Living in the US it's absolutely wild how people are constantly scrutinizing transit systems and expect them to never spend more than they make back in fares, and then at the same time expect that highways go absolutely everywhere and be accessible for free.
Speaking of people not realizing that highways are free: I recently did an analysis of the cost of a light rail vs the cost of a freeway. BUT I baked in the price of every citizen having to purchase, maintain, and fuel a car in order to use the freeway. When you look at it this way, the cost of the freeway is waaaaaay more expensive than the cost of the train.
Yeah people don't factor in that highways just privatize the costs of driving and vehicles. Public transportation will inherently cost more because those factors will be in the cost due to operator wages/vehicles. People don't consider that their time or their cars as a part of the cost of a highway.
@@vinniezcenzo On top of that, people really seem to forget to account for the cost of maintance, repair and eventual replacement of thier car...not to mention the fines (parking/speeding/etc.) they'll eventually get on top of that...
That analysis is a very good video by the way, do check it out: ruclips.net/video/QGcDrQXEV0k/видео.html Also, what the hell went on in the replies here? What, do you even like having to schlep a metric ton of metal, rubber, battery acid and fossil fuel around with you everywhere you go, and you can’t even lie back, read the news, talk to people from other socioeconomic classes, or watch the scenery (which would now just be expanses of asphalt)? (Same problem with self-driving cars, by the way.) Also, if you want to privatize the passenger railroads and transit agencies, well then, good luck with being able to make an easy transfer, and especially expecting a consistent fare…and don’t get me or Alan started on freight oligopolies and train traffic priority in the US.
People are willing to pay more for freedom of movement. I can get in my car and drive at any time, if I take a train somewhere, I have to coordinate my schedule with the schedule of the train. People realize trains in this country are filthy and unreliable, making them less likely to want to use one for their primary transportation.
@@adambooth1908 You say it like it’s an inherent issue with transit in general which is usually not the case. Transit in other places is highly frequent and isn’t filthy.
Fun fact about the Shinkansen. The rail bureaucrat who proposed it knew it would cost more, but lowballed because he had a trump card. The project was funded partially from a world bank development loan, which stipulated that the funds must only be used for the project, and the project must be seen to completion. Once the truth came out, he was disgraced but the politicians had no choice and had to finish the project. He was of course vindicated in the end and the government built many more lines. Edit: for anyone curious, the guy is Shinji Sogo. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinji_Sog%C5%8D
The biggest benefit of riding the shinkansen is not: 1: No check-in, security check time wasted as when catching flight. 2: It delivering you directly to city centers. 3: Enjoying a beer while travelling. 4: Staring longingly at Mt. Fuji as you pass it (instead of staring at the road) while enjoying your beer. No, the biggest benefit of riding the shinkansen is... the leg room.
Yess~~ you can literally show up like five minutes before your train departs and just scan your ticket in the machine, or have enough time to have a coffee/tea or noodles at one of the many little restaurants and cafes that stations tend to have
Japan is a TINY nation compared to America. Nearly two thirds of Japan's population is within the original Shinkansen route of less than 300 miles very suitable for HSR. That is less than the distance from Dallas to San Antonio along I-35 in Texas. Never mind the rest of the USA...
@@ronclark9724 we are not bringing bullet trains to Wyoming or Alaska we are first wanting to brig high quality high speed rail that’s better than the Amtrak northeast corridor currently is. Extending the north east corridor all the way to Florida then Brightline can take the rest is a great idea . Building HSR In populated routes is a good idea.
Way to remind me about the whole Nashville transit debacle. I live here, and it is such a shame. This city could easily be transformed by proper transportation and knocking down a few highways (i40 and i65) within city limits. There is so much potential here, but I must drive my Carolla to places, wasting time and gas in traffic and going to big box stores. Not a fan. I ride my bike as much as possible, for whatever that's worth.
The Koch Brothers are still active in trying to block railway projects across the US. They weren't successful in blocking the light rail in Phoenix, so they're now influencing the local councils at neighboring Scottsdale and Gilbert by igniting very fierce NIMBY sentiments.
The best thing that can be done for transit is to privatize all limited access highways (interstates) as tollways, and to defund other roads and STOP SUBSIDIZING SUBURBAN GROWTH WITH PUBLIC DEBT.
Yeah even in a design competition a few months back (although I was not apart of it, a few buddies of mine were and I helped guide them) in Nashville, the judges essentially didn't let a single team go forward in finals that proposed deconstructing highways as an alternative. The pro-car, anti-innovation mentality irked me to the point where its making me ask how architects, the people who are supposed to be innovative and future thinkers, still get stuck on how cars should be prioritized. Mind you, one of the many reasons to removing a 2 mile, unnecessary stretch of highway was to re-unite two neighborhoods that were intentionally segregated over 50 years ago. But 'feasibility' was not possible in a city literally built like a giant highway.
speaking of over budget: here in germany EVERY SINGLE ONE of the post reunification rail construction projects was or is heavily over budget but once the projects were finished and started showing their worth people stopped giving a shit and enjoyed the ride
The light rail in Seattle was very over budget but it gets tons of riders every day. It's also faster than driving through the most crowded part of the city every day.
Military has the same issue with contractors. Our own engineers that we train and give schooling for don’t get to do a lot of work so we can get companies like NAVFAC to repair everything instead. It’s awful and a waste of our budget, and the contractor incompetence literally burned down one of our ships, billions down the drain!
Private companies should be outlawed from lobbying or otherwise engaging in any form of political activity. They're not people and even less so citizens. If these large stockholders want to throw money at politicians for corrupt and immoral laws then they can do so from beyond the veil of anonymity.
Bro, I hate that people in the US believe that cars are the only way to travel and put so LITTLE scrutiny on 3 decade behind schedule Interstate highways but put so MUCH scrutiny in transit projects like the CA High Speed Railway.
Unfortunately California HSR thus far has been the largest BOONDOGGLE in American history... Over tripled its original projected costs at the referendum without not even one mile built and put into operation after nearly two decades... If this doesn't qualify as a BOONDOGGLE, nothing will! And guess what, a HSR train will NOT be operating on any segment during the next decade either...
We have driven 3 trillion miles since 1950s, only 10 million rail passengers a year, even airlines have 850 million a year. Until you have the passengers it doesn’t make sense. It’s an utter waste of money. No roi in it. 😊
The wildest thing I've ever heard about a tranist project from a politcian was the govenor of Louisiana saying that he would back any plan to build a lightrail connecting the capitol Baton Rouge to the state's largest city New Orleans. Downtown to downtown, they are separated by 100 miles. Obviously he meant he'd back a regional rail system, but it's still funny to think about the Bayou State unironically constructing the world's longest tram line.
@@MilwaukeeF40C Fuck yeah, interurbans were one of the most fascinating things to read about for me when learning about American rail systems. Down here in NZ we never even had things like those. An interurban revival in the US and the construction of similar systems in places in NZ would be awesome.
Yeah, he's the only good governor in the entire Deep South U.S, all the other Dixie governors suck. God bless him for expanding the medical weed program in this state.
God, if only... I live in Louisiana and have to go between New Orleans and Baton Rouge all the time for work and other activities. It's such a PITA to have to drive between them on I-10 every time I need to do so... such a terrible stretch of interstate
@@venticuiliar9136 New Orleans and Baton Rouge ironically have such good bones to build off of, because they were built before cars. It'd be surprisingly easy to build a train there if you had the budget, and it would make travel there so easy. But no, we live with a bunch of car-brained boomer rednecks and can't have nice things.
@@MilwaukeeF40C True. But the media is incentivized to ignore it. Why do you think that is? Could it be due to advertisers connected to the oil industrial complex? I don’t know for sure but I sure could see it.
Yeah I was waiting for the Shinkansen reference. The head of JNR resigned over the backlash, yet they kept at it. They tunneled and blasted through mountains 500 kilometers building a train in the 1960s. And now what? The economy shot up, jobs increased, and everyone in the world started to emulate Japan in building high speed rail. Everyone looks at Japan at the golden example of good high speed rail. It's fast, reliable, punctual, comfortable, connects the country well and it's affordable. CHSR is truly America's shinkansen project. They just need to get their heads down and build the damn thing.
Actually the Shinkansen along with other public expenditures are regarded as having contributed to the "lost decade" of monetary problems and economic stagnation, which is now the lost 30 years and going. The Shinkansen was very connected with private sector clout and not real democratic. Something like it would not be done in a place like California with all of its downtrodden factions claiming oppression because something would be done a certain way. Everyone wanted a piece of CAHSR and it turned in to a cluster.
@@MilwaukeeF40C No it didn’t. A bunch of Republican dark money groups sued the crap out of the project over key land parcels so that they could engineer cascading delays and cost overruns. They were hoping that the public would get discouraged by the increased costs and just cancel the project. It worked for a couple of years, but this was always just a delaying tactic. The public refused to budge and the project’s popularity has actually _increased_ since the 2008 bond referendum on CAHSR. The dark money groups basically ran away with their tail between their legs to oppose other projects like Texas Central. CAHSR just continued plowing forward and are now on track to complete construction on the first three sections by next year. Newsom announced two more extensions in 2019 and those are already fully approved, fully funded, and in active pre-construction. The project is doing pretty good now actually. RUclips is full of drone shots with completed strictures and raised guideway. The villains lost in this case, surprisingly.
@@MilwaukeeF40C no dude, the lost decade was caused by japan's falling birth rate and the Asian financial crash along with stagnation in their tech sector, shinkansen predated the crisis by 20 years. Get your facts straight
@@MilwaukeeF40C politicians and claiming Japan is dying due to no positive gdp. Think of it this way, average Japanese person experienced no inflation for past 30 years. Politicians can call it failure and lost decade all they want. I see it as a chad stable 3 decades.
A reminder that before Brightline, Rick Scott personally killed a high-speed rail connection between Tampa and Orlando and was later found to have many close (albeit not incriminating) financial ties to Brightline.
i'm pretty sure in wisconsin, there was a high speed rail project, paid for, trains purchased, and fully approved and ready to go before scott walker just straight up canceled it
@@rishabhanand4973 Fortunately in the last mid term election, Walker's Lt Governor (Rebecca Kleefisch), was defeated in the primary and the Republican candidate (Michels), who actually lives in Connecticut, was defeated in the general election. Republican US senator Ron Johnson (who spends most of his time at his villa in Florida) won.
@@MilwaukeeF40C Brightline is privately owned but publicly funded. Up to 90% of just the cost of their station construction is direct government subsidy and 100% of their planned profits is from real estate allowances that the government gave them. If it’s still 100% subsidized then why give the resulting infrastructure to a private company? If we’re paying for it anyway then how come some hedge fund gets to keep the things they bought with our money? What you are in favor of is essentially socialism, but for people who are already rich!
@Zaydan Alfariz just curious though. Would the recent earthquake at Cianjur impact the opening of the KCIC next year? Also, given that Cianjur is a major stop for the current Jakarta-Bandung rail line, would KAI prioritize rebuilding those quake hit lines?
CA high speed rail will serve as the backbone allowing tons of regional and private rail projects to fill in the blanks between where it ends and where the demand is like San Diego and other areas. This is why building the Central Valley first as boring as it may be , was the right move. It’s going to change California in amazing ways … live in Bakersfield and work in LA? Maybe 🤔 Nobody will remember the cost once they are all on a nice rail car enjoying a beer and the scenery , saving time and money.
@@Racko. God we can only hope. I absolutely despise flying between LA and SF and would literally rather drive that distance than fuck around with the airports for a sub-hour flight
Remind the people that in short intrastate transport, you can: 1. Drink alcohol, unlike while driving; 2. Carry arms on your person, unlike in airplane 3. Sleep.
@@rams_r_champs 7) you have some smelly old wino sitting next to you.8) you can enjoy somebody else's kids screaming at the top of their lungs 9) you can add some crazy drunk gang banger giving you the LA county look 10) you can catch the vid by the guy in the seat next to you that's coughing the whole way... 11) you're out the door at 3:00 a.m. to catch the transit and try to make it to work by 6:00 when if you had your own car you could leave at say 5:30 and be there with 10 minutes to spare to grab a cup of coffee before you start your shift.
Fun fact, my grandma's friend literally has a railway track in his backyard. He lives along Ioco Rd in Port Moody in British Columbia, Canada along an industrial route where trains would transport goods to the refineries along the coast. The trains aren't frequent, at most a few times a week, but when I was eight a saw a train pass right behind his backyard and I found it interesting.
That's just a lie. People who unfortunately live near highways don't love them. Nobody who lives near highways wants them in their backyard or wants them expanded.
8:35 "Keep your workers and move to the next project" Also applies to the energy sector too...alot of countries *could* have learned from France, (As a Brit I am cuturally required to dislike the French...but when they're right, they're right) where they build aload of nuclear power plants, one after the after, with the same design, expect for improvements they figured out while builing them...sure its boring, but the last thing you ever want is an 'interesting' nuclear power plant...like Chernobyl...
That's what they've been doing with high-speed rail as well. There has never been a pause in LGV construction in France, because as soon as one project is nearing completion, they have already started the next. That's how they've ended up with arguably the best high-speed rail infrastructure in the world (I know people will bring up Japan, but the different track gauges severely limit where Shinkansen services can actually go, a problem TGV services don't have).
I mean the French suck, but they sometimes have good ideas. TGV was not one of them because once again it’s too expensive, but apparently it’s the only way to build rail as the infrastructure owned by the US rail companies isn’t going to be upgraded anytime soon.
This is why building new nuclear power plants like the two new reactors at Vogtle must be done side by side with high speed rail. Both go hand in hand and will benefit the economy in the long run.
Yes, although there’s also risk in putting all the eggs in one basket. A large number of France’s reactors have recently been shut down because of corrosion, so defects can also be duplicated.
Just want to point out that the issue of rail lines getting uniquely and unfairly heavy scrutiny is not unique to the US or countries that generally lack rail infrastructure, see e.g. the huge uproar about HS2 in the UK or Stuttgart 21 in Germany Edit: I encourage people to look at the replies to my comment if they want hilariously telling proof of my point!
or, on the matter of Germany, the the connecting Routes for the Gotthard base tunnel in Switzerland and brenner base tunnel in Austria, which Germany contractually promides to build, in the first case decades ago, but hasn't even started
In germany we complain about all over budget things on principle. or do i need tor emind you of the berlin airport or the A44 in north hessen? We dont like spending money period. Also, germany has a lot of public transit. but it deteriorated in quality since its half privatised (thanks cdu)
Honestly the HS2 thing is so damned infuriating. They've gone above and beyond to make sure that HS2 is a good infrastructure project with fully thought out benefits, and yet the greenwashing campaigners only ever care about stopping it, but never RIS2 despite RIS2 A) costing more, B) destroying more woodland, and C) not doing archealogical digs before starting construction like HS2 had to do. Why do roads get a pass on all the hoops that rail infrastructure has to jump through to prove itself useful?
ECRL in Malaysia. The issues talk about is no longer about it being a mainland china project, the issues is environmental impact and bla bla bla woke bs
Breaking the status quo is hard but as long as the project is effective and provides a good service it’s really only a function of time. I live in Miami and a couple years ago all the brightline media coverage was “multi billion dollar murder train” “another pedestrian killed by high speed rail” Now it’s slowly but steadily shifting to “Brightline reaches record ridership with new aventura station” “Brightline ridership triples in 2022” Still have those stupid murder train articles but most people understand that its the people’s fault and not the train.
Lifelong Californian here. You don't know how much bad press and angry comments in news articles I've seen about the CA high speed rail project. So much negativity, and -- most teeth-gnashing of all, for me personally -- people asserting that it doesn't solve any problems and no one is gonna ride it anyway. I have no idea which planet they're living on, because virtually everyone I know IRL will ride the HECK outta this thing. I know I will, and I know I would have back when I was a college student. The amount of exchange between Norcal and Socal is NOT negligible -- the more options we have to link the two regions, the better. Whatever it takes!
The NorCal-SoCal travel corridor is now literally the busiest in the country! (It used to be the second busiest for decades). And the San Joaquins, the train that CAHSR is replacing, is the 5th most popular rail route in the country! Sometimes I think that the entire opposition to this project is 100% astroturf. I know for a fact that most of it is, but perhaps it’s just all astroturf. That will explain the ridiculous, disconnected from reality claims that the opposition is making. I mean, who even believes those clowns?
@@TohaBgood2 It _is_ 100% astroturf. Politicians on both sides of the isle have investments companies involved in the oil and automotive industries (including BEV companies like TESLA and Rimic) and ones involved in the construction and maintenance of the interstate system, like the concrete industry. And in airlines and commercial aircraft manufacturers. And more cars on the road means more possibilities for tickets due to speeding and parking violations as well. It's all a matter of money.
@@VestedUTuber We just need more public pressure for this thing to be built! These people easily forget who they work for if we keep quiet for too long!
@@Ironclad17 Where? Plus, nobody gets mugged on the San Joaquins which this train is supposed to replace. What makes you think that CAHSR will be anything but bougie, Acela-type service?
There is also a bias against transit in the US because it's seen as for the poor who deserve only the most basic and minimal expenditure. In most countries, transit is seen as a benefit for the whole society and thus enjoys more support.
Which is just weird. They want to pay peanuts to factory and service industry workers and yet force them to waste even more money on cars to keep them poor.
