Quote:
Originally Posted by aquablue
Why compare W. Europe to USA? You should be comparing certain areas/states of the USA to specific countries in Europe, that's a more fair comparison. USA will never be like Europe, it's HSR routes will be probably limited to 3 or 4 places and that's it. The overall demand in Europe will always be far greater for rail because of what you said (population), but that doesn't mean that rail can't work in specific places in America and run profitably .
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by aquablue
It still is only 310 vs 255/sq mile (california).
On another note:
Shame they went with non-grade separation from San Francisca to San Jose, pretty disappointing. I have no seen a high speed rail system anywhere where they have road barriers, but they could exist somewhere in the world. The cost of a tunnel would have been too much, understandable. I would have preferred them take a more direct route to LA, but politics I suppose made it so. What can you do.
|
Complains about comparing Europe to USA then proceeds to compare Europe to the USA. My point of my post is that they are NOT comparable! I made a comparison to show how ridiculous it is. Furthermore, people per square mile tells nothing. Once again, we are talking about a country of 70 million people in an area the size of Texas. Compare that to the US which is more fair. You are comparing a country to a state. I am stating that is NOT!!! a valid comparison. I don't know how to make myself more clear.
I am not taking a stance for or against HSR with that statement. I support HSR in general. But simply saying France approved x amount of HSR lines and why can't we doesn't make much of a case-- especially all things considered.