High-speed rail networks are fast train systems that connect major cities, providing a quick and efficient alternative to car and air travel. Proponents argue that it can reduce travel times, lower carbon emissions, and stimulate economic growth through improved connectivity. Opponents argue that it requires significant investment, may not attract enough users, and funds could be better used elsewhere.
@9N8XVGK1wk1W
Yes, but only in areas where such a development is economically beneficial, such as the northeast corridor.
@9NSB24N5hrs5H
No, the government should create high-speed rail projects with minimum safety, business capacity, quality, and environmental requirements that would be given to the private sector to openly bid on publicly. The cheapest qualified bid must be approved to prevent bias. Companies may only win a limited amount of government projects per year based on value to prevent an oligarchy of private contractors winning projects.
@9NPDDHYLibertarian2 days2D
if the government wants the development of high speed rail networks, and is leaving it to the state on whether they want said speedway or can find a fair and reasonable way to get it functioning to how large the US is. Give states incentives to do so, incentives that not only build said speedway but also allows for other programs to be made in the benefit of the people.
@9NP3WG22 days2D
i think it should be very few to none in every state. or make it only to go cross state/country and few locations.
@9NNC8HX2 days2D
Yes, if they get rid of other public transportation as a way to replace it and truly make its impact effective
@9NM5TMBIndependent3 days3D
I support the development of high-speed rail if it will be used by enough people to make it worthwhile.
@9NKVN4C4 days4D
The expensiveness of the project wouldn't regain its expense within a new borns lifetime. The vist of the tickets and it would only extend over to the six digit money makers.
@9NKDSKX4 days4D
once we fix homelessness, crime, debt, illegal immigration, is when I think we should work on this and other modes of transportation
@9NHLT535 days5D
Yes, if the taxpayer who does not use the speed rail have to pay yearly taxes. If it will affect taxpayers that do not use the rail then No.
Yes as to capital spending for needing rail routes, some initial capital for rolling stock, no for operating expense.
@9NH66J95 days5D
The government should offer low interest rate loans to credit worthy companies that have the ability to produce such a project. Pocketing government money for additional profit isn't acceptable