That’s the latest propaganda weapon that the anti-transit right is using! First they make sure to make transit a poor-only service, like welfare. Then they vilify it with the non-poor population and get them to cancel it because now it’s just an “entitlement” for the poor. Tactically, this is a pretty brilliant strategy! A ton of even very leftie and theoretically well-meaning local governments get fooled by this all the time. They are encouraged to subsidize and tailor their public services for the poor. That’s a good thing, right? More services for poor people, yay! And then it turns out that no one except the poor use the service (which was specifically tailored for that group of customers and is most attractive and useful to them.) And then, bam! 80-90% of the population supports cutting that service _because they never use it_! Devious crap, but it works like a charm! In a very bad and dangerous way.
This is true, the reason the subway in NYC hasn't been yanked out is because investor and other business men frequent this transportation to get around.
The NYC subway system is the great equalizer of our fine city. Only here will you see an investment banker, a middle-class college student and a blue-collar worker ride side by side to their respective activities.
Our relationship with trains in this country is terrible. Most of my childhood I didn't know people could ride trains. I thought they were only for transporting goods bc those are the only kinds of trains we have where I live.
@@davidty2006 I'd congratulate you on getting to dunk on us, but we've set the bar so low that it'd be like congratulating an athlete for beating up a double amputee with Asperger's
Another thing that leads to scrutiny is how many US transit projects are half-assed and rarely used because they are (though this is the result of governments not doing enough). The Q-Line on Detroit is an example of this: just happens to stop short of many (poorer) residential areas along Woodward and runs slower than most busses because it has to run in mixed traffic. And since the only other transit in Detroit is the People Mover, it doesn't integrate well with the transit in the city. Perhaps if the Amtrak station next to it had more commuter service it could be more useful getting into downtown, or at least more lines radiating well out of downtown and into other neighborhoods.
@@alex-dj3of I still don't see a Canadian intercity train running from Calgary to Edmonton or Saskatoon to Regina. Where are they? Nor does Canada have a single paved highway running to its Arctic coast. Nunavut is still waiting for a deep water port it was promised nearly three decades ago. No wonder its Arctic is underdeveloped...
Indeed, public transit planners could look to the shining record of our highway, street and road planners, who have built such an efficient and low-cost world of beautiful suburbs, lovely industrial parks and delightful parking lots everywhere, with never a traffic jam, ever. When I'm forced to spend 45 minutes in a car to reach work 18 miles away, I cry tears of gratitude to the mental giants who built the beautiful stroads and jammed freeways we enjoy today. My house is so wonderful. I wish I could get home before dark to actually see my yard on weekdays.
Commercial companies always try to scrape the bottom when it comes to expenses. They want to make profit. There isn't so much a national sentiment about having a good transport system.
> Construction workers should move from one project to the next, don't stop You know, I realize that I think this is one of the vital reasons why the Washington Metro was able to build 129 miles of track in 46 years, something I still find to be incredibly impressive. The Metro basically went from one expansion to the next in rapid succession, completing the originally planned Metro system in 2001 by just continuously building out the system without stopping. And even after 2001, when the final extension of the Green Line to Branch Avenue opened, did Metro stop? No! NoMa - Gallaudet University opened on the Red Line in 2004, The Blue (and currently Silver Line) expanded out to Downtown Largo in 2004 as well, and of course, the Silver Line opened out to Whiele-Reston East in 2014 with the Ashburn extension opening days ago in 2022 as of this comment. I'm honestly really sad that the 98th station at Potomac Yard - VT is probably going to be the last Metro station opened for decades, they finally reached the end of the plans :( The Metro is by no means perfect, but this is one of the reasons why it's one of my favorite pieces of infrastructure in the US, even when the Metro was going over budget and over time, WMATA did not care and just kept going until they finally opened all of it AND MORE!
Interestingly, WMATA’s sister system in the Bay Area - BART has been doing the same. Basically, every 5-10 years there is a new extension. They’re now in the process of expanding to San Jose and Santa Clara. These two systems were so similar when they opened that you could even use the magstrip tickets from one system on the other! It’s interesting that they are still doing about the same things all these years later.
Yup! The pace of construction on the Vancouver SkyTrain system is definitely slower than other larger cities, but there's literally always been a new extension under construction/in the planning phase pretty much ever since it opened in the 80s.
What about the purple line in Maryland? Currently being built now and planning on opening in late 2026? Or are you saying Potomac Yard will be the last station to open in DC for a while?
@@mattpopovich The Purple Line is technically not part of the Washington Metro, it's being built by the Maryland Transit Administration (MTA), so those won't be "Metro" stops. Potomac Yard - VT is the last planned Metro stop for now, though there are studies being done to further expand Metro.
Funny how transit cost overruns made Governor Christie cancel the ARC tunnel yet the LIRR is about to open East Side Access and NJ could’ve already had their second tunnel built and operating by now.
Chris Christie is the same dumbass who intentionally caused a traffic issue (Bridgegate) in order to blame a democratic mayor so go figure. Total idiot of a governor
@@MarloSoBalJr yup, and he closed the bridge all b/c the mayor of Fort Lee refused to endorse Christie for his re-election and the crazy part is that he ended up winning re-election.
One way to reduce costs on construction is to allow around-the-clock work. In America we tend to do 9-5 construction, which means an hour to set up, 6 hours to work, and one hour to take down. When COVID hit and no one went on this LA highway, they were able to run constantly and got the project done in a fraction of the time. We have to be okay shutting down transportation in some places for some time. I'm so sorry fellow Americans, often times good growth means a little inconvenience.
"I'm so sorry fellow Americans, often times good growth means a little inconvenience." THIS is the key problem!! It's so hypocritical when people brag about "I WANNA SAVE THE PLANET" but go absolutely hypernova when they realise that the convenience that they get to enjoy decreases by an amount greater than 0. The whole deal with electric cars, autonomous cars, battery buses, battery locomotives, solar everything, wind everything, and countless other things is just people claiming to want change but not wanting to change the _status quo._
Yeah try shutting down an LA highway with non Covid traffic and watch the anarchy unfold. It won’t just be a “little Inconvenience” and those 9-5 work schedules were created by the unions who also run the city construction crews. I doubt they are going to just want to work 12 hour shifts now.
@@electric7487 Like, heck. People will whine when you tell them to buy an EV with less than 300km range. Like, it has a plug for rapid chargers. Just spend the half hour when you're driving long distance once in a blue moon.
@@agonzgonzalez7748 3 times 8 hour shifts. Yes, the night shifts will demand higher wages, but just pay them. The project is done faster, meaning you get economic benefits faster.
Most people I know that complain about the California High Speed Rail project have never been on high speed rail in any other country. They think it's like flying Southwest or something. I just got back from Italy and the Italo bullet train is awesome. Just as awesome as the high speed rail I've been on in Japan, China, and Taiwan. Once this project is complete, it's going to transform California.
@@AngelloDelNorte Lol, what parallel reality do you hail from? California recently became the world’s 4th largest economy after Passing Germany! Freaking Germany! We have a $100 billions dollar surplus and our economy grows about twice faster than Texas, Florida, and even China. We’re on track to pass Japan for 3rd largest economy in less than a decade. Yes, everything is expensive here including construction, because our wages are insane. Yes, we take forever with environmental and other reviews and any member of an impacted community can prevent projects from negatively impacting them. This is exactly by design. We don’t want people, especially poor people, to get steamroller so that some rich dude can build another oil refinery in their neighborhood.
A high speed rail across the US would be incredibly wasteful. Low speed rail works when stuffed to the gunnals with goods that you can make far more money off than passengers who won't pay much for such slow travel.
@@TreblaineLOL. Enabling movememt of prople within your country is wasteful? LOL. You usa-ian are so stockholmed and mindless that you don't even know that you are simping for those who are working against your own interest.
@@Treblaine high speed rail will replace the airline company They have benefit like better seat than plane In my 3rd world train its better option if you cant afford plane ticket (its expensive) Airline just for faster option For long travel we have option car,bus,motorcycle,train,plane For travel to another island airline and sealine
Hey Alan, great doc/essay. I do have one issue, though. There's only one t in scrutiny. You kept saying "scrutinty". Thanks and I can't wait for the next CaHSR video!
Thanks for pointing this out. On the first instance of him saying it, I thought, "I wonder why he didn't edit out that mispronunciation". On the third instance, it became clear that that was just how he thinks it's pronounced.
@@mikejuly24 It took me way too long to find someone commenting on this. It annoyed me throughout the video. It's in your title, how can you not pronounce it correctly?!
It's like how nobody except NJ urbanists and Jersey City residents (or a former JC resident in my case) are criticizing Phil Murphy's NJ Turnpike widening in Jersey City because the big media aren't talking about it. The extension is his "solution" for fixing the traffic to the Holland Tunnel...he probably lives under the same rock as Patrick because this won't solve anything and will only make the traffic worse by adding one more lane (not like the tunnel is magically gonna get wider). Plus, it would force the HBLR to shut down in order to relocate a part of its track...without this vital link, residents are stuck taking buses. Trains lead to development in general, as historically shown. I live on Long Island, and formerly in Jersey City and Westchester County...all places with great trains. How did Long Island develop so much? Because the LIRR helped it do so big time. If you build it, they will come. You bringing up the Shinkansen is a shining example of this. There was opposition in Germany and France too for HSR, and now both systems have been praised. Sure, Deutsche Bahn has its problems, but I'd rather have high-speed rail than no convenient rail whatsoever.
Alan, I think everyone here would be super intrigued by I-69 as a separate video. The costs of building that road are insane. It’s also very much not needed, existing roads mostly cover any need I-69 has.
New intercity Interstates just seem wasteful at this point. Maybe I am wrong about a few city pairs, but rail upgrades, for both freight and passenger can do the same thing without encouraging more sprawl from sea to shining sea.
@Bushrod Rust Johnson The US and State Hwy systems did not adequately service the whole country in a uniform way with uniform standards, not to mention there was something called the Cold War that drove a need to be able to move material, arms, and people across the country in bulk fast that wasn't available before the Interstate system.
I'm a bit of a geek about road and transportation projects. One major problem with I-69, and a lot of newer interstate projects (I-73, I-14, and others I can't think of at the moment) have their routes written into law by Congress. Meaning by law, Interstate 69 (and others like it) HAVE to serve X, Y, and Z states regardless of if they are economically viable. With Interstate 73, and the Interstate 74 extension eastward, the road has been planned from the Canadian border in Michigan down to Myrtle Beach, SC, and that was decided in the late 90s, early 2000s. By 2022, only North Carolina has built any portion of I-73/74. I-73 is effectively dead in Michigan and Ohio because it's seen as not necessary, it's unclear if it will be built in West Virginia, it 'might' be built in Virginia. South Carolina (specifically Myrtle Beach) wants it bad, but the state doesn't have the funds, and it seems that I-73 isn't much of a priority in South Carolina. What has really annoyed me about these new interstate projects is that lawmakers, either in Congress or at the state or local level, view building an Interstate in their region as an 'economic development tool' rather than a transportation link. Meaning, that Congress and other legislators believe that building an Interstate will magically bring jobs to their area, regardless of if an Interstate would be appropriate in the area. And in my opinion, writing an interstate and it's route into law is inappropriate, possible even corrupt. Going back to I-69, in Texas, I-69 splits into three pieces (I-69E, C, and W) because the cities in the Rio Grande Valley on the Mexican border all wanted I-69 to end in *their* city and not the others. So the politicians had it written into law that I-69 would split like it currently does, even though the precedent was that Interstates could not have a suffix (example: I-69E) to avoid driver confusion and were phased out, the exception being I-35E/W in Minnesota and Texas. TL/DR: Politicians have begun writing interstate routes into law even if they aren't necessary, or economically viable.
They criticize railway projects for costing hundreds of millions of dollars, yet these same people praise a $10,000,000,000 underwater highway project. (It was a ten lane water tunnel IIRC)
Meanwhile you have Germany and Denmark building an underwater road-rail tunnel at a fraction of the cost. And they plan to finish it by 2029. The US is way left behind.
i’ve been waiting for this video since you made the real life lore response video. amazing points as always, this needs to be broadcast on every news station in california
@@MilwaukeeF40C but guess what, the Federal Highwat Act happened. And now even non-car owners are forced to subsidize the interstate freeway system through taxes.
I love subsidizing things with taxes that bring social benefits, even if I don't personally use them. That's what taxes are for. I'd much rather subsidize rail than highways though.
@@MilwaukeeF40C Patently false. According to the Federal Highway Administration, 90% of the funding to build out the highway system came from federal money, mostly through bonds. Eisenhower even favored self-funded methods like toll roads but got too much push back and gave up fighting it. Maybe some funding for highways maintenance now comes from private non profits, but it wasn't originally built that way and even today most of it comes from the Highway Trust Fund.
Great video as always! While I certainly agree that excessive contracting is a plague, I disagree with "avoid contractors at all cost". Modern engineering works are extremely complex and the flexiblity of *some* subcontracting is necessary. For example, if a super specialized piece of equipment is worth several millions, and is to be used once or twice in the project, it may not make sense to purchase it, but rather subcontract the job to people who do only that but across multiple projects.
Yep! Complex modern systems are basically impossible without a ton of contracting. I like Alan and he’s usually right, but his weird anti-contractor fetish is off the mark. Any system is gameable and griftable. If anything, a highly vertically-integrated one without contractors is more so than a highly decentralized one relying on contractors. At least he’s right on all the rest!
i think it'd be more accurate to say avoid CONSULTANTS rather than contractors and specifically private equity firms with no real knowledge of rail. If we truly want rail to succeed in America we should hire SNCF TGV or one of the Japanese railroad firms to come help give us technical advice
@@TohaBgood2 The thing is, the design work for a project CAN be done in-house. DOTs do it for every highway project. The don't hire a consulting firm to do the design and engineering to build a road. Only small cities do that for road projects.
Because most people don't live in close proximity to a stop as well as have their destination be near a stop. Rails are faaaaarrrrr less efficient in the states due to our land mass. We didn't have to design cities & towns with high population density as an impossibility to avoid.
the anti trains are well able to complain about the so-called environmental disaster of the project. Europe Ecology-The Greens in France have already complained about Lyon-Turin. and it's incomprehensible because the train is eco-friendly and the Swiss, concerned about their living environment, are digging rail tunnels to stem the traffic of 1.2 million trucks per year. French ecologists believe that Lyon Turin is an environmental disaster but nothing like this has been observed in Switzerland.
@@mauriceskyliners9873 italian ecologist and nimbys are even worse they are actively sabotaging the project and making up bullshit like asbestos or uranium in the mountains
@@bbbbbbb51 You mean suburbs are the issue here, trains were great in the early 20th century before everyone was hypnotized by the car craze. Suburban development caused the sprawl we know today since we are so spread out by low density housing.
It's so funny how money for trains are so expensive that Americans don't see the big picture that US' defense budget is 20× the budget of mass transits.
Hell yes. THIS is the video we needed. I-95 in Philly has been getting rebuilt for 2 decades and everyone is rightfully annoyed about it, but the moment you suggest something that might be mildly disruptive like throwing light or heavy rail up the Boulevard, people lose their minds. Yes, infrastructure projects suck in the modern age. If we're going to disrupt people's lives and commutes with one, why not build a new backbone of transit that takes cars off the road instead of... one more lane.
Because as the i in i95 everyone benefits from the extra lane. Even me who wants to travel up the East Coast to visit Niagara falls. Or go down to to the beaches of obx. Or visit the beginnings of our country in Philadelphia Every American can take advantage of i95
In a way it almost feels like double standards are going on with American infrastructure. Thanks for bringing the situation into the spotlight. Also, whenever high speed rail in the US is discussed, it's usually California or the northeast, but believe it or not, there's actually been plans to build one in Illinois as well. Its terminuses would be Chicago and St Louis. Last spring, a committee was set up to survey the state on how best to build it. In my town, there's even been a project to reroute passenger rail so there's as few leveled crossings as possible. This could be a topic for a future video. Good job.
yeah the Midwest HSR is exciting. High Speed Rail Alliance has been advocating for a Midwest HSR network, using both upgraded shared-use and dedicated tracks, radiating out from Chicago to St Louis, Minneapolis, Cincinnati via Indianapolis, Detroit, and Cleveland. There's also a proposed HSR route in the Pacific NW between Portland, Seattle and Vancouver, as well as a Southeast HSR between Atlanta and Charlotte, and I think Savannah. I'd make the case for linking up the NE Corridor, Midwest and Southeast HSR networks with an 'Eastern Triangle' HSR system connecting NYC, Chicago and Atlanta via major cities like Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Louisville, Nashville, Raleigh and Richmond, using HSRA's proposal of both upgraded shared-use and dedicated tracks.
St. Louis, Minneapolis/St.Paul, and Detroit are too far for a cost effective HSR as the train journey would take more than three hours, the sweet spot for effective HSR worldwide. And when I say effective, I mean winning the passenger market share battle with the airlines. Chicago should concentrate on HSR for shorter distances such as Milwaukee to Indianapolis, Quad Cities to Fort Wayne, Grand Rapids to Springfield or Peoria... Instead of being a terminus station, Chicago should be the middle station for their HSR network... Any HSR train route beyond three hours loses the passenger market share battle with the airlines significantly, it's not even close. If you are going to spend $100 billion for a very expensive HSR network, you might as well as run trains on it frequently which require a large metro population for its city pairs on routes no longer than three hours... Otherwise you are just flushing good money down the toilet...
