Not so friendly reminder that musk specifically came up with, and pushed, for hyperloop knowing that it would never be made, as an effort to stop the development of highspeed rail in America and shift all political discussions of it because “something better is around the corner”:
As I’ve written in my book, Musk admitted to his biographer Ashlee Vance that Hyperloop was all about trying to get legislators to cancel plans for high-speed rail in California—even though he had no plans to build it. Several years ago, Musk said that public transit was “a pain in the ass” where you were surrounded by strangers, including possible serial killers, to justify his opposition.
Also: 2024 update, the total length of China’s high-speed rail tracks has now reached well over 45,000 km, or 28,000 miles, by the end of 2023.
They are additionally five years ahead of schedule and expect to double the total number within ten years. And, before someone inevitably complains about “how expensive it is”, they are turning over a net-profit of over $600M USD a year.
Projects intended for the public good don’t need to be profitable. It is disingenuous to argue that High Speed Rail is profitable in China, nor can you make the assumption that it could be profitable in other markets.
There are a lot of conflicting reports on how profitable HSR is in China, the fact that government and Industry are often one in the same and the lack of good public accounting at Chinese companies makes any reports from HSR advocates out of china questionable. After all they do want to sell their HSR technology globally.
HSR is much more difficult in the US as the rights of private property are respected and projects need to pass a much higher threshold of review for environmental impact, etc. There are many major infrastructure projects in China that turn out to be poorly planned and executed years after they have been completed.
Good thing that’s not what OP or anyone else in here was arguing. Like you said, it’s a public good. It doesn’t need to be profitable to serve the public interest. In fact, profits run counter to the public interest. So why bring it up?
We have eminent domain, and HSR has been built in Europe despite stricter envirobmental regulations.
Wow. Couldn’t happen in the US. Never.
Only OP did argue it… it was part of his closing arguments of his post he even cited a WSJ article on it.
We do have eminent domain, but it is still a much harder process than in China where all land is owned by the central government. My point was to reinforce the fact that the process of building HSR is harder and more expensive in the US than in the CCP, not that it’s impossible.
Your “Whataboutisms” are either ill informed or disingenuous. The amount of badly built infrastructure projects in China vs the US aren’t even on the same scale. Feel free to educate yourself and google “tofu dreg projects”.
My bad, it was the very last thing the OP said. But either way we’re in agreement profits aren’t the way to measure success of a public service.
Anyway, I’ve learned it’s pretty impossible to have a reasonable discussion with someone suffering from “China bad”-ism
The Big Dig didn’t cost that much in the end … about 1/4 of what Musk paid for Twitter. If a billionaire could throw money away on a vanity social media project, than the government could spend a quarter of that on critical infrastructure.
The biggest cost of the big dig was the opportunity cost. The state let the mbta (the metro and commuter rail) fall into a state of comical disrepair. Trains aren’t supposed to catch fire or derail as often as the T does
High efficiency public infrastructure doesn’t add economic value because it won’t show up on China’s domestic ledger as “profit for shareholders”. You heard it here first.
Yes, we have data to argue there is an economic benefit, but DON’T TRUST IT! Everything good you read about China is a lie and everything bad you read about China is a ten times worse.
LO-fucking-L.
In Iowa, an ongoing saga regarding a network of carbon dioxide pipelines proposed by carbon-capture companies has united predominantly conservative farmers and environmental activists on the issue of taking privately owned land for corporate gain.
Despite feeling intimidated, the Averitts wouldn’t sell their 135-acre property, along with a 100-acre commercial site the family had hoped to develop. The company, Dominion Energy, ended up claiming the land anyway via eminent domain, the power to take private land for “public use,” which in recent years has been invoked with increasing frequency by oil and gas companies seeking to build new pipelines. After Dominion and its ACP partner, Duke Energy, canceled the Atlantic Coast Pipeline in July 2020, the Averitts, who had been in the process of challenging the company in court, regained control of their land, but not without a serious financial and emotional toll. Others along the ACP’s route—often rural communities that are disproportionately BIPOC, low-income, or both—have fared even worse in the aftermath of the canceled pipeline, which was going to run from West Virginia to North Carolina, and elsewhere in the country.
