less efficient than the average car if you could just put two people in the car. But given the mandated fuel efficiency standards coming up and the rapid shift to electric cars, it won’t be long before the average person driving cross country will do so more efficiently in a car than by train. That’s assuming no further improvements to electric cars, but clearly there are still lots of improvements to be had. Everything from this day forward gets worse for trains. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2021, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404/53 "2021-04-06T02:29:15Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > […] trains simply won’t be more efficient than cars by the time this is done. In fact they are already less efficient than the average car if you could just put two people in the car. > > But given the mandated fuel efficiency standards coming up and the rapid shift to electric cars, it won’t be long before the average person driving cross country will do so more efficiently in a car than by train. That’s assuming no further improvements to electric cars, but clearly there are still lots of improvements to be had. Everything from this day forward gets worse for trains. Except, as I noted, the fact that at least tens of millions of people are still going to need or prefer some kind of mass transit for medium- to long-distance trips (and short-distance as well, but that brings in a bunch of other transportation alternatives) rather than operating a personally owned individual vehicle. Comparing the superficial efficiency of any form of mass transit to that of individual car trips, without taking into account the vast differences between them in terms of serving the general public, being a manageable option for densely populated transit hubs, etc., is apples to elephants. Maybe you’ve also got in mind the potential development of other genuine mass-transit options, like electric long-distance buses in platooned fleets such as DSeid was talking about. In which case, fine, let’s hear it. But it is not an adequate argument against passenger rail development just to say that individual electric car trips could potentially wind up being more fuel-efficient per passenger mile than train trips. Individual car trips are not feasible as a complete replacement for trains or other forms of mass transit. ---
**Author:** ![squeegee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/squeegee/32/14537_2.png) [@squeegee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squeegee)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2021, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404/54 "2021-04-06T02:49:25Z")
@Sam_Stone, Kimstu’s argument is the important one. What should transportation look like in the future? A fleet of Teslas and nothing else is ridiculous. But let’s not forget that [Amtrack’s fleet has gotten 56% more energy efficient](https://www.cato.org/commentary/high-speed-rail-no-solution) in [just 11 years](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404/37) according to Cato-\>your cite. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2021, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404/55 "2021-04-06T02:59:09Z")
> [@Elmer\_J.Fudd](#): > > … this whole discussion seems to be ignoring the great bane of highway travel. Traffic. Even self driving cars aren’t going to solve that problem … However, at present, that is also a problem for train travel. I have taken Amtrak across the west numerous times, a trip of over 1500 miles for me, and the train has to lay over in sidings from time to time to let BNSF or whatever line we are on charge on by. This can accumulate an hour or two over a scheduled 40+ hour trip. There is a chicken\<-\>egg situation here. We have, at most, one train a day on the route I use. That not only limits passenger options but also slows the train down because it has to stop at every scheduled station, some of them only 20 miles apart. If there were several runs a day, the trains could alternate the smaller stations, cutting travel time down by hours and improving efficiency, because it takes a lot of juice to get a furlong of train going again after a stop. Faster service, even by a little, would make the train more attractive, filling more seats. Rail travel could be more attractive if it had better support. Making airlines pay duly for the dirt they pump into the skies would most certainly level the playing field. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2021, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404/56 "2021-04-06T03:03:15Z")
I see some space between “no new routes at all” and “everything on Amtrack’s wishlist”. LaHood as an informed outsider has the following as his expectation. > [@](#): > > I really think he wants to improve rail service with existing lines and with opportunities to provide some connectivity to the current Amtrak line And a current official portrays it as > [@](#): > > the ultimate focus of the plan is to support projects that offer the greatest public benefits for their costs Some that wishlist may make the cut. Some not. City center to city center modern trains have lots to offer, especially if those cities the have good other public transportation. The existing system clearly need updating and improvements with a disciplined eye on value for the investment. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2021, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404/57 "2021-04-06T03:05:48Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > Rail travel could be more attractive if it had better support. Making airlines pay duly for the dirt they pump into the skies would most certainly level the playing field. The issue out here is the SP owns the tracks and they screw Amtrak every opportunity. SP is run by total assholes. Time to nationalize the freight lines too. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2021, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404/58 "2021-04-06T03:30:38Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > One reason Japan has been so effective if that their federal government can do more stuff than ours. The HSR in CA has been handicapped by huge amounts of NIMBYism from private landowners, cities and counties. This have driven up the cost immensely . Whereas Japan can just draw the route, get public, etc input, then go. This may be a bit circular, but Japan also has much more of a “train culture” than America. America is a cars-and-airplanes culture. It’s harder to sell the idea of trains and high-speed shinkansen in America than in Japan, just like how Japanese aren’t as in love with road tripping in RVs or big SUVs like America. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2021, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404/59 "2021-04-06T03:45:42Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > This may be a bit circular, but Japan also has much more of a “train culture” than America. America is a cars-and-airplanes culture. Although I think it could be argued that the US had much more of a train culture back before the interstate highway system than it does now. “City of New Orleans”, anyone? AFAICT it’s a fairly standard argument of modern libertarianism that US passenger rail is intrinsically inefficient and should be divested from, but [the full reality is somewhat more complicated](https://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?id=1383). > [@](#): > > [Cato Institute scholar Randall O’Toole’s] _Romance of the Rails_, by contrast, is for the policy community, and it suggests that passenger trains, in any form, never had much of a chance to be commercially successful, and, apart from in a few historically thickly settled areas, are not a good use of public money today. […] > > Thus, the story arc of passenger trains: in _Romance of the Rails_ , O’Toole groups chapters on the emergence of the various intercity and urban passenger rail services. Then come the challenges and the decline. That’s the first half of the book. > > The second half concentrates on the policy implications, which, he argues, are mostly unfavorable for passenger trains, thus not productive uses of public money. The normative principle structuring his argument, stated succinctly (p. 289), is “No one should have the right to decide to live in a place with higher transportation costs and then expect taxpayers to subsidize them.” Perhaps, though, _Romance of the Rails_ identifies opportunities to do positive analysis of transportation policy that doesn’t preclude Passenger Rail, whether public money is involved or not. […] > > O’Toole’s work continues the curious libertarian attitude toward public spending on transportation, which the late Paul Weyrich characterized as “road socialism,” although it might be more charitably understood as a less unfavorable stance toward public money for internal improvements where exclusion is costly, as may be true of roads, waterways, and airways. Railroads, which can more easily exclude unauthorized use, are less worthy of public money. Because the use of roads, waterways, and airways is rival, at the margin the provision of rail service to reduce congestion on the other modes might reduce the subsidies to places with higher transportation costs, or hold the highway system in trust for future users. […] > > Perhaps O’ Toole could contemplate inefficiencies in current transportation funding methods more effectively than by perpetuating the criticism of publicly funded rail projects that compares, e.g., the full cost of Nashville’s commuter rail service (chapter 15) with buying each potential rider a Prius. That criticism pretends that additional automobiles can be added to the road network without any increases in lanes or parking lots, something that is almost certainly not true. Nor are ridesharing services and autonomous cars-for-hire (when those become feasible) likely to be more effective than trains in taming congestion. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2021, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404/60 "2021-04-06T03:45:52Z")
Good points. The UK used to also , but it seems to have gone downhill. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-high-speed-rail-is-a-terrible-idea/939404.md?page=4)