@@ronclark9724 Ron, this the worst comment I've ever seen in your history. St. Louis isn't "too far" from Chicago because both are around 417 km apart and there are far longer HSL than that (even with stops, you'd reach the 3 hour mark). Chicago to Detroit also isn't too bad either as by road, they're 455 km apart. Only calling Chicago to Minneapolis/St. Paul too far is reasonable but even that doesn't exclude a connection thereof entirely (Paris-Marseille is a comparable distance, in fact).
Sir, I appreciate you for giving your support for CHSR. I don't live in California, but I like the project too and really hate the bad press that this project gets just because of it's issues. I believe in this project because I believe that it will be socioeconomically and environmentally helpful, mainly because I've seen the A line in Denver succeed, so kudos to you for making a positive video of CHSR.
I’ve lived in CA all my life and it would suck to take a train to one city only then have to spend $200 in Uber to get around the metropolitan area and for what reason? Tourist don’t simply go to downtown LA they go to adjacent cities like Santa Monica, Burbank and Anaheim which are all $50+ Ubers away. I’ve paid less in gas making road trips between and through both cities even at 6$ a gallon. If you live in the Bay Area chances are you work there and same with LA since it really makes no sense to live in one city and work in the other as both are comparably expensive. I’m not against people supporting CHSR but I am surprised people don’t realize it’s obvious flaws and anticipate it will just be another white elephant project all to try and appease socialists and climate activists while the majority will continue to drive I-5 and 99.
@@D00rHandleMedia Uber is in and of itself a giant grift. There’s tons of videos about what the dynamics of Uber are and how it isn’t good on this platform.
@@D00rHandleMedia wow its almost as if SoCal needs better transit and less car-dependent development but in order to do this there needs to be a intercity transit backbone for it to be centralized around so that its possible to access the rest of the state without a car. Gee, I wonder what that could be...???
Ideally they should have San Diego, Sacramento, Las Vegas (if Brightline falls through) and Portland extensions locked and loaded as soon as the current sections enter service. Let's go absolutely feral here. Then follow up with a full corridor up to Vancouver. Is anyone going to ride the whole thing end to end? No, not really. Are you going to service a fuckload of customers up and down the entire Pacific coast? Hell yeah.
This fits with the "don't stop building after one project" point. Once San Francisco to LA is complete, IMMEDIATELY start building to San Diego, to Las Vegas, hell, up to Oregon and go up the Willamette Valley to Portland. Just keep going until the whole West Coast is connected then hire those folks to do the same in Texas, the Great Lakes, the Northeast. By the time we've run out of viable HSR destinations we'll need to do upgrades on existing lines. A-B-C: Always Be Constructing!
@@professorspark2361 I think that will be how they’re ultimately going to finish the corridor. I would imagine that Amtrak will push to get the Brightlines station and tracks built.
8:15 I’d say outsourcing manufacturing is much different than outsourcing thinking. Outsourcing manufacturing yields hassles like you mention but also cost efficiencies due to comparative advantage. The government outsourcing thinking only increases costs as they spend more money to get the same thing had they developed it in house.
There's nothing wrong with outsourcing. The example given simply shows they don't know how to do it in the US. You know who's doing the CPU component for Volkswagen? Continental, the company k own for tyres. And who's doing part of the work for Continental? Hitachi Poland, Capgemini Portugal and some more in Romania and India. So there's a *three* tier system that works well because of the legal framework and communication.
You should mention this... Put it this way... 1) Just LAX and SFO have gone through or are going through $120B in upgrades and improvements. Maintenance is incredibly high. 2) At the low rate of interest paid on this debt, the entire project can and will be profitable and more than carry the monthly debt service expenses, while airports never can and only require more money to be fed into the airport system. 3) Door to door, downtown to downtown travel times will be significantly less, comfort higher, hassle less. 4) Costs will be significantly lower for travelers... So they'll be able to travel more often and have more money to spend once they reach their destination. Once Phoenix to Ontario segment is announced, which should happen soon, it'll be built quickly. I've had to pay up to $585 RT for a last-minute flight from Phoenix to Los Angeles... Imagine a family of 4 at $2400! 5) With more disposable income available by spending less on a rail ticket, small businesses reap those benefits, large businesses reap those benefits. Remember the new economy isn't about selling more 'things and stuff', those days are over. This is the biggest argument that those on the GOP side of things needs to hear.... By providing education from pre-K to post-grad, by providing daycare, by providing healthcare, by providing solar and battery storage for all residential customers (through barely higher electric rates for commercial customers, but still lower than in the 80s!), we free up disposable income to be spent in the economy on every other industry out there. Period. 6) High speed rail extends the life of existing airports and opens them up for longer flights that are more profitable. Puts off enormous spending needs. 7) High speed enormously reduces demand for foreign oil... Foreign oil supports nations that are not friendly to democracy or human rights... Yet we reward those nations that support terror and treat women and minorities like property slaves criminals animals trash and garbage yet we're dependent on oil and continue to feed these countries money hand over fist. Reduced demand for foreign oil would likely result in lower gas prices. Also far reduced need for defense spending to protect that oil we do desperately need. 8) Noise reduction... If you live near any airport know that most flights are ones that could be replaced by high speed rail. One 16 car Japanese train holds 1352 people... About what 10 planes hold, and can leave every 3 minutes. In one hour that's 260 planes worth of people... And back to cost, each train needs one 'driver' (and soon no drivers). 9) One train, one driver, there are savings in energy, fuel, maintenance, insurance, and most of all equipment... Cost of one 16-car 1352 passenger trainset, $40MM... Cost of ten (for passenger equivalent)737-800s... $1.1 *billion*. Cost of one train 'driver' per hour, $100... Cost of two pilots x 10 planes, $4000 per hour... Hence why pilotless planes are likely coming, plus they handle a few more rows of seats... Including very expensive seats with front windows. 10) Try these arguments out instead. Let me know how they work... This is not an issue of left or right, just ideas that work and make sense in so many ways.
Believe it or not, in America less than two percent of Americans have ever rode a intercity train... Less than two percent... Whereas over eighty percent have flown at least once, and one hundred percent use highways one way or another, if only to walk on them... Let those numbers sink into your brain, and you wonder why Congress and the media support highways like business as usual?
I'm working on (and off) a rail project in northern Europe which joins the capital region and the second city. It's going to cost A LOT but it's also going to run through 2 economically depressed regional cities putting them within 30 mins of the two much larger cities. Not only is this going to help those cities economically, it'll also help stabilize housing prices in the larger cities. If the money had been spent on roads, it'd have been impossible to achieve even a fraction of the improvement in travel times and you'd increase congestion. My point is, whatever the cost, public transport is a virtuous circle and if you're actually 'pro-business' you'd want these sort of projects because the economic growth they bring about are immeasurable ( they probably are measurable but I'm too busy to go looking for the research!).
Yes but it's all California and all benefiting California All budget overages should be covered by California not America I think its a great idea and will benefit California and the residents greatly. But my tax dollars shouldn't be spent on their budget issues only California benefits
The lack of decent intercity train services is the only thing holding me back from visiting the U.S. You guys have so many cool and interesting historic cities, charming small towns and so much natural beauty, but it is all wasted potential because of the obsession with cars
My guy we likely have over 20x the land mass of your country. We can't realistically cover it all in rail. Our "obsession with cars" is out of necessity. When I do visit Europe, I'll 100% be renting a car over there as I want to go to places that are far away from rail destinations & more remote. Both cars & rails & the design around them have pros & cons. I'm so tired of everyone acting like one is a holy saint & the other is a steaming pile of shit. It's delusional.
@@bbbbbbb51 EU as a whole is comparable to size of USA. Russia is bigger than USA. China is comparable to the USA. None of them have a problem buildings trains connecting the entire country. What happened to pride in our country? You're really going to let those filthy commies outdo us when it comes to trains? Shameful. It makes us look bad.
I grew up In Germany and just visited again. while the trains often have delays it is so much more comfortable to travel. say you want to go from Munich to Berlin, in 7 hours your there even Paris to Berlin is possible it is truly amazing how comfortable traveling can be.
Why don't Germans ride trains to Istanbul? Tel Aviv? Baghdad? Cairo? Why do Germans usually FLY long distances instead of ride trains, much like the rest of the world, including China? Munich to Berlin is only a distance of 363 miles. The distance from New York City to Buffalo is 377 miles... You are still in one American state, never mind the other forty-nine states... I have rode trains in the Balkans, HSR doesn't exist there...
@@fishofgold6553 Germany doesn't have hi-speed trains of the type you're thinking of in Japan and China. In Western Europe, Spain and Italy have the best trains, which is why their economies are perpetually broke. France pioneered the high speed in Europe, and the network is still very good, but is now a bit older than Spain and Italy's. Germany is not up to the standard of the others, but is reasonable compared with much of the world.
Because it's just for California If LA and las Vegas and Phoenix had a high speed rail project that connected each other that would be super cool and yeah use the America dollars But if it's just California, use your California dollars, don't use as much America dollars it's only benefiting 1 of the 50 states. I think people get it twisted, we only care about the cost because we pay the bill without seeing the finished train in our communities
As a Montrealer who saw the REM just get built extremely efficiently through a private/public partnership, I couldn’t give a shit if more companies start following brightline’s lead. It’s literally how North America got all those streetcars (and some railroads I think) built in the first place. Why not just do the same thing now?
Literally ALL of the U.S. Railroads throughout history have been built and run by private companies. Except for Amtrak which is kind of an oddity in history.
@@SmallTown_Studio Amtrak was created by Congress when the private railroad went bankrupt running the northeast corridor after the USPS, the government itself, terminated the railroads mail contracts more than a half century ago. The USPS chose to FLY the mail long distances, no longer do American passenger trains have a dozen or more mail cars on their consists... Duh... The reason: HOURS NOT DAYS! UPS and FedEx weren't far behind FLYING the mail either NEXT DAY AIR, or OVERNIGHT... It takes Amtrak three days to cross the continent coast to coast running all night long on at least two routes, while it takes a single truck/lorry driver six days to drive from LA to Boston legally...
Shhhh you can't say that. The collectivists get mad. Robber Barons, anti-trust, bla bla This video is full of strawman arguments. And everything hinges on arguing "IF THINGS WERE DONE MY WAY" it would be better. They also say "it wasn't real socialism" and "better regulation", variations on a theme The issue is simple: control. Not control of the outcome. Just control of the people. They will burn down the planet, or let the jungle take over in a green blanket. It doesn't matter, as long as they are controlling what other people are doing. Regards
This is just fueling me into wanting to transition my job even more. I currently design roads, but for the past year I have been wanting more pedestrian, bicycle, and transit projects. I know I have to switch jobs for that, but it is so hard to get a job when I do not have the experience in transit and everyone just brushes me over.
I think its absolutely rich that the local news in the Bay was running a scathing report on how the BART to downtown san jose extension would displace a couple of local business. As if freeways did not displace entire neighborhoods. Like where's the scrutiny in THAT?
@@MrBirdnose I am not talking about the passive displacement caused by rent increases. Light rail transit or not, this phenomenon will occur, especially in the bay. I am alluding to BART and VTA's use of eminent domain for their construction. I could provide the link to the article, but youtube automatically deletes comments with links.
I live right next to the freshly constructed I-69. Like, so close that some of that footage shows the street I live on in the background. To say it's been disruptive to normal life here in Martinsville, IN is an understatement. It's a small, hyperconservative town of 11k, and locals were upset enough to *protest* alongside Native people and environmentalists. I can't understate how unprecedented that struggle was. Yet, only a couple articles document the resistance to it. Meanwhile, Indy's first rapid transit, a (half-baked but still good) BRT line, was financially scrutinized to hell and back by local media despite overwhelming local support. (Interestingly the same rags applauded when many times the Red Line's total budget was forked over to Indy police DURING 2020.)
There was a headline here in toronto that a subway line the province sort of forced through, the Ontario Line, was going to balloon to 20 billion dollars. Turns out the price tag is still 10.9 billion, and the rest of that money was to operate it for the first 30 years. I am no fan of doug ford, but by chance, he's done the one right thing by *forcing* Toronto to build a subway whose cost they would have surely mewled about for 60 years before anyone even thought about touching a shovel. In essence the headline was tribal nimby deficit horror bullshit.
Great work on this. So infuriating to see rail and transit require perfection in every aspect. Roads and highways haven't helped anything and we continue to just do the same thing over and over hoping for a different outcome!
It's because everybody will support a highway named 'I-69'. They should rename the California highspeed rail to '420 blaze it rail line' and get more support.
4:18 This is so infuriating. I live in Texas and my employer wants me to relocate 6 hours from where I currently live, in Texas. I wouldn't mind commuting daily by train if I had the option. At least there's Greyhound. I wouldn't be surprised if the state is actually losing money with it's over-reliance on highways and airlines.
It is and we are overpaying for transportation. The highway system provides maximum coverage already; contnuing investing in new expansion, adding lanes, and building sprawling new subdivisions, has gone past the point of diminishing returns. On the most heavily traveled routes, and the US has a lot of them, rail is more economic in the long-run and it supports denser home-building near stations. Yeah, these up-front costs are high, but they are nothing compared to the long-term costs and deficincies of our bloated, crumbing, and ever-growing subsidized roadway network.
France had the same problem when creating the TGV project. During the 1960s, the train in France had a bad reputation. It was slow and dirty (steam train). In addition, the car dominated the debates and the plane began to develop. The SNCF then put the means to counter this way of seeing. It electrified the lines (the steam trains disappeared mid 70's), installed rapid service on the busiest lines, bearing prestigious names, such as the Etoile du Nord or the rolling Mistral has 160 or 200 kph. The TGV arrives in 1981 and already the image of the train has improved. It will definitively erase the doubts about the efficiency at high speed. The Paris Marseille (800km) for 3 hours with the direct service did not eliminate the car or the plane on this section, it only took part of the clientele and created a new clientele. There are always Paris Marseille flights, and the A6 and A7 (Motorways) are still busy.
its so weird how people can justify the economic benefits of a free highway but go right to claiming how unprofitable trains are because 'ticket prices aren't paying for all of it'
Seriously, thank you for the intelligent coverage of the CAHSR. So many people online keep spewing out the same negative, scripted rhetoric about the project opposed to actual facts. This video helps to establish some sense of sanity.
the state of Georgia spending 800 million on one interchange when MARTA expansion to Gwinnett County would be covered by that is perfectly indicative of your point
On May 12, 2023, Newsom announced that California's DEFICIT this year year would be $32B, having announced in January it would be a deficit of $22B. That $100B surplus in 2021 was a perfect storm of favorable events. The stock market rose, and interest rates were at historic lows. Now that both of those have reversed, you can kiss goodbye to $100B surpluses. I trust you will be honest and give up to date numbers when you next comment.
The thing with I-69 at the start reminds me a lot of some of the BS around the F-35 program. People always talk about how expensive the F-35's development cost is, until they realise that its actually around the same as the F-15's development cost, despite being a more capable aircraft
Capable of what? conquering the world for gasoline? has failed at that one. providing an elaborate welfare program for MAGAnoids in the military industrial complex?
Of course interstate 69 is a meme... Yeah I literally had never heard of it - very happy to now make sure other people hear about it from me all the time. Thanks for sharing
You forget that highway budgets have funding sources already approved and Rail funding is usually new money. Meaning Money we do not have now that you want people to just approve. Solution is to have a Federal Railway Trust Fund that lays a framework for high speed rail and fixes passenger rail across the us. The US railway system was started by federal initiatives and private ventures in the 1880's and sidelined in the 1950's by the interstate system.
Highways are vastly underfunded though (I mean they have to be, there's no way to pay for themselves). Use tax through tolls, registration fees, and gas tax don't even come close to fully maintaining them. So governments typically have to earmark more money from the general fund collected through income tax to cover the difference. And when politicians suggest actually raising the use taxes to better cover infrastructure cost, taxpayers balk.
@@pax6833 Though underfunded, public demand makes it easier to approve funding where as with rail you have to justify the use case. It is easier to pave main street and open a clear semi route for stocking shelves then to connect an apartment cluster to a mall then to a industrial sector.
Thank you for uploading this video today. I love your channel and appreciate the work you do. My wife and I are sitting in Labor and Delivery in the hospital waiting for our son to come. This definitely helped pass the time. Happy Thanksgiving
I take CalTrain to work daily. I wholly support california High speed rail. My friends who drive do not understand why I take the train/bike to and from work. I'm excited to take High speed rail to LA (assuming all the negative press doesnt stop it). Based on the turn out for the 4 stop "subway" line in SF that runs to China town on the weekends. Public transit in california will ultimately succeed!
It's refreshing to hear someone actually defend this project for a change, I'm sick of the cynical manufactured outrage astroturfed by oil companies I see in every article and comment page.
4:44 this is an interesting problem, and by interesting I mean awful. In the article they say "iPads full of voter data". The fact that private companies can have access to such data and can use it in such a matter, such as sabotaging the greater good for personal gain, is a heartbreaker. This is why data protection is important, and why we should be doing more about it.
That's why I appreciate the existence of GDPR in BritainandEurope. But of course, the Corporations of the USA would never allow for anything that takes power and influence away from them.
@Ian Homer Pura General Data Protection Regulations. It's a European Union law protecting online data and personal privacy. It's illegal to use data for anything other than its original purpose. The penalties can be steep if data is misused or used without permission. Edit: It's why even now, some US websites aren't accessible to anyone covered by GDPR because some websites in the US won't protect personal data.
Here in New Zealand we have the exact same problem. The Transmission Gully motorway went way over budget and only opened this year when it was supposed to open like three years ago, and nobody cared. But the minute a project like the City Rail Link in Auckland goes over budget the media will complain. It's also for similar reasons why light rail projects in Auckland and Wellington still haven't been built because of years of bickering about how much it'll cost the taxpayer. Only now are we even seeing the first steps of real progress towards building those projects when they could've easily been built 20 years ago.
I love how you say the Brightline is trying to make its money back by selling real estate like it's a bad thing, because A. They need to make some money back from this project and B. That's how the original railroads were built, they got the land from the Government, built the track, then sold the the land around it to people.
C. Asian countries still do it. That tactic is partly why Hong Kong MTR and Singapore MRT, both state owned and operated, as well as Japanese private rail companies like JR East manage to pay for operation and maintenance costs and still generate MASSIVE profits.
The project is also a huge target for public transit simply because it's in California. California is always the scapegoat for every single problem with liberal policies and is always pointed at for any reason at all. It's very much an extrnsion of the entire SF debate and the argument of "how can it be so good to live in California if there's so much homelessness?! You're wasting your budget on expensive social programs when you should be spending it on police!" California is not without its problems, but 99% of critics in California will not point out that California should do more for the houseless population or do more in terms of public transportation. Instead it will be something along the lines of "Go woke, go broke" or "Back the blue." I'm studying civil engineering and I plan on specializing in transportation engineering thanks in part to videos like these. Please keep making them
Ironically the main reason Cali has this homeless problem is a combination of too much R1 residential zoning, a warm climate year round, and how most conservative homeless policies is to put all the local homeless people on a bus to either NYC or California.
@@outlawruby Exactly, this hits the nail on its head. But to a majority of Americans, no, apparently homelessness only exists inside CA cities. I love this state, but it is ultimately a part of the USA and as such adopts many conservative policies whether people realize it or not. Then again, even if they did realize it, so many people are so far gone that the moment the California government tries to help the unhoused or those on the brink of becoming unhoused, it immediately gets bashed by both the democratic and republican party.
@@outlawruby Bingo! A few cities in the state actually sued other cities, counties, and states for sending their homeless people here and won damages in court! But it’s a ton of work to track down each case and prove that another jurisdiction paid for their Greyhound ticket to CA - the so-called “greyhound treatment”. And it’s only legally punishable if the unhoused person was in psychiatric treatment just before being sent here. So they just gave up on this whole thing after proving that this is happening in a few dozen court cases.
I am so happy that someone else sees the value of transit vs highways. We lived in Aurora Il. For almost 20 years and I can count one hand the number times we drove downtown. METRA is not perfect, but Union Station provides a walkable distance to most area of the Loop and N Michigan Avenue.
I rode that Metra from Naperville to Downtown for about a month when I was taking some classes in the city. What a great way to commute to work or school.
it's genuinely wild to me that americans will see insanely huge highway expansion projects announced that cause millions or billions of dollars and they won't bat an eye or even just be excited at the prospect but when it comes to any expected and normal construction costs for a train they lose it. they don't expect a single road in the entire country to make any money, but if it's public transport suddenly they're all about making money. it's a ridiculous double standard.
Exactly.. I just don't see why my fellow Americans see it like that.. oh wait, cause most don't even have the mind to comprehend it beyond the first (immediate) level.
A train that services 1 state Vs a highway that connects 8 states and 3 countries. Tell me which deserves federal funding and which should have limited federal funding I think ca hsr is an amazing idea, just don't do it on American tax dollars. What's the point of taxing Californians the way that do if they can't fund it themselves
I'm from Denver where we have an alright train system around the city, but it still needs a lot of work to get where it needs to be. That being said, the building of that still far from perfect infrastructure has made my life so much better than extra highway lanes or even new roads all together ever seem to.
It doesn't matter if a train project goes over budget because it can actually make some operating costs back thru fares and arent a maintenance money pit like freeways are.
Yes but that over budget should be footed by ca tax payers not American tax payers I agree with everything you are saying!!! Just not American dollars when it's specifically a California rail project and California only project
MODOT has taken a LONG time just to get a few additions to highways done. Honestly, I was only recently made aware of the I69 project. Thankfully my local newspaper doesn't seem that interested in talking about infrastructure costs of trains (but I wouldn't put it past them).
Forget climate change, people aren't willing to change for that. Talk about COMFORT. Why are Americans always selecting the cheapest possible options when they have enough to make use of something decent? A train is not going to be delayed by rain, ice, sleet, whatever. A train doesn't need to have to wait till the evening because the air density is too low, like a plane in summer in Colorado mountains. A train has normal-sized toilets and decent bars, where you can eat and (gasp!) drink decently priced beer! And above else, stretch your legs.
"this is route I-69" nice. wait, no! NOT nice! Seriously though: I live near LA and have family close to the bay area, a high speed rail between these two would be a game changer for me, especially since I could hop on another train and end up right outside my hometown with minimal fuss. With planes, I can't do that, closest I can get to home still requires a 1 hour drive. That's something people don't really mention: its a lot easier to proliferate an area with train stations then it is to do so with airports. There's too much overhead necessary to get an airport to work, even a small one. Trains though, you can just add a new route in from some hub and then slap largely unmanned stations along its length (maybe have 1 or 2 staff members to handle emergencies or run a stall selling provisions). Modify bus service to connect smaller settlements that are too small/out of the way to justify their own station and bam! functioning rail network. I'm sure its more complicated then that, and after a while certain hubs would become too sprawling to handle another route, but then you'd make another hub somewhere else to reduce load. Regrettable, I will likely be moved back up north by the time the project reaches its conclusion, but I'd still like to have it as a transportation option. Maybe it would make me more inclined to travel to the LA area more often.
@@ianhomerpura8937 issue with whole of the UK's train system is piece meal private providers making so so expensive to use. It's cheaper to fly from say Manchester to london by quite alot.
Show this to any conservative/neoliberal arguing against public transit (copy-pasted from r/f cars): -Cars are more expensive for the taxpayer: The construction and maintenance of highways and roads often ends up being far more expensive than a transit-oriented approach; according to one of Bill Bryson's articles in I'm A Stranger Here Myself, restoring rail passenger transport to much of northern New England in the 1990s would have cost about $500 million; meanwhile, Burlington, VT spent $100 million on a single 12-mile road. This, of course, does not even include other costs borne by the taxpayer, ranging from industry subsidies and bailouts to massive military spending aimed at securing sources of oil to the use of public schools to teach driving lessons to the upkeep of vast bureaucracies like DMVs and highway departments. -Transport funding is not a zero-sum game: A corollary to the above, every user of public transport should be thought of not as a freeloader or as a subsidized burden on taxpayers, but as a savings to the taxpayer that results from every car taken off the road. Cars have resulted in a massive expansion of the size and scope of police forces and policing (this is more a libertarian argument): Traffic control, highway patrols, parking enforcement, etc; the widespread use of cars means having a lot more police officers and departments. Also compared to using public transport, I'm subject to far more police scrutiny when I drive, with "implied consent" pretty much throwing the Fourth Amendment out the window when it comes to search and seizure. -Car-centric planning has eroded property rights: Euclidean/single-use/R1 and related zoning laws, byproducts of the auto age and designing communities around car users, have resulted in increasingly onerous restrictions on what property owners can do with their private property in terms of what they can build on it and how they can use it. -Federal highways and highway funding have greatly increased the Federal government's spending levels and reach: In addition to the Federal government's spending (and overspending) on highways, the threat to withdraw highway funding has been used as an extra-constitutional cudgel to force states into compliance with the Federal government's wishes on matters that should be left up to the states themselves (like the 21 drinking age). -Highway construction results in more use of Eminent Domain: Because of the much larger footprint a highway has relative to a railroad line with the equivalent capacity, when building a new highway more private property will have to be seized and built over. Greater choice for the road user: Having public transportation systems in addition to cars ultimately gives a transportation user a choice over which mode to use, rather than forcing them to drive because there are no other options available. -Walkable towns, mixed-use buildings, and transit-oriented development is more traditional: Car-centric development is only a relatively recent phenomenon, so building car-free or car-optional areas is returning to a more traditional way of development. -There's market demand for alternatives: Walkable and transit-oriented areas (either older developments that are grandfathered on zoning requirements or new developments that have gotten exempted from car-centric zoning requirements) often command a premium compared to car-only housing, so forcing places to build car-oriented development is an artificial restraint imposed on what the market really wants.
The nonsense that is running services as businesses when a public service has no obligation to make money, it only has an obligation to avoid wastefulness. Totally different things. The "Success metrics" are completely different.
@@JamesSmith-ij8nj And one of those metrics is access which a default for profit format clearly fails at. Otherwise I dunno what your intended point is.
@@Adalore Lots of words, not much sense. Unless you can show how paying almost 70% of someone else's commute is beneficial? You know the ones that pay for the roads.
@@JamesSmith-ij8nj The "free rider" problem is only a problem if you decide it is. Now if you want a real garbage fire there's a whole "military industrial complex" over there to complain about that is far more valid.
We are facing the same kind of problem in India. The state of Kerala is planning a semi highspeed Railway system. But the people and media are loosing their sh*t but at the same time have no problem with expanding Highways
You need to be a contributor on some of these network news channels. I-69 is the perfect comparison that when presented as you did, anyone can understand (and I-69 is way more of a shitshow than any US rail project)
These videos are so important. Public transit is freedom and would make our lives so much healthier, easier and environmentally sustainable. We need less highways and cars and more transit infrastructure
Prisons are important. If only they were used to make public transportation actually safe enough to ride in. But no let the crackheads get free reign and if anyone tries to stop them they get jailed
@@Mrwizard-ck7oe The United States has the the second highest incarnation rate in the world, a little over 20% of all prisoners on the planet. How much higher does that rate have to be to make public transit "safe"?
Brilliant exposure of lobby industry and media relationship to oil companies and airlines. Similar story with anti tram/ rail in Australias capital city: Canberra.
I like your style in presenting this topic and offering a different perspective that makes a lot of sense. And those illustrations of the manufacturers were epic! 😀
Despite our reputation The Netherlands suffers from the same bias as the US when it comes to a lot of transit projects (though it isn't as bad as the US obviously) Our 3 most northern provinces are all connected through 1 station, so if there's a problem there it cuts off the whole north. Politicians just cannot be convinced to build a second line. They much rather invest billions into highway extensions, tunnels and extra lanes instead of new train or metro lines. Over the last 20 years of neoliberal policies the whole intricacy of our transit system has been slowly dying as unprofitable lines to small towns and villages have been cut, making the living standards there go down and essentially killing them. Prices have been rising while service has been declining while investment into car infrastructure keeps going. It's sad, really.
Living in the US it's absolutely wild how people are constantly scrutinizing transit systems and expect them to never spend more than they make back in fares, and then at the same time expect that highways go absolutely everywhere and be accessible for free.
Then if Amtrak becomes a real estate developer they get all angry about communism. Like wtf.
Public transit isn't safe.
Ppl in the US usually hate transit because all of these corrupt elites and lobbyist have convinced them that transit will always suck
@@wilburbrickowski driving is less safe.
@@wilburbrickowski If you are that worried about other people I hope you are consistent and never leave your house.
Speaking of people not realizing that highways are free: I recently did an analysis of the cost of a light rail vs the cost of a freeway. BUT I baked in the price of every citizen having to purchase, maintain, and fuel a car in order to use the freeway.
When you look at it this way, the cost of the freeway is waaaaaay more expensive than the cost of the train.
Yeah people don't factor in that highways just privatize the costs of driving and vehicles. Public transportation will inherently cost more because those factors will be in the cost due to operator wages/vehicles. People don't consider that their time or their cars as a part of the cost of a highway.
@@vinniezcenzo On top of that, people really seem to forget to account for the cost of maintance, repair and eventual replacement of thier car...not to mention the fines (parking/speeding/etc.) they'll eventually get on top of that...
That analysis is a very good video by the way, do check it out: ruclips.net/video/QGcDrQXEV0k/видео.html
Also, what the hell went on in the replies here? What, do you even like having to schlep a metric ton of metal, rubber, battery acid and fossil fuel around with you everywhere you go, and you can’t even lie back, read the news, talk to people from other socioeconomic classes, or watch the scenery (which would now just be expanses of asphalt)? (Same problem with self-driving cars, by the way.)
Also, if you want to privatize the passenger railroads and transit agencies, well then, good luck with being able to make an easy transfer, and especially expecting a consistent fare…and don’t get me or Alan started on freight oligopolies and train traffic priority in the US.
People are willing to pay more for freedom of movement. I can get in my car and drive at any time, if I take a train somewhere, I have to coordinate my schedule with the schedule of the train. People realize trains in this country are filthy and unreliable, making them less likely to want to use one for their primary transportation.
@@adambooth1908 You say it like it’s an inherent issue with transit in general which is usually not the case. Transit in other places is highly frequent and isn’t filthy.
Fun fact about the Shinkansen. The rail bureaucrat who proposed it knew it would cost more, but lowballed because he had a trump card. The project was funded partially from a world bank development loan, which stipulated that the funds must only be used for the project, and the project must be seen to completion. Once the truth came out, he was disgraced but the politicians had no choice and had to finish the project. He was of course vindicated in the end and the government built many more lines.
Edit: for anyone curious, the guy is Shinji Sogo. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinji_Sog%C5%8D
The world bank and IMF stuff never should have existed.
Damn what a gigachad. Sacrificed his career to get the best transit line built.
@@Amir-jn5mo Hes basically went "I told you so" and Japan got one of the best transport in the world, even ever.
And they all lived happily ever faster
High speed train W’s for decades
The biggest benefit of riding the shinkansen is not:
1: No check-in, security check time wasted as when catching flight.
2: It delivering you directly to city centers.
3: Enjoying a beer while travelling.
4: Staring longingly at Mt. Fuji as you pass it (instead of staring at the road) while enjoying your beer.
No, the biggest benefit of riding the shinkansen is... the leg room.
Yess~~ you can literally show up like five minutes before your train departs and just scan your ticket in the machine, or have enough time to have a coffee/tea or noodles at one of the many little restaurants and cafes that stations tend to have
Leg room at definitely lower cost than business flight? Sold!
Japan is a TINY nation compared to America. Nearly two thirds of Japan's population is within the original Shinkansen route of less than 300 miles very suitable for HSR. That is less than the distance from Dallas to San Antonio along I-35 in Texas. Never mind the rest of the USA...
@@ronclark9724 we are not bringing bullet trains to Wyoming or Alaska we are first wanting to brig high quality high speed rail that’s better than the Amtrak northeast corridor currently is. Extending the north east corridor all the way to Florida then Brightline can take the rest is a great idea . Building HSR In populated routes is a good idea.
@@ronclark9724 Tokyo to Fukuoka is basically as long as Boston to Raleigh. You can't be serious that you can't build a high speed rail line like that.
Way to remind me about the whole Nashville transit debacle. I live here, and it is such a shame. This city could easily be transformed by proper transportation and knocking down a few highways (i40 and i65) within city limits. There is so much potential here, but I must drive my Carolla to places, wasting time and gas in traffic and going to big box stores. Not a fan. I ride my bike as much as possible, for whatever that's worth.
The Koch Brothers are still active in trying to block railway projects across the US.
They weren't successful in blocking the light rail in Phoenix, so they're now influencing the local councils at neighboring Scottsdale and Gilbert by igniting very fierce NIMBY sentiments.
oh yeah. didn't the Koch Brothers kill that?
The best thing that can be done for transit is to privatize all limited access highways (interstates) as tollways, and to defund other roads and STOP SUBSIDIZING SUBURBAN GROWTH WITH PUBLIC DEBT.
Why do people get so worked up about the Kochs?
Yeah even in a design competition a few months back (although I was not apart of it, a few buddies of mine were and I helped guide them) in Nashville, the judges essentially didn't let a single team go forward in finals that proposed deconstructing highways as an alternative. The pro-car, anti-innovation mentality irked me to the point where its making me ask how architects, the people who are supposed to be innovative and future thinkers, still get stuck on how cars should be prioritized. Mind you, one of the many reasons to removing a 2 mile, unnecessary stretch of highway was to re-unite two neighborhoods that were intentionally segregated over 50 years ago. But 'feasibility' was not possible in a city literally built like a giant highway.
speaking of over budget: here in germany EVERY SINGLE ONE of the post reunification rail construction projects was or is heavily over budget but once the projects were finished and started showing their worth people stopped giving a shit and enjoyed the ride
The light rail in Seattle was very over budget but it gets tons of riders every day. It's also faster than driving through the most crowded part of the city every day.
Germany and Europe have bigger fiat currency problems.
Here in italy we always go over budget and we always complain about the shitty service 😉
Amen to this . This is what will happen in CA
there isn't much to enjoy with DB (Delay Bahn) lol unless you are not in a rush.