And that’s just the modern stuff. Google “Robert Moses” if you really want to get a taste for American style private property protections.
Weird you would write that when in the first sentence of my post, I explicitly stated that public works projects don’t need to be profitable to be justified. But hey I’m glad we agree on something, it’s great to find common ground!
If you choose to willingly believe everything the CCP is stating, feel free to put your money where your mouth is and invest in Chinese HSR companies. It could be a great investment opportunity for you.
In Iowa, an ongoing saga regarding a network of carbon dioxide pipelines proposed by carbon-capture companies has united predominantly conservative farmers and environmental activists on the issue of taking privately owned land for corporate gain. Despite feeling intimidated, the Averitts wouldn’t sell their 135-acre property, along with a 100-acre commercial site the family had hoped to develop. The company, Dominion Energy, ended up claiming the land anyway via eminent domain, the power to take private land for “public use,” which in recent years has been invoked with increasing frequency by oil and gas companies seeking to build new pipelines. After Dominion and its ACP partner, Duke Energy, canceled the Atlantic Coast Pipeline in July 2020, the Averitts, who had been in the process of challenging the company in court, regained control of their land, but not without a serious financial and emotional toll. Others along the ACP’s route—often rural communities that are disproportionately BIPOC, low-income, or both—have fared even worse in the aftermath of the canceled pipeline, which was going to run from West Virginia to North Carolina, and elsewhere in the country. And that’s just the modern stuff. Google “Robert Moses” if you really want to get a taste for American style private property protections.
I once again wish to express appreciation to you for making my point for me. It is weird you would do that but hey thanks! The fact that the pipeline was tied and others were canceled because of the increased costs of eminent domain illustrates how it is more expensive to undertake major infrastructure projects in the US than it is in China.
If I save 10 minutes on my daily commute, I claim a profit in relative time. If I can get between home and work for $5 less a day, that profits me monetarily. You can - and plenty of papers do - demonstrate the financial benefits of a high speed transit system.
The difference between the East Asian rapid transit model and the American model is that those profits accrue primarily to the individual rather than the corporation. Claiming that Chinese/Japanese/Korean residents don’t profit from an HSR requires you to treat their time and money as valueless.
You need more on the table than “Don’t believe Chinese people, they’re all lying to you”. Hell, I’m not even sure what I’m not supposed to believe. You haven’t cited a source much less challenged one.
Don’t trust the Chinese, because Iowa corn farmers are being sold out to the American O&G industry?
Why do you think that is?
Weirder and weirder…you seem intent on misquoting me and taking my statements out of context. You left off the first part of my original statement:
Once again thank you for agreeing with me (even if you didn’t realize it) and finding common ground.
Yet again you seem intent on taking my statements out of context. Even with my exact words listed above… Are you just trying to invent straw man arguments?
No where in my sentence about the CCP did I say “Don’t believe Chinese people”, THAT IS YOUR OWN QUOTE. Quite frankly its very racist.
You can’t even cite or interpret my own text properly, why would I bother providing you with more advanced citations.
I’m not even sure where to go with this racist rhetorical question. Once again I would advise not trusting the CCP, I have no qualms with the Chinese people. I’ve done direct business with Chinese business owners and in all my personal dealings they were honest and forthright.
My original post covers why it is more expensive to build HSR in the US, I suggest going back and re-reading it.
Is there any actual reason for this?
Other than the obvious, of course.
Do you know what the C in CCP stands for?
Feel free to educate yourself.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Uyghurs_in_China
https://www.hrw.org/report/2021/04/19/break-their-lineage-break-their-roots/chinas-crimes-against-humanity-targeting
https://time.com/6302515/china-philippines-south-china-sea-aggression/
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/china-new-map-anger-india-south-china-sea-border-disputes-rcna102921
Yes, do you know how a names and acronyms work? Do you also know what the CP in the CCP stands for?
All of these have been debunked.
The the largest political party on earth. Might as well say “I don’t hate Americans, just all the Republicans plus all the Democrats”
LMAO, now you’ve moved on from internet troll to delusional.