Military has the same issue with contractors. Our own engineers that we train and give schooling for don’t get to do a lot of work so we can get companies like NAVFAC to repair everything instead. It’s awful and a waste of our budget, and the contractor incompetence literally burned down one of our ships, billions down the drain!
If only they utilized the Army Corps of Engineers like what they did in Louisiana post-Katrina, they would be able to do the job SO MUCH FASTER.
NAVFAC is part of the Navy though...
Do you mean the Bonnie Dick?
Yeah, what a waste, and all just to go and kill innocent people abroad. Let's spend zero on the military instead.
Private companies should be outlawed from lobbying or otherwise engaging in any form of political activity. They're not people and even less so citizens. If these large stockholders want to throw money at politicians for corrupt and immoral laws then they can do so from beyond the veil of anonymity.
Bro, I hate that people in the US believe that cars are the only way to travel and put so LITTLE scrutiny on 3 decade behind schedule Interstate highways but put so MUCH scrutiny in transit projects like the CA High Speed Railway.
Unfortunately California HSR thus far has been the largest BOONDOGGLE in American history... Over tripled its original projected costs at the referendum without not even one mile built and put into operation after nearly two decades... If this doesn't qualify as a BOONDOGGLE, nothing will! And guess what, a HSR train will NOT be operating on any segment during the next decade either...
Bro why the number 69???
And THIS, THIS, IS WHY TRANSIT IS DYING IN THE US! BECAUSE IT’S CAR OVER TRANSIT
We have driven 3 trillion miles since 1950s, only 10 million rail passengers a year, even airlines have 850 million a year. Until you have the passengers it doesn’t make sense. It’s an utter waste of money. No roi in it. 😊
@@ae9074What do you think we did in the US *before* the interstate system was buit? You know they have to build it to use it.
The wildest thing I've ever heard about a tranist project from a politcian was the govenor of Louisiana saying that he would back any plan to build a lightrail connecting the capitol Baton Rouge to the state's largest city New Orleans. Downtown to downtown, they are separated by 100 miles. Obviously he meant he'd back a regional rail system, but it's still funny to think about the Bayou State unironically constructing the world's longest tram line.
That would be an interurban. The longest were in the 100 mile range.
@@MilwaukeeF40C Fuck yeah, interurbans were one of the most fascinating things to read about for me when learning about American rail systems. Down here in NZ we never even had things like those. An interurban revival in the US and the construction of similar systems in places in NZ would be awesome.
Yeah, he's the only good governor in the entire Deep South U.S, all the other Dixie governors suck. God bless him for expanding the medical weed program in this state.
God, if only... I live in Louisiana and have to go between New Orleans and Baton Rouge all the time for work and other activities. It's such a PITA to have to drive between them on I-10 every time I need to do so... such a terrible stretch of interstate
@@venticuiliar9136 New Orleans and Baton Rouge ironically have such good bones to build off of, because they were built before cars. It'd be surprisingly easy to build a train there if you had the budget, and it would make travel there so easy. But no, we live with a bunch of car-brained boomer rednecks and can't have nice things.
Create an advocacy group that watches highway costs, and the moment they go over-budget, spread the news loudly and fast like wildfire.
There are groups including fiscal conservatives.
Nobody cares because it's cars
it's a worthy idea, but the media environment is so slanted that it won't spread.
Strong towns kinda does this.
@@MilwaukeeF40C True. But the media is incentivized to ignore it. Why do you think that is? Could it be due to advertisers connected to the oil industrial complex? I don’t know for sure but I sure could see it.
Yeah I was waiting for the Shinkansen reference. The head of JNR resigned over the backlash, yet they kept at it. They tunneled and blasted through mountains 500 kilometers building a train in the 1960s. And now what? The economy shot up, jobs increased, and everyone in the world started to emulate Japan in building high speed rail. Everyone looks at Japan at the golden example of good high speed rail. It's fast, reliable, punctual, comfortable, connects the country well and it's affordable. CHSR is truly America's shinkansen project. They just need to get their heads down and build the damn thing.
Actually the Shinkansen along with other public expenditures are regarded as having contributed to the "lost decade" of monetary problems and economic stagnation, which is now the lost 30 years and going. The Shinkansen was very connected with private sector clout and not real democratic. Something like it would not be done in a place like California with all of its downtrodden factions claiming oppression because something would be done a certain way. Everyone wanted a piece of CAHSR and it turned in to a cluster.
@@MilwaukeeF40C No it didn’t. A bunch of Republican dark money groups sued the crap out of the project over key land parcels so that they could engineer cascading delays and cost overruns. They were hoping that the public would get discouraged by the increased costs and just cancel the project. It worked for a couple of years, but this was always just a delaying tactic.
The public refused to budge and the project’s popularity has actually _increased_ since the 2008 bond referendum on CAHSR. The dark money groups basically ran away with their tail between their legs to oppose other projects like Texas Central.
CAHSR just continued plowing forward and are now on track to complete construction on the first three sections by next year. Newsom announced two more extensions in 2019 and those are already fully approved, fully funded, and in active pre-construction. The project is doing pretty good now actually. RUclips is full of drone shots with completed strictures and raised guideway. The villains lost in this case, surprisingly.
@@MilwaukeeF40C no dude, the lost decade was caused by japan's falling birth rate and the Asian financial crash along with stagnation in their tech sector, shinkansen predated the crisis by 20 years. Get your facts straight
Japan is still paying off original debt from the Shinkansen. All of these things contribute to financial problems decades later.
@@MilwaukeeF40C politicians and claiming Japan is dying due to no positive gdp. Think of it this way, average Japanese person experienced no inflation for past 30 years. Politicians can call it failure and lost decade all they want. I see it as a chad stable 3 decades.
As a Californian, I cannot wait to ride my high speed train.
some day, your grandkids may ride it!
@@alquinn8576 sure. But I plan to ride in it with my kids since it is scheduled to be completed by 2033.
@@awinnett yes, "scheduled"
Even Laos has one lmao
@@travl8138 Laos spent (well, borrowed from China) >30% of GDP to build 250mi of HSR. Not sure if that one's going to pay off!
A reminder that before Brightline, Rick Scott personally killed a high-speed rail connection between Tampa and Orlando and was later found to have many close (albeit not incriminating) financial ties to Brightline.
i'm pretty sure in wisconsin, there was a high speed rail project, paid for, trains purchased, and fully approved and ready to go before scott walker just straight up canceled it
@@MilwaukeeF40C please stop commenting your libertarian nonsense under every comment
@@rishabhanand4973 Fortunately in the last mid term election, Walker's Lt Governor (Rebecca Kleefisch), was defeated in the primary and the Republican candidate (Michels), who actually lives in Connecticut, was defeated in the general election. Republican US senator Ron Johnson (who spends most of his time at his villa in Florida) won.
@@rishabhanand4973 and now the trains have been purchased by the Nigerian Government.
@@MilwaukeeF40C Brightline is privately owned but publicly funded. Up to 90% of just the cost of their station construction is direct government subsidy and 100% of their planned profits is from real estate allowances that the government gave them.
If it’s still 100% subsidized then why give the resulting infrastructure to a private company? If we’re paying for it anyway then how come some hedge fund gets to keep the things they bought with our money?
What you are in favor of is essentially socialism, but for people who are already rich!
YES!! Just build the fucking trains already!!
Cars are very gae
@Zaydan Alfariz just curious though. Would the recent earthquake at Cianjur impact the opening of the KCIC next year?
Also, given that Cianjur is a major stop for the current Jakarta-Bandung rail line, would KAI prioritize rebuilding those quake hit lines?
Then you can pay for it
I thought you said we should give up on America
No don’t
CA high speed rail will serve as the backbone allowing tons of regional and private rail projects to fill in the blanks between where it ends and where the demand is like San Diego and other areas. This is why building the Central Valley first as boring as it may be , was the right move. It’s going to change California in amazing ways … live in Bakersfield and work in LA? Maybe 🤔
Nobody will remember the cost once they are all on a nice rail car enjoying a beer and the scenery , saving time and money.
Nobody will invest in private infrastructure until competition is no longer subsidized.
CA High speed rail when complete while absolutely destroy the flights between LA-SF because of competition, similar to Madrid Barcelona Route
People also forget that bakersfield and fresno are big cities on their own too, and this could jumpstart a new boom for them.
@@angelmendez2211 and they need it !
@@Racko. God we can only hope. I absolutely despise flying between LA and SF and would literally rather drive that distance than fuck around with the airports for a sub-hour flight
Remind the people that in short intrastate transport, you can:
1. Drink alcohol, unlike while driving;
2. Carry arms on your person, unlike in airplane
3. Sleep.
Yeah, you can read something. Do a lot in that time, rather than sit in you silly car.
4. Be on your personal devices or read books
5. Look around at the scenery
6. Don't have to deal with traffic and road rage
@@rams_r_champs 7) you have some smelly old wino sitting next to you.8) you can enjoy somebody else's kids screaming at the top of their lungs
9) you can add some crazy drunk gang banger giving you the LA county look
10) you can catch the vid by the guy in the seat next to you that's coughing the whole way...
11) you're out the door at 3:00 a.m. to catch the transit and try to make it to work by 6:00 when if you had your own car you could leave at say 5:30 and be there with 10 minutes to spare to grab a cup of coffee before you start your shift.
@@slimshady6359 My brother takes train to Angel's game. Amtrak you can drink Metro you can't.
Americans when a highway is built in their neighborhood: 😌
Americans when a railway is built in their neighborhood: 👁️👄👁️
Having trains go through fields and backyards is more calmer than highways too
Highways get their share of protests from locals. But on a whole, they are more resilient than railroads.
Fun fact, my grandma's friend literally has a railway track in his backyard. He lives along Ioco Rd in Port Moody in British Columbia, Canada along an industrial route where trains would transport goods to the refineries along the coast. The trains aren't frequent, at most a few times a week, but when I was eight a saw a train pass right behind his backyard and I found it interesting.
Highways are more useful than trains.
That's just a lie. People who unfortunately live near highways don't love them. Nobody who lives near highways wants them in their backyard or wants them expanded.
8:35 "Keep your workers and move to the next project"
Also applies to the energy sector too...alot of countries *could* have learned from France, (As a Brit I am cuturally required to dislike the French...but when they're right, they're right) where they build aload of nuclear power plants, one after the after, with the same design, expect for improvements they figured out while builing them...sure its boring, but the last thing you ever want is an 'interesting' nuclear power plant...like Chernobyl...
That's what they've been doing with high-speed rail as well. There has never been a pause in LGV construction in France, because as soon as one project is nearing completion, they have already started the next. That's how they've ended up with arguably the best high-speed rail infrastructure in the world (I know people will bring up Japan, but the different track gauges severely limit where Shinkansen services can actually go, a problem TGV services don't have).
I mean the French suck, but they sometimes have good ideas. TGV was not one of them because once again it’s too expensive, but apparently it’s the only way to build rail as the infrastructure owned by the US rail companies isn’t going to be upgraded anytime soon.
This is why building new nuclear power plants like the two new reactors at Vogtle must be done side by side with high speed rail. Both go hand in hand and will benefit the economy in the long run.
Yes, although there’s also risk in putting all the eggs in one basket. A large number of France’s reactors have recently been shut down because of corrosion, so defects can also be duplicated.
Applies to any sector really.
UK is sure one of them thats forgot how to build railways.
With nearly a 20 year gap between HS 1 and HS 2.
Just want to point out that the issue of rail lines getting uniquely and unfairly heavy scrutiny is not unique to the US or countries that generally lack rail infrastructure, see e.g. the huge uproar about HS2 in the UK or Stuttgart 21 in Germany
Edit: I encourage people to look at the replies to my comment if they want hilariously telling proof of my point!
or, on the matter of Germany, the the connecting Routes for the Gotthard base tunnel in Switzerland and brenner base tunnel in Austria, which Germany contractually promides to build, in the first case decades ago, but hasn't even started
In the UK there were even environmental activist protesting and trying to sabotage HS2.
In germany we complain about all over budget things on principle. or do i need tor emind you of the berlin airport or the A44 in north hessen? We dont like spending money period. Also, germany has a lot of public transit. but it deteriorated in quality since its half privatised (thanks cdu)
Honestly the HS2 thing is so damned infuriating. They've gone above and beyond to make sure that HS2 is a good infrastructure project with fully thought out benefits, and yet the greenwashing campaigners only ever care about stopping it, but never RIS2 despite RIS2 A) costing more, B) destroying more woodland, and C) not doing archealogical digs before starting construction like HS2 had to do.
Why do roads get a pass on all the hoops that rail infrastructure has to jump through to prove itself useful?
ECRL in Malaysia. The issues talk about is no longer about it being a mainland china project, the issues is environmental impact and bla bla bla woke bs
Breaking the status quo is hard but as long as the project is effective and provides a good service it’s really only a function of time.
I live in Miami and a couple years ago all the brightline media coverage was “multi billion dollar murder train”
“another pedestrian killed by high speed rail”
Now it’s slowly but steadily shifting to
“Brightline reaches record ridership with new aventura station”
“Brightline ridership triples in 2022”
Still have those stupid murder train articles but most people understand that its the people’s fault and not the train.
damn there also must be lot's of articles about murder cars
Lifelong Californian here. You don't know how much bad press and angry comments in news articles I've seen about the CA high speed rail project. So much negativity, and -- most teeth-gnashing of all, for me personally -- people asserting that it doesn't solve any problems and no one is gonna ride it anyway. I have no idea which planet they're living on, because virtually everyone I know IRL will ride the HECK outta this thing. I know I will, and I know I would have back when I was a college student. The amount of exchange between Norcal and Socal is NOT negligible -- the more options we have to link the two regions, the better. Whatever it takes!
The NorCal-SoCal travel corridor is now literally the busiest in the country! (It used to be the second busiest for decades). And the San Joaquins, the train that CAHSR is replacing, is the 5th most popular rail route in the country!
Sometimes I think that the entire opposition to this project is 100% astroturf. I know for a fact that most of it is, but perhaps it’s just all astroturf. That will explain the ridiculous, disconnected from reality claims that the opposition is making. I mean, who even believes those clowns?
@@TohaBgood2
It _is_ 100% astroturf. Politicians on both sides of the isle have investments companies involved in the oil and automotive industries (including BEV companies like TESLA and Rimic) and ones involved in the construction and maintenance of the interstate system, like the concrete industry. And in airlines and commercial aircraft manufacturers. And more cars on the road means more possibilities for tickets due to speeding and parking violations as well. It's all a matter of money.
@@VestedUTuber We just need more public pressure for this thing to be built! These people easily forget who they work for if we keep quiet for too long!
I just see people getting routinely mugged.
@@Ironclad17 Where?
Plus, nobody gets mugged on the San Joaquins which this train is supposed to replace. What makes you think that CAHSR will be anything but bougie, Acela-type service?
There is also a bias against transit in the US because it's seen as for the poor who deserve only the most basic and minimal expenditure. In most countries, transit is seen as a benefit for the whole society and thus enjoys more support.
Which is just weird. They want to pay peanuts to factory and service industry workers and yet force them to waste even more money on cars to keep them poor.
@@ianhomerpura8937 Weird? No no, that’s intentional!
That’s the latest propaganda weapon that the anti-transit right is using! First they make sure to make transit a poor-only service, like welfare. Then they vilify it with the non-poor population and get them to cancel it because now it’s just an “entitlement” for the poor.
Tactically, this is a pretty brilliant strategy! A ton of even very leftie and theoretically well-meaning local governments get fooled by this all the time. They are encouraged to subsidize and tailor their public services for the poor. That’s a good thing, right? More services for poor people, yay! And then it turns out that no one except the poor use the service (which was specifically tailored for that group of customers and is most attractive and useful to them.) And then, bam! 80-90% of the population supports cutting that service _because they never use it_!
Devious crap, but it works like a charm! In a very bad and dangerous way.
This is true, the reason the subway in NYC hasn't been yanked out is because investor and other business men frequent this transportation to get around.
The NYC subway system is the great equalizer of our fine city. Only here will you see an investment banker, a middle-class college student and a blue-collar worker ride side by side to their respective activities.
Our relationship with trains in this country is terrible. Most of my childhood I didn't know people could ride trains. I thought they were only for transporting goods bc those are the only kinds of trains we have where I live.
Oof. Makes britain look good yet we complain about ours all the time.
@@davidty2006 the UK is shit aswell.
@@Mgameing123 Atleast we beat the US.
@@davidty2006 I'd congratulate you on getting to dunk on us, but we've set the bar so low that it'd be like congratulating an athlete for beating up a double amputee with Asperger's
That's how it should be. Passenger trains are obsolete.
Another thing that leads to scrutiny is how many US transit projects are half-assed and rarely used because they are (though this is the result of governments not doing enough). The Q-Line on Detroit is an example of this: just happens to stop short of many (poorer) residential areas along Woodward and runs slower than most busses because it has to run in mixed traffic. And since the only other transit in Detroit is the People Mover, it doesn't integrate well with the transit in the city. Perhaps if the Amtrak station next to it had more commuter service it could be more useful getting into downtown, or at least more lines radiating well out of downtown and into other neighborhoods.
Look at Canada's trains
@@alex-dj3of I still don't see a Canadian intercity train running from Calgary to Edmonton or Saskatoon to Regina. Where are they? Nor does Canada have a single paved highway running to its Arctic coast. Nunavut is still waiting for a deep water port it was promised nearly three decades ago. No wonder its Arctic is underdeveloped...
Indeed, public transit planners could look to the shining record of our highway, street and road planners, who have built such an efficient and low-cost world of beautiful suburbs, lovely industrial parks and delightful parking lots everywhere, with never a traffic jam, ever.
When I'm forced to spend 45 minutes in a car to reach work 18 miles away, I cry tears of gratitude to the mental giants who built the beautiful stroads and jammed freeways we enjoy today.
My house is so wonderful. I wish I could get home before dark to actually see my yard on weekdays.
hello kim
the genuine rage toward our degraded infrastructure is why im subbed.
and the ethical finance tips
I came to laugh at USA infrastructure, I stayed because I felt bad for you guys
Commercial companies always try to scrape the bottom when it comes to expenses. They want to make profit. There isn't so much a national sentiment about having a good transport system.
The naked whataboutism is why I’m not.
@@MrMarinus18 the problem with that though is the us in general being 80% commercial
> Construction workers should move from one project to the next, don't stop
You know, I realize that I think this is one of the vital reasons why the Washington Metro was able to build 129 miles of track in 46 years, something I still find to be incredibly impressive. The Metro basically went from one expansion to the next in rapid succession, completing the originally planned Metro system in 2001 by just continuously building out the system without stopping. And even after 2001, when the final extension of the Green Line to Branch Avenue opened, did Metro stop? No! NoMa - Gallaudet University opened on the Red Line in 2004, The Blue (and currently Silver Line) expanded out to Downtown Largo in 2004 as well, and of course, the Silver Line opened out to Whiele-Reston East in 2014 with the Ashburn extension opening days ago in 2022 as of this comment. I'm honestly really sad that the 98th station at Potomac Yard - VT is probably going to be the last Metro station opened for decades, they finally reached the end of the plans :(
The Metro is by no means perfect, but this is one of the reasons why it's one of my favorite pieces of infrastructure in the US, even when the Metro was going over budget and over time, WMATA did not care and just kept going until they finally opened all of it AND MORE!
Interestingly, WMATA’s sister system in the Bay Area - BART has been doing the same. Basically, every 5-10 years there is a new extension. They’re now in the process of expanding to San Jose and Santa Clara.
These two systems were so similar when they opened that you could even use the magstrip tickets from one system on the other! It’s interesting that they are still doing about the same things all these years later.
Yup! The pace of construction on the Vancouver SkyTrain system is definitely slower than other larger cities, but there's literally always been a new extension under construction/in the planning phase pretty much ever since it opened in the 80s.
@@ZZValiant Greater Vancouver has the same population as greater Charlotte:
What about the purple line in Maryland? Currently being built now and planning on opening in late 2026? Or are you saying Potomac Yard will be the last station to open in DC for a while?
@@mattpopovich The Purple Line is technically not part of the Washington Metro, it's being built by the Maryland Transit Administration (MTA), so those won't be "Metro" stops. Potomac Yard - VT is the last planned Metro stop for now, though there are studies being done to further expand Metro.
Funny how transit cost overruns made Governor Christie cancel the ARC tunnel yet the LIRR is about to open East Side Access and NJ could’ve already had their second tunnel built and operating by now.
Chris Christie is the same dumbass who intentionally caused a traffic issue (Bridgegate) in order to blame a democratic mayor so go figure. Total idiot of a governor
Didn't he also intentionally caused a false construction project on the GW Bridge where... nothing was actually done
That's what happens when your governor is a far-right Republican boomer. They fundamentally oppose anything that would help the common man.
@@MarloSoBalJr yup, and he closed the bridge all b/c the mayor of Fort Lee refused to endorse Christie for his re-election and the crazy part is that he ended up winning re-election.
And where did ARC go? Was it designed to integrate into the existing system or just dead end?
One way to reduce costs on construction is to allow around-the-clock work. In America we tend to do 9-5 construction, which means an hour to set up, 6 hours to work, and one hour to take down.
When COVID hit and no one went on this LA highway, they were able to run constantly and got the project done in a fraction of the time.
We have to be okay shutting down transportation in some places for some time. I'm so sorry fellow Americans, often times good growth means a little inconvenience.
"I'm so sorry fellow Americans, often times good growth means a little inconvenience."
THIS is the key problem!! It's so hypocritical when people brag about "I WANNA SAVE THE PLANET" but go absolutely hypernova when they realise that the convenience that they get to enjoy decreases by an amount greater than 0. The whole deal with electric cars, autonomous cars, battery buses, battery locomotives, solar everything, wind everything, and countless other things is just people claiming to want change but not wanting to change the _status quo._
Yeah try shutting down an LA highway with non Covid traffic and watch the anarchy unfold. It won’t just be a “little Inconvenience” and those 9-5 work schedules were created by the unions who also run the city construction crews. I doubt they are going to just want to work 12 hour shifts now.
@@electric7487 Like, heck. People will whine when you tell them to buy an EV with less than 300km range. Like, it has a plug for rapid chargers. Just spend the half hour when you're driving long distance once in a blue moon.
@@agonzgonzalez7748 3 times 8 hour shifts. Yes, the night shifts will demand higher wages, but just pay them. The project is done faster, meaning you get economic benefits faster.
Most people I know that complain about the California High Speed Rail project have never been on high speed rail in any other country. They think it's like flying Southwest or something. I just got back from Italy and the Italo bullet train is awesome. Just as awesome as the high speed rail I've been on in Japan, China, and Taiwan. Once this project is complete, it's going to transform California.
Once the CHSR is up, and Caltrain gets electrified, California is going to be something a class better.
If fares shoot up and people don't use it it'll serve as a nice blow to high speed rail in the US
You have too much hope for California. The states are unstable/incompetent and ppl constantly ruin good projects.
@@AngelloDelNorte right? I like the idea of it. But there's a reason people talk shit. Californian politicians are inept, corrupt tards lol
@@AngelloDelNorte Lol, what parallel reality do you hail from? California recently became the world’s 4th largest economy after Passing Germany! Freaking Germany! We have a $100 billions dollar surplus and our economy grows about twice faster than Texas, Florida, and even China. We’re on track to pass Japan for 3rd largest economy in less than a decade.
Yes, everything is expensive here including construction, because our wages are insane. Yes, we take forever with environmental and other reviews and any member of an impacted community can prevent projects from negatively impacting them. This is exactly by design. We don’t want people, especially poor people, to get steamroller so that some rich dude can build another oil refinery in their neighborhood.
Imagine how amazing tourism would be in the U.S if it had a good high-speed rail network across it.
A high speed rail across the US would be incredibly wasteful. Low speed rail works when stuffed to the gunnals with goods that you can make far more money off than passengers who won't pay much for such slow travel.
make money lol
@@Treblaine you didnt even say anything in your comment.
@@TreblaineLOL. Enabling movememt of prople within your country is wasteful? LOL. You usa-ian are so stockholmed and mindless that you don't even know that you are simping for those who are working against your own interest.
@@Treblaine high speed rail will replace the airline company
They have benefit like better seat than plane
In my 3rd world train its better option if you cant afford plane ticket (its expensive)
Airline just for faster option
For long travel we have option car,bus,motorcycle,train,plane
For travel to another island airline and sealine
Hey Alan, great doc/essay. I do have one issue, though. There's only one t in scrutiny. You kept saying "scrutinty". Thanks and I can't wait for the next CaHSR video!
Thanks for pointing this out. On the first instance of him saying it, I thought, "I wonder why he didn't edit out that mispronunciation". On the third instance, it became clear that that was just how he thinks it's pronounced.
@@mikejuly24 It took me way too long to find someone commenting on this. It annoyed me throughout the video. It's in your title, how can you not pronounce it correctly?!
Youre the goat for pointing this out
Agreed, really great points on Alan. Hearing "scrutinty" repeated kept irking me though.
and then he pronounced it correctly the last time he said it?! it was baffling
It's like how nobody except NJ urbanists and Jersey City residents (or a former JC resident in my case) are criticizing Phil Murphy's NJ Turnpike widening in Jersey City because the big media aren't talking about it. The extension is his "solution" for fixing the traffic to the Holland Tunnel...he probably lives under the same rock as Patrick because this won't solve anything and will only make the traffic worse by adding one more lane (not like the tunnel is magically gonna get wider). Plus, it would force the HBLR to shut down in order to relocate a part of its track...without this vital link, residents are stuck taking buses.
Trains lead to development in general, as historically shown. I live on Long Island, and formerly in Jersey City and Westchester County...all places with great trains. How did Long Island develop so much? Because the LIRR helped it do so big time. If you build it, they will come. You bringing up the Shinkansen is a shining example of this. There was opposition in Germany and France too for HSR, and now both systems have been praised. Sure, Deutsche Bahn has its problems, but I'd rather have high-speed rail than no convenient rail whatsoever.
Alan, I think everyone here would be super intrigued by I-69 as a separate video. The costs of building that road are insane. It’s also very much not needed, existing roads mostly cover any need I-69 has.
No, existing roads do no
Existing state and U.S. highway routes were great before any of the Interstates we're built.
New intercity Interstates just seem wasteful at this point. Maybe I am wrong about a few city pairs, but rail upgrades, for both freight and passenger can do the same thing without encouraging more sprawl from sea to shining sea.
@Bushrod Rust Johnson The US and State Hwy systems did not adequately service the whole country in a uniform way with uniform standards, not to mention there was something called the Cold War that drove a need to be able to move material, arms, and people across the country in bulk fast that wasn't available before the Interstate system.
I'm a bit of a geek about road and transportation projects. One major problem with I-69, and a lot of newer interstate projects (I-73, I-14, and others I can't think of at the moment) have their routes written into law by Congress. Meaning by law, Interstate 69 (and others like it) HAVE to serve X, Y, and Z states regardless of if they are economically viable. With Interstate 73, and the Interstate 74 extension eastward, the road has been planned from the Canadian border in Michigan down to Myrtle Beach, SC, and that was decided in the late 90s, early 2000s. By 2022, only North Carolina has built any portion of I-73/74. I-73 is effectively dead in Michigan and Ohio because it's seen as not necessary, it's unclear if it will be built in West Virginia, it 'might' be built in Virginia. South Carolina (specifically Myrtle Beach) wants it bad, but the state doesn't have the funds, and it seems that I-73 isn't much of a priority in South Carolina.
What has really annoyed me about these new interstate projects is that lawmakers, either in Congress or at the state or local level, view building an Interstate in their region as an 'economic development tool' rather than a transportation link. Meaning, that Congress and other legislators believe that building an Interstate will magically bring jobs to their area, regardless of if an Interstate would be appropriate in the area. And in my opinion, writing an interstate and it's route into law is inappropriate, possible even corrupt. Going back to I-69, in Texas, I-69 splits into three pieces (I-69E, C, and W) because the cities in the Rio Grande Valley on the Mexican border all wanted I-69 to end in *their* city and not the others. So the politicians had it written into law that I-69 would split like it currently does, even though the precedent was that Interstates could not have a suffix (example: I-69E) to avoid driver confusion and were phased out, the exception being I-35E/W in Minnesota and Texas.
TL/DR: Politicians have begun writing interstate routes into law even if they aren't necessary, or economically viable.
They criticize railway projects for costing hundreds of millions of dollars, yet these same people praise a $10,000,000,000 underwater highway project. (It was a ten lane water tunnel IIRC)
Meanwhile you have Germany and Denmark building an underwater road-rail tunnel at a fraction of the cost. And they plan to finish it by 2029.
The US is way left behind.
i’ve been waiting for this video since you made the real life lore response video. amazing points as always, this needs to be broadcast on every news station in california
“Electric cars and other technobullshit is not going to save us…”
Love your irreverent take. Let’s build, baby, build!
Trains... electric trains will save us. Not electric cars.
@@jonahmoran3751 Save us from what? What are you afraid of?
The fist highways were also built as cheaply as possible and have required several reconstruction periods since their original construction.
They worked fine though and we're mostly locally funded or even done by private non profit groups such as the Lincoln Highway Association.
@@MilwaukeeF40C but guess what, the Federal Highwat Act happened. And now even non-car owners are forced to subsidize the interstate freeway system through taxes.
I love subsidizing things with taxes that bring social benefits, even if I don't personally use them. That's what taxes are for. I'd much rather subsidize rail than highways though.
"Social benefits" are a fool's errand.
@@MilwaukeeF40C Patently false. According to the Federal Highway Administration, 90% of the funding to build out the highway system came from federal money, mostly through bonds. Eisenhower even favored self-funded methods like toll roads but got too much push back and gave up fighting it. Maybe some funding for highways maintenance now comes from private non profits, but it wasn't originally built that way and even today most of it comes from the Highway Trust Fund.
Great video as always! While I certainly agree that excessive contracting is a plague, I disagree with "avoid contractors at all cost". Modern engineering works are extremely complex and the flexiblity of *some* subcontracting is necessary. For example, if a super specialized piece of equipment is worth several millions, and is to be used once or twice in the project, it may not make sense to purchase it, but rather subcontract the job to people who do only that but across multiple projects.
Yep! Complex modern systems are basically impossible without a ton of contracting. I like Alan and he’s usually right, but his weird anti-contractor fetish is off the mark. Any system is gameable and griftable. If anything, a highly vertically-integrated one without contractors is more so than a highly decentralized one relying on contractors.
At least he’s right on all the rest!
You need intelligent clients, you cannot outsource that capability, that's part of the issue
i think it'd be more accurate to say avoid CONSULTANTS rather than contractors and specifically private equity firms with no real knowledge of rail. If we truly want rail to succeed in America we should hire SNCF TGV or one of the Japanese railroad firms to come help give us technical advice
@@TohaBgood2 The thing is, the design work for a project CAN be done in-house. DOTs do it for every highway project. The don't hire a consulting firm to do the design and engineering to build a road. Only small cities do that for road projects.
@@mohammedsarker5756 yes exactly
When Roads go over budget: 👁👄👁
When Trains go over buget: 😭
Because most people don't live in close proximity to a stop as well as have their destination be near a stop.
Rails are faaaaarrrrr less efficient in the states due to our land mass. We didn't have to design cities & towns with high population density as an impossibility to avoid.
the anti trains are well able to complain about the so-called environmental disaster of the project. Europe Ecology-The Greens in France have already complained about Lyon-Turin. and it's incomprehensible because the train is eco-friendly and the Swiss, concerned about their living environment, are digging rail tunnels to stem the traffic of 1.2 million trucks per year.
French ecologists believe that Lyon Turin is an environmental disaster but nothing like this has been observed in Switzerland.
@@mauriceskyliners9873 italian ecologist and nimbys are even worse they are actively sabotaging the project and making up bullshit like asbestos or uranium in the mountains
@@bbbbbbb51 You mean suburbs are the issue here, trains were great in the early 20th century before everyone was hypnotized by the car craze. Suburban development caused the sprawl we know today since we are so spread out by low density housing.
@@harryflashman4370 You’re taking to someone who doesn’t know how far the rabbit hole goes.
It's so funny how money for trains are so expensive that Americans don't see the big picture that US' defense budget is 20× the budget of mass transits.
ruclips.net/video/m_2D0-OHbqw/видео.html india high speed rail
If the US didn't have a defense budget then you wouldn't be debating the cost of the train or not, because Moscow and Beijing wouldn't be bothered.
Hell yes. THIS is the video we needed. I-95 in Philly has been getting rebuilt for 2 decades and everyone is rightfully annoyed about it, but the moment you suggest something that might be mildly disruptive like throwing light or heavy rail up the Boulevard, people lose their minds. Yes, infrastructure projects suck in the modern age. If we're going to disrupt people's lives and commutes with one, why not build a new backbone of transit that takes cars off the road instead of... one more lane.
Because as the i in i95 everyone benefits from the extra lane.
Even me who wants to travel up the East Coast to visit Niagara falls.
Or go down to to the beaches of obx.
Or visit the beginnings of our country in Philadelphia
Every American can take advantage of i95
In a way it almost feels like double standards are going on with American infrastructure. Thanks for bringing the situation into the spotlight. Also, whenever high speed rail in the US is discussed, it's usually California or the northeast, but believe it or not, there's actually been plans to build one in Illinois as well. Its terminuses would be Chicago and St Louis. Last spring, a committee was set up to survey the state on how best to build it. In my town, there's even been a project to reroute passenger rail so there's as few leveled crossings as possible. This could be a topic for a future video. Good job.
yeah the Midwest HSR is exciting. High Speed Rail Alliance has been advocating for a Midwest HSR network, using both upgraded shared-use and dedicated tracks, radiating out from Chicago to St Louis, Minneapolis, Cincinnati via Indianapolis, Detroit, and Cleveland. There's also a proposed HSR route in the Pacific NW between Portland, Seattle and Vancouver, as well as a Southeast HSR between Atlanta and Charlotte, and I think Savannah.
I'd make the case for linking up the NE Corridor, Midwest and Southeast HSR networks with an 'Eastern Triangle' HSR system connecting NYC, Chicago and Atlanta via major cities like Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Louisville, Nashville, Raleigh and Richmond, using HSRA's proposal of both upgraded shared-use and dedicated tracks.