Not true at all, I never used any hate speech that has been your M.O. I stated don’t don’t believe the CCP. You are the one engaging in hate speech and straw man arguments.
This is a great, nuanced post. Musk is still an asshat and we should still get HSR but there are a lot of practical reasons it’s harder in the US. Part of that is the lobbying of the automobile industry. Obligatory “fuck cars.”
If your point is that it’s harder and more expensive to build HSR in the US than in China, so what? The US builds massive infrastructure that’s more regulated and more expensive than the equivalent in China all the time. None of your points adequately explain why no HSR has been built in California and has only just started being built in the US broadly compared to what’s been built around the world in the last decade.
Yes that is my point.
That is the “so what”, you answered your own question.
The fact that it is more regulated and more expensive than China is the main point. There are many hurdles, from NIMBY to regulatory capture, to competition with other industries. Without the profit motive, there is no private interest in HSR. That leaves it to the public sector and without strong public support, it will fail or won’t enjoy widespread adoption. The fact that there are at least two other widely available modes (air, car) of transportation in California undermines that support. In Europe, China and Japan HSR is more successful because they do not have the car culture or required infrastructure to support that mode of transportation that we enjoy in the USA.
Oh, do you “enjoy” air and car travel in California?
I think it’s a little strange to say Europe and China and even Japan lack the car and air infrastructure the US does, car culture sure.
My response was more asking to clarify what your response to OP was. The OP meme points out an embarassing gap between how other places have built HSR much to the benefit of its people while California has yet to lay a single line after a decade of promises for a people who want and stand to benefit from HSR. You pointed out obstacles that China doesn’t face, but none of these obstacles are insurmountable and have been overcome in other US projects, so how is the decade of broken promises not an embarassing tragedy?
That is a subjective question, not very many people enjoy the actual act of traveling no matter what it is. The fact remains those alternate modes of travel exist and compete with HSR no matter what your personal feelings are.
You seem intent on inventing strawman arguments. No where in my post did I state that the infrastructure for car and air travel didn’t exist in those countries. They just don’t exist to the extent that they do in the US. The vast majority of US citizens travel by car every day. Only in certain urban centers do you have the option of alternative modes of transportation. I’m arguing that ratio is quite different in China, Europe and japan.
I’ve laid that out in both of my prior statements, you even state:
Perhaps you should reread those points.
Let me rephrase on infrastructure. Car and Air infrastructure is obviously as developed (footprint, accessibility, sophistication, etc.) in Europe and China compared to the US. Utilization proportions is going to be different because US lacks HSR. That Americans use cars more than other countries doesn’t mean those countries have less developed car infrastructure for the needs of their populations.
And again, other US infrastructure projects that deal with the same obstacles show they don’t prevent development. So they’re weak excuses. I am very open to reasonable or more specific explanations as to why HSR development in California is justifiably dead.
While I appreciate a well written and thought out response, especially one which I can broadly find common ground with you on. That isn’t at all the point you made, in your original pithy comment. See below:
US infrastructure projects do encounter similar issues that exist in Japan and Europe. Car infrastructure is far more developed and integrated within the US than in those countries. US cities (by and large) are designed around cars. Our suburbs exist because of cars. One may not agree with cars from a philosophical, environmental or economic basis. But the fact is the infrastructure is there and the majority of Americans already have the necessary vehicles to use it. Americans are also already conditioned to take their car where they want to go.
Trains do not have that existing infrastructure. Most US Cities have poor public transportation infrastructure compared to their European and Japanese cohorts. The population is also not conditioned to use it. For individuals that have already sunk money into a car for their day to day transportation, using the train is demonstrably more expensive.
HSR may be popular, but with existing entrenched alternatives that are better suited for the existing infrastructure. They just aren’t a priority. Yes European and Japanese cities have cars infrastructure in place, but the cost of ownership is higher, the availability of parking is less and ease of operation is significantly lower than in the US. There are many cases where operating a car in a city such as Paris with heavy traffic regulation just doesn’t make sense. In those environments robust HSR infrastructure can flourish.