St. Louis, Minneapolis/St.Paul, and Detroit are too far for a cost effective HSR as the train journey would take more than three hours, the sweet spot for effective HSR worldwide. And when I say effective, I mean winning the passenger market share battle with the airlines. Chicago should concentrate on HSR for shorter distances such as Milwaukee to Indianapolis, Quad Cities to Fort Wayne, Grand Rapids to Springfield or Peoria... Instead of being a terminus station, Chicago should be the middle station for their HSR network... Any HSR train route beyond three hours loses the passenger market share battle with the airlines significantly, it's not even close. If you are going to spend $100 billion for a very expensive HSR network, you might as well as run trains on it frequently which require a large metro population for its city pairs on routes no longer than three hours... Otherwise you are just flushing good money down the toilet...
The double standard at play is that cars make Big Oil and automakers more money. Trains do not.
@@ronclark9724 Ron, this the worst comment I've ever seen in your history. St. Louis isn't "too far" from Chicago because both are around 417 km apart and there are far longer HSL than that (even with stops, you'd reach the 3 hour mark). Chicago to Detroit also isn't too bad either as by road, they're 455 km apart. Only calling Chicago to Minneapolis/St. Paul too far is reasonable but even that doesn't exclude a connection thereof entirely (Paris-Marseille is a comparable distance, in fact).
Sir, I appreciate you for giving your support for CHSR. I don't live in California, but I like the project too and really hate the bad press that this project gets just because of it's issues. I believe in this project because I believe that it will be socioeconomically and environmentally helpful, mainly because I've seen the A line in Denver succeed, so kudos to you for making a positive video of CHSR.
I’ve lived in CA all my life and it would suck to take a train to one city only then have to spend $200 in Uber to get around the metropolitan area and for what reason? Tourist don’t simply go to downtown LA they go to adjacent cities like Santa Monica, Burbank and Anaheim which are all $50+ Ubers away. I’ve paid less in gas making road trips between and through both cities even at 6$ a gallon. If you live in the Bay Area chances are you work there and same with LA since it really makes no sense to live in one city and work in the other as both are comparably expensive. I’m not against people supporting CHSR but I am surprised people don’t realize it’s obvious flaws and anticipate it will just be another white elephant project all to try and appease socialists and climate activists while the majority will continue to drive I-5 and 99.
@@D00rHandleMedia Uber is in and of itself a giant grift. There’s tons of videos about what the dynamics of Uber are and how it isn’t good on this platform.
@@D00rHandleMedia wow its almost as if SoCal needs better transit and less car-dependent development but in order to do this there needs to be a intercity transit backbone for it to be centralized around so that its possible to access the rest of the state without a car. Gee, I wonder what that could be...???
@@ryanfraley7113 Unfortunately ride share is the only alternative to driving if one needs to arrive at any particular destination in a timely matter.
Isn’t the line that Real Life Lore suggested CAHSR take to San Diego tge one that is suspended due to erosion right now?
Not wanting highspeed rail as someone who lives in asia is aboslutely WILD to me. I would kill for highspeed rail in my country.
My biggest problem with CHSR is that the scope is IMO still too small. Build to Redding. Build a parallel line up 101. Go absolutely nuts.
Ideally they should have San Diego, Sacramento, Las Vegas (if Brightline falls through) and Portland extensions locked and loaded as soon as the current sections enter service. Let's go absolutely feral here.
Then follow up with a full corridor up to Vancouver. Is anyone going to ride the whole thing end to end? No, not really. Are you going to service a fuckload of customers up and down the entire Pacific coast? Hell yeah.
@@professorspark2361 Some will, maybe with a sleeper service.
This fits with the "don't stop building after one project" point. Once San Francisco to LA is complete, IMMEDIATELY start building to San Diego, to Las Vegas, hell, up to Oregon and go up the Willamette Valley to Portland. Just keep going until the whole West Coast is connected then hire those folks to do the same in Texas, the Great Lakes, the Northeast. By the time we've run out of viable HSR destinations we'll need to do upgrades on existing lines. A-B-C: Always Be Constructing!
They can’t build a line along 101, they could potentially get UP to upgrade to 177 km/h. However, it is very hilly.
@@professorspark2361 I think that will be how they’re ultimately going to finish the corridor. I would imagine that Amtrak will push to get the Brightlines station and tracks built.
8:15 I’d say outsourcing manufacturing is much different than outsourcing thinking. Outsourcing manufacturing yields hassles like you mention but also cost efficiencies due to comparative advantage. The government outsourcing thinking only increases costs as they spend more money to get the same thing had they developed it in house.
That is exactly how "feasibility studies" work.
yes, and pretty much every DOT will do the design for a road project in-house. There's no reason why transit agencies can't do likewise.
There's nothing wrong with outsourcing. The example given simply shows they don't know how to do it in the US.
You know who's doing the CPU component for Volkswagen? Continental, the company k own for tyres. And who's doing part of the work for Continental? Hitachi Poland, Capgemini Portugal and some more in Romania and India.
So there's a *three* tier system that works well because of the legal framework and communication.
You should mention this... Put it this way... 1) Just LAX and SFO have gone through or are going through $120B in upgrades and improvements. Maintenance is incredibly high.
2) At the low rate of interest paid on this debt, the entire project can and will be profitable and more than carry the monthly debt service expenses, while airports never can and only require more money to be fed into the airport system.
3) Door to door, downtown to downtown travel times will be significantly less, comfort higher, hassle less.
4) Costs will be significantly lower for travelers... So they'll be able to travel more often and have more money to spend once they reach their destination. Once Phoenix to Ontario segment is announced, which should happen soon, it'll be built quickly. I've had to pay up to $585 RT for a last-minute flight from Phoenix to Los Angeles... Imagine a family of 4 at $2400!
5) With more disposable income available by spending less on a rail ticket, small businesses reap those benefits, large businesses reap those benefits. Remember the new economy isn't about selling more 'things and stuff', those days are over. This is the biggest argument that those on the GOP side of things needs to hear.... By providing education from pre-K to post-grad, by providing daycare, by providing healthcare, by providing solar and battery storage for all residential customers (through barely higher electric rates for commercial customers, but still lower than in the 80s!), we free up disposable income to be spent in the economy on every other industry out there. Period.
6) High speed rail extends the life of existing airports and opens them up for longer flights that are more profitable. Puts off enormous spending needs.
7) High speed enormously reduces demand for foreign oil... Foreign oil supports nations that are not friendly to democracy or human rights... Yet we reward those nations that support terror and treat women and minorities like property slaves criminals animals trash and garbage yet we're dependent on oil and continue to feed these countries money hand over fist. Reduced demand for foreign oil would likely result in lower gas prices. Also far reduced need for defense spending to protect that oil we do desperately need.
8) Noise reduction... If you live near any airport know that most flights are ones that could be replaced by high speed rail. One 16 car Japanese train holds 1352 people... About what 10 planes hold, and can leave every 3 minutes. In one hour that's 260 planes worth of people... And back to cost, each train needs one 'driver' (and soon no drivers).
9) One train, one driver, there are savings in energy, fuel, maintenance, insurance, and most of all equipment... Cost of one 16-car 1352 passenger trainset, $40MM... Cost of ten (for passenger equivalent)737-800s... $1.1 *billion*. Cost of one train 'driver' per hour, $100... Cost of two pilots x 10 planes, $4000 per hour... Hence why pilotless planes are likely coming, plus they handle a few more rows of seats... Including very expensive seats with front windows.
10) Try these arguments out instead. Let me know how they work... This is not an issue of left or right, just ideas that work and make sense in so many ways.
Thanks for making this video! I hate the way rail projects are reported with scrutiny, yet highways are just treated like business as usual.
Believe it or not, in America less than two percent of Americans have ever rode a intercity train... Less than two percent... Whereas over eighty percent have flown at least once, and one hundred percent use highways one way or another, if only to walk on them... Let those numbers sink into your brain, and you wonder why Congress and the media support highways like business as usual?
I'm working on (and off) a rail project in northern Europe which joins the capital region and the second city. It's going to cost A LOT but it's also going to run through 2 economically depressed regional cities putting them within 30 mins of the two much larger cities. Not only is this going to help those cities economically, it'll also help stabilize housing prices in the larger cities. If the money had been spent on roads, it'd have been impossible to achieve even a fraction of the improvement in travel times and you'd increase congestion.
My point is, whatever the cost, public transport is a virtuous circle and if you're actually 'pro-business' you'd want these sort of projects because the economic growth they bring about are immeasurable ( they probably are measurable but I'm too busy to go looking for the research!).
Yes but it's all California and all benefiting California
All budget overages should be covered by California not America
I think its a great idea and will benefit California and the residents greatly. But my tax dollars shouldn't be spent on their budget issues only California benefits
This Thanksgiving Alan is thankful for existing public rail transport.
The lack of decent intercity train services is the only thing holding me back from visiting the U.S.
You guys have so many cool and interesting historic cities, charming small towns and so much natural beauty, but it is all wasted potential because of the obsession with cars
You could take a trip to the northeast, visit DC, Philadelphia, NY, Boston, all by rail, and all those cities have good transit
@@romanrat5613 that’s true. But go outside of the north east corridor and maybe Chicago and the intercity train services are bad at best.
My guy we likely have over 20x the land mass of your country. We can't realistically cover it all in rail.
Our "obsession with cars" is out of necessity. When I do visit Europe, I'll 100% be renting a car over there as I want to go to places that are far away from rail destinations & more remote.
Both cars & rails & the design around them have pros & cons. I'm so tired of everyone acting like one is a holy saint & the other is a steaming pile of shit. It's delusional.
@@bbbbbbb51 EU as a whole is comparable to size of USA. Russia is bigger than USA. China is comparable to the USA. None of them have a problem buildings trains connecting the entire country.
What happened to pride in our country? You're really going to let those filthy commies outdo us when it comes to trains? Shameful. It makes us look bad.
In germany basically every town and many Villages have thier own Connection. the few that dont haev a good bus connection.
I grew up In Germany and just visited again. while the trains often have delays it is so much more comfortable to travel. say you want to go from Munich to Berlin, in 7 hours your there even Paris to Berlin is possible it is truly amazing how comfortable traveling can be.
Why don't Germans ride trains to Istanbul? Tel Aviv? Baghdad? Cairo? Why do Germans usually FLY long distances instead of ride trains, much like the rest of the world, including China? Munich to Berlin is only a distance of 363 miles. The distance from New York City to Buffalo is 377 miles... You are still in one American state, never mind the other forty-nine states... I have rode trains in the Balkans, HSR doesn't exist there...
Excuse my ignorance, but was that Munich-to-Berlin journey on a high-speed train (instead of a conventional train)?
@@fishofgold6553 Germany doesn't have hi-speed trains of the type you're thinking of in Japan and China. In Western Europe, Spain and Italy have the best trains, which is why their economies are perpetually broke. France pioneered the high speed in Europe, and the network is still very good, but is now a bit older than Spain and Italy's. Germany is not up to the standard of the others, but is reasonable compared with much of the world.
Mfers really look at the U.S. infinite budget then look at public transport and say "You're spending too much."
Because it's just for California
If LA and las Vegas and Phoenix had a high speed rail project that connected each other that would be super cool and yeah use the America dollars
But if it's just California, use your California dollars, don't use as much America dollars it's only benefiting 1 of the 50 states.
I think people get it twisted, we only care about the cost because we pay the bill without seeing the finished train in our communities
As a Montrealer who saw the REM just get built extremely efficiently through a private/public partnership, I couldn’t give a shit if more companies start following brightline’s lead. It’s literally how North America got all those streetcars (and some railroads I think) built in the first place. Why not just do the same thing now?
PPPs are great!
Literally ALL of the U.S. Railroads throughout history have been built and run by private companies. Except for Amtrak which is kind of an oddity in history.
@@SmallTown_Studio Amtrak was created by Congress when the private railroad went bankrupt running the northeast corridor after the USPS, the government itself, terminated the railroads mail contracts more than a half century ago. The USPS chose to FLY the mail long distances, no longer do American passenger trains have a dozen or more mail cars on their consists... Duh... The reason: HOURS NOT DAYS! UPS and FedEx weren't far behind FLYING the mail either NEXT DAY AIR, or OVERNIGHT... It takes Amtrak three days to cross the continent coast to coast running all night long on at least two routes, while it takes a single truck/lorry driver six days to drive from LA to Boston legally...
Shhhh you can't say that. The collectivists get mad. Robber Barons, anti-trust, bla bla
This video is full of strawman arguments. And everything hinges on arguing "IF THINGS WERE DONE MY WAY" it would be better. They also say "it wasn't real socialism" and "better regulation", variations on a theme
The issue is simple: control. Not control of the outcome. Just control of the people.
They will burn down the planet, or let the jungle take over in a green blanket. It doesn't matter, as long as they are controlling what other people are doing.
Regards
And this project is cheaper than widening I-5 by billions of dollars
This is just fueling me into wanting to transition my job even more. I currently design roads, but for the past year I have been wanting more pedestrian, bicycle, and transit projects. I know I have to switch jobs for that, but it is so hard to get a job when I do not have the experience in transit and everyone just brushes me over.
I think its absolutely rich that the local news in the Bay was running a scathing report on how the BART to downtown san jose extension would displace a couple of local business. As if freeways did not displace entire neighborhoods. Like where's the scrutiny in THAT?
Main issue with light rail isn't that it physically displaces people, it's that it drives up rents and displaces them that way.
@@MrBirdnose I am not talking about the passive displacement caused by rent increases. Light rail transit or not, this phenomenon will occur, especially in the bay. I am alluding to BART and VTA's use of eminent domain for their construction. I could provide the link to the article, but youtube automatically deletes comments with links.
Tell that news station that you're appalled.
The San Jose downtown was completely obliterated by highway construction. But Bart integration is the villain.
I live right next to the freshly constructed I-69. Like, so close that some of that footage shows the street I live on in the background. To say it's been disruptive to normal life here in Martinsville, IN is an understatement.
It's a small, hyperconservative town of 11k, and locals were upset enough to *protest* alongside Native people and environmentalists. I can't understate how unprecedented that struggle was. Yet, only a couple articles document the resistance to it. Meanwhile, Indy's first rapid transit, a (half-baked but still good) BRT line, was financially scrutinized to hell and back by local media despite overwhelming local support. (Interestingly the same rags applauded when many times the Red Line's total budget was forked over to Indy police DURING 2020.)
There was a headline here in toronto that a subway line the province sort of forced through, the Ontario Line, was going to balloon to 20 billion dollars.
Turns out the price tag is still 10.9 billion, and the rest of that money was to operate it for the first 30 years. I am no fan of doug ford, but by chance, he's done the one right thing by *forcing* Toronto to build a subway whose cost they would have surely mewled about for 60 years before anyone even thought about touching a shovel.
In essence the headline was tribal nimby deficit horror bullshit.
It’s weird that Doug Ford, the literal maniac he is, somehow endorsed a good transportation project…
Great work on this. So infuriating to see rail and transit require perfection in every aspect. Roads and highways haven't helped anything and we continue to just do the same thing over and over hoping for a different outcome!
The definition of insanity.
"Roads and highways haven't helped anything". Well, there's no arguing with intelligent analysis like that.
@@daleviker5884lol
They certainly have helped, it's just that we don't utilize them properly nowadays, like with every other thing.
It's because everybody will support a highway named 'I-69'. They should rename the California highspeed rail to '420 blaze it rail line' and get more support.
Cars aren't a silver bullet. A silver train that goes fast enough to be called a bullet train? That's a silver bullet.
4:18 This is so infuriating. I live in Texas and my employer wants me to relocate 6 hours from where I currently live, in Texas.
I wouldn't mind commuting daily by train if I had the option. At least there's Greyhound.
I wouldn't be surprised if the state is actually losing money with it's over-reliance on highways and airlines.
It is and we are overpaying for transportation. The highway system provides maximum coverage already; contnuing investing in new expansion, adding lanes, and building sprawling new subdivisions, has gone past the point of diminishing returns. On the most heavily traveled routes, and the US has a lot of them, rail is more economic in the long-run and it supports denser home-building near stations. Yeah, these up-front costs are high, but they are nothing compared to the long-term costs and deficincies of our bloated, crumbing, and ever-growing subsidized roadway network.
France had the same problem when creating the TGV project. During the 1960s, the train in France had a bad reputation. It was slow and dirty (steam train). In addition, the car dominated the debates and the plane began to develop.
The SNCF then put the means to counter this way of seeing. It electrified the lines (the steam trains disappeared mid 70's), installed rapid service on the busiest lines, bearing prestigious names, such as the Etoile du Nord or the rolling Mistral has 160 or 200 kph.
The TGV arrives in 1981 and already the image of the train has improved. It will definitively erase the doubts about the efficiency at high speed.
The Paris Marseille (800km) for 3 hours with the direct service did not eliminate the car or the plane on this section, it only took part of the clientele and created a new clientele. There are always Paris Marseille flights, and the A6 and A7 (Motorways) are still busy.
its so weird how people can justify the economic benefits of a free highway but go right to claiming how unprofitable trains are because 'ticket prices aren't paying for all of it'
Ticket prices can’t pay for a train, only rental properties can. Freeways should all be expressways.
Nobody honest does that. Privatize it all.
Seriously, thank you for the intelligent coverage of the CAHSR. So many people online keep spewing out the same negative, scripted rhetoric about the project opposed to actual facts. This video helps to establish some sense of sanity.
the state of Georgia spending 800 million on one interchange when MARTA expansion to Gwinnett County would be covered by that is perfectly indicative of your point
Or SEPTA wasting money on the KOP branch line instead of extending the Broad Street Line.
Just the budget SURPLUS of California last year alone was $100B. That is the entire over-budget cost of the whole HSR project.
If a government is running a $100 billion surplus, the taxes are way too high (and they are).
On May 12, 2023, Newsom announced that California's DEFICIT this year year would be $32B, having announced in January it would be a deficit of $22B. That $100B surplus in 2021 was a perfect storm of favorable events. The stock market rose, and interest rates were at historic lows. Now that both of those have reversed, you can kiss goodbye to $100B surpluses. I trust you will be honest and give up to date numbers when you next comment.
The thing with I-69 at the start reminds me a lot of some of the BS around the F-35 program. People always talk about how expensive the F-35's development cost is, until they realise that its actually around the same as the F-15's development cost, despite being a more capable aircraft
Capable of what? conquering the world for gasoline? has failed at that one. providing an elaborate welfare program for MAGAnoids in the military industrial complex?
Of course interstate 69 is a meme...
Yeah I literally had never heard of it - very happy to now make sure other people hear about it from me all the time. Thanks for sharing
You forget that highway budgets have funding sources already approved and Rail funding is usually new money. Meaning Money we do not have now that you want people to just approve. Solution is to have a Federal Railway Trust Fund that lays a framework for high speed rail and fixes passenger rail across the us. The US railway system was started by federal initiatives and private ventures in the 1880's and sidelined in the 1950's by the interstate system.
Highways are vastly underfunded though (I mean they have to be, there's no way to pay for themselves). Use tax through tolls, registration fees, and gas tax don't even come close to fully maintaining them. So governments typically have to earmark more money from the general fund collected through income tax to cover the difference.
And when politicians suggest actually raising the use taxes to better cover infrastructure cost, taxpayers balk.
@@pax6833 Though underfunded, public demand makes it easier to approve funding where as with rail you have to justify the use case. It is easier to pave main street and open a clear semi route for stocking shelves then to connect an apartment cluster to a mall then to a industrial sector.
The purple line in Maryland is a great example of bad outsourcing, it was stalled for years and just got restarted
I am really getting triggered about that prononciation of scrutiny, but otherwise great video
Scru-tin-ty
It scrutintizing.....
Same but for *in* Long Island.
Alan: I am Scrut(inty).
Croutons
Thank you for uploading this video today. I love your channel and appreciate the work you do.
My wife and I are sitting in Labor and Delivery in the hospital waiting for our son to come. This definitely helped pass the time.
Happy Thanksgiving
Name the kid after me
Your son will share a birthday with me!
Congrats! Best wishes that all goes smoothly, and that mother and son will be safe and sound! 🙂
@@emporioalnino4670 No name him after me!
Congrats and best wishes!
I take CalTrain to work daily. I wholly support california High speed rail. My friends who drive do not understand why I take the train/bike to and from work. I'm excited to take High speed rail to LA (assuming all the negative press doesnt stop it).
Based on the turn out for the 4 stop "subway" line in SF that runs to China town on the weekends. Public transit in california will ultimately succeed!
It's refreshing to hear someone actually defend this project for a change, I'm sick of the cynical manufactured outrage astroturfed by oil companies I see in every article and comment page.
I want a video exclusively dunking on overbudget car projects now
4:44 this is an interesting problem, and by interesting I mean awful. In the article they say "iPads full of voter data". The fact that private companies can have access to such data and can use it in such a matter, such as sabotaging the greater good for personal gain, is a heartbreaker. This is why data protection is important, and why we should be doing more about it.
That's why I appreciate the existence of GDPR in BritainandEurope. But of course, the Corporations of the USA would never allow for anything that takes power and influence away from them.
@@markstott6689 wait. What is GPDR?
@Ian Homer Pura General Data Protection Regulations. It's a European Union law protecting online data and personal privacy. It's illegal to use data for anything other than its original purpose. The penalties can be steep if data is misused or used without permission.
Edit: It's why even now, some US websites aren't accessible to anyone covered by GDPR because some websites in the US won't protect personal data.
@@markstott6689 no one tell the uk government, if they learn this is a thing they'll for sure nullify gdpr
@@contrapunctusmammalia3993 why on earth would they do that?
Here in New Zealand we have the exact same problem. The Transmission Gully motorway went way over budget and only opened this year when it was supposed to open like three years ago, and nobody cared. But the minute a project like the City Rail Link in Auckland goes over budget the media will complain. It's also for similar reasons why light rail projects in Auckland and Wellington still haven't been built because of years of bickering about how much it'll cost the taxpayer. Only now are we even seeing the first steps of real progress towards building those projects when they could've easily been built 20 years ago.
As a San Joaquin Valley resident, thank you. We’re excited for high speed rail here
I love how you say the Brightline is trying to make its money back by selling real estate like it's a bad thing, because A. They need to make some money back from this project and B. That's how the original railroads were built, they got the land from the Government, built the track, then sold the the land around it to people.
C. Asian countries still do it. That tactic is partly why Hong Kong MTR and Singapore MRT, both state owned and operated, as well as Japanese private rail companies like JR East manage to pay for operation and maintenance costs and still generate MASSIVE profits.
The project is also a huge target for public transit simply because it's in California. California is always the scapegoat for every single problem with liberal policies and is always pointed at for any reason at all. It's very much an extrnsion of the entire SF debate and the argument of "how can it be so good to live in California if there's so much homelessness?! You're wasting your budget on expensive social programs when you should be spending it on police!" California is not without its problems, but 99% of critics in California will not point out that California should do more for the houseless population or do more in terms of public transportation. Instead it will be something along the lines of "Go woke, go broke" or "Back the blue." I'm studying civil engineering and I plan on specializing in transportation engineering thanks in part to videos like these. Please keep making them
Ironically the main reason Cali has this homeless problem is a combination of too much R1 residential zoning, a warm climate year round, and how most conservative homeless policies is to put all the local homeless people on a bus to either NYC or California.
@@outlawruby Exactly, this hits the nail on its head. But to a majority of Americans, no, apparently homelessness only exists inside CA cities. I love this state, but it is ultimately a part of the USA and as such adopts many conservative policies whether people realize it or not. Then again, even if they did realize it, so many people are so far gone that the moment the California government tries to help the unhoused or those on the brink of becoming unhoused, it immediately gets bashed by both the democratic and republican party.
@@outlawruby
I thought they are locking up the homelessness to keep providing the privatized prison industry complex with fresh slave labor?
@@outlawruby Bingo! A few cities in the state actually sued other cities, counties, and states for sending their homeless people here and won damages in court!
But it’s a ton of work to track down each case and prove that another jurisdiction paid for their Greyhound ticket to CA - the so-called “greyhound treatment”. And it’s only legally punishable if the unhoused person was in psychiatric treatment just before being sent here. So they just gave up on this whole thing after proving that this is happening in a few dozen court cases.
@@outlawruby Incorrect. The main reason Cali has a homeless problem is its expensiveness, which is made due to mostly liberal policies.
I am so happy that someone else sees the value of transit vs highways. We lived in Aurora Il. For almost 20 years and I can count one hand the number times we drove downtown. METRA is not perfect, but Union Station provides a walkable distance to most area of the Loop and N Michigan Avenue.
I rode that Metra from Naperville to Downtown for about a month when I was taking some classes in the city. What a great way to commute to work or school.
it's genuinely wild to me that americans will see insanely huge highway expansion projects announced that cause millions or billions of dollars and they won't bat an eye or even just be excited at the prospect but when it comes to any expected and normal construction costs for a train they lose it. they don't expect a single road in the entire country to make any money, but if it's public transport suddenly they're all about making money. it's a ridiculous double standard.
Exactly.. I just don't see why my fellow Americans see it like that.. oh wait, cause most don't even have the mind to comprehend it beyond the first (immediate) level.
A train that services 1 state
Vs a highway that connects 8 states and 3 countries.
Tell me which deserves federal funding and which should have limited federal funding
I think ca hsr is an amazing idea, just don't do it on American tax dollars. What's the point of taxing Californians the way that do if they can't fund it themselves
I'm from Denver where we have an alright train system around the city, but it still needs a lot of work to get where it needs to be. That being said, the building of that still far from perfect infrastructure has made my life so much better than extra highway lanes or even new roads all together ever seem to.
It doesn't matter if a train project goes over budget because it can actually make some operating costs back thru fares and arent a maintenance money pit like freeways are.
Oh, hello sensible person. Nice to meet ya.
Wow I never thought Id come across a like minded person..
Yes but that over budget should be footed by ca tax payers not American tax payers
I agree with everything you are saying!!! Just not American dollars when it's specifically a California rail project and California only project
MODOT has taken a LONG time just to get a few additions to highways done. Honestly, I was only recently made aware of the I69 project. Thankfully my local newspaper doesn't seem that interested in talking about infrastructure costs of trains (but I wouldn't put it past them).
Forget climate change, people aren't willing to change for that.
Talk about COMFORT. Why are Americans always selecting the cheapest possible options when they have enough to make use of something decent?
A train is not going to be delayed by rain, ice, sleet, whatever. A train doesn't need to have to wait till the evening because the air density is too low, like a plane in summer in Colorado mountains.
A train has normal-sized toilets and decent bars, where you can eat and (gasp!) drink decently priced beer!
And above else, stretch your legs.
I rode the Shinkansen in 2019. So fast and convenient! And so many departures!
"this is route I-69"
nice.
wait, no! NOT nice!
Seriously though: I live near LA and have family close to the bay area, a high speed rail between these two would be a game changer for me, especially since I could hop on another train and end up right outside my hometown with minimal fuss. With planes, I can't do that, closest I can get to home still requires a 1 hour drive. That's something people don't really mention: its a lot easier to proliferate an area with train stations then it is to do so with airports. There's too much overhead necessary to get an airport to work, even a small one. Trains though, you can just add a new route in from some hub and then slap largely unmanned stations along its length (maybe have 1 or 2 staff members to handle emergencies or run a stall selling provisions). Modify bus service to connect smaller settlements that are too small/out of the way to justify their own station and bam! functioning rail network. I'm sure its more complicated then that, and after a while certain hubs would become too sprawling to handle another route, but then you'd make another hub somewhere else to reduce load.
Regrettable, I will likely be moved back up north by the time the project reaches its conclusion, but I'd still like to have it as a transportation option. Maybe it would make me more inclined to travel to the LA area more often.
I disagree for CHSR. All stations will need alot of staff. We are talking about a railway between 2 major economic hubs and redeveloped valley.
Pretty much same case can be said about HS 2.
And i think the I69 issue is because it's numbered 69.
For HS2, the B1M video emphasized why it's very much needed: capacity. Trains at the existing system are bursting at the seams.
@@ianhomerpura8937 issue with whole of the UK's train system is piece meal private providers making so so expensive to use. It's cheaper to fly from say Manchester to london by quite alot.
Show this to any conservative/neoliberal arguing against public transit (copy-pasted from r/f cars):
-Cars are more expensive for the taxpayer: The construction and maintenance of highways and roads often ends up being far more expensive than a transit-oriented approach; according to one of Bill Bryson's articles in I'm A Stranger Here Myself, restoring rail passenger transport to much of northern New England in the 1990s would have cost about $500 million; meanwhile, Burlington, VT spent $100 million on a single 12-mile road. This, of course, does not even include other costs borne by the taxpayer, ranging from industry subsidies and bailouts to massive military spending aimed at securing sources of oil to the use of public schools to teach driving lessons to the upkeep of vast bureaucracies like DMVs and highway departments.
-Transport funding is not a zero-sum game: A corollary to the above, every user of public transport should be thought of not as a freeloader or as a subsidized burden on taxpayers, but as a savings to the taxpayer that results from every car taken off the road.
Cars have resulted in a massive expansion of the size and scope of police forces and policing (this is more a libertarian argument): Traffic control, highway patrols, parking enforcement, etc; the widespread use of cars means having a lot more police officers and departments. Also compared to using public transport, I'm subject to far more police scrutiny when I drive, with "implied consent" pretty much throwing the Fourth Amendment out the window when it comes to search and seizure.
-Car-centric planning has eroded property rights: Euclidean/single-use/R1 and related zoning laws, byproducts of the auto age and designing communities around car users, have resulted in increasingly onerous restrictions on what property owners can do with their private property in terms of what they can build on it and how they can use it.
-Federal highways and highway funding have greatly increased the Federal government's spending levels and reach: In addition to the Federal government's spending (and overspending) on highways, the threat to withdraw highway funding has been used as an extra-constitutional cudgel to force states into compliance with the Federal government's wishes on matters that should be left up to the states themselves (like the 21 drinking age).
-Highway construction results in more use of Eminent Domain: Because of the much larger footprint a highway has relative to a railroad line with the equivalent capacity, when building a new highway more private property will have to be seized and built over.
Greater choice for the road user: Having public transportation systems in addition to cars ultimately gives a transportation user a choice over which mode to use, rather than forcing them to drive because there are no other options available.
-Walkable towns, mixed-use buildings, and transit-oriented development is more traditional: Car-centric development is only a relatively recent phenomenon, so building car-free or car-optional areas is returning to a more traditional way of development.
-There's market demand for alternatives: Walkable and transit-oriented areas (either older developments that are grandfathered on zoning requirements or new developments that have gotten exempted from car-centric zoning requirements) often command a premium compared to car-only housing, so forcing places to build car-oriented development is an artificial restraint imposed on what the market really wants.
"Show this to any neoliberal arguing against public transit:"
*shows neoliberal reasoning and ideas*
@@arkethel It hurt itself in it's confusion
@@arkethel
Excuse me?
@@kevinp.h157 Neoliberals typically argue in favor of public transit
@adsaa ok muscle man
The nonsense that is running services as businesses when a public service has no obligation to make money, it only has an obligation to avoid wastefulness. Totally different things. The "Success metrics" are completely different.
NJTransit fares cover 29% of the cost. The remaining comes from those that don't have access..
@@JamesSmith-ij8nj And one of those metrics is access which a default for profit format clearly fails at. Otherwise I dunno what your intended point is.
@@Adalore Lots of words, not much sense. Unless you can show how paying almost 70% of someone else's commute is beneficial? You know the ones that pay for the roads.
@@JamesSmith-ij8nj The "free rider" problem is only a problem if you decide it is. Now if you want a real garbage fire there's a whole "military industrial complex" over there to complain about that is far more valid.
@@Adalore Really, a Constitutional requirement of government is just like deeply discounted commutes?
Again, make sense please.
We are facing the same kind of problem in India.
The state of Kerala is planning a semi highspeed Railway system.
But the people and media are loosing their sh*t but at the same time have no problem with expanding Highways
Just like Arnab Goswami?
You need to be a contributor on some of these network news channels. I-69 is the perfect comparison that when presented as you did, anyone can understand (and I-69 is way more of a shitshow than any US rail project)
He went on the New York times, so maybe.
These videos are so important. Public transit is freedom and would make our lives so much healthier, easier and environmentally sustainable. We need less highways and cars and more transit infrastructure
You know what is freedom? Getting in your fucking car and driving wherever and whenever you want. Take off your nose ring and dyed hair.
@@carsonfran I'm sure it's freedom for disabled veterans and cancer survivors with amputated limbs.
Having the option for both is freedom, not either or.
One should be free to drive and it be viable, as well as one taking passenger rail.
I wonder where all the budget hawks were when California decided to massively expand their prison system in the 80s and 90s?
Prisons are profitable.
Passenger trains are not.
Prisons are important. If only they were used to make public transportation actually safe enough to ride in. But no let the crackheads get free reign and if anyone tries to stop them they get jailed
@@Mrwizard-ck7oe The United States has the the second highest incarnation rate in the world, a little over 20% of all prisoners on the planet. How much higher does that rate have to be to make public transit "safe"?
@@fritzophrenia3146 Incarceration, not incarnation.
@@fritzophrenia3146 Not to mention a high recidivism rate
Brilliant exposure of lobby industry and media relationship to oil companies and airlines. Similar story with anti tram/ rail in Australias capital city: Canberra.
Been checking the discussions in r/Canberra. It seems that Liberals are really trying to stop light rail extensions. Why though?
I like your style in presenting this topic and offering a different perspective that makes a lot of sense. And those illustrations of the manufacturers were epic! 😀
Despite our reputation The Netherlands suffers from the same bias as the US when it comes to a lot of transit projects (though it isn't as bad as the US obviously) Our 3 most northern provinces are all connected through 1 station, so if there's a problem there it cuts off the whole north. Politicians just cannot be convinced to build a second line. They much rather invest billions into highway extensions, tunnels and extra lanes instead of new train or metro lines.
Over the last 20 years of neoliberal policies the whole intricacy of our transit system has been slowly dying as unprofitable lines to small towns and villages have been cut, making the living standards there go down and essentially killing them. Prices have been rising while service has been declining while investment into car infrastructure keeps going. It's sad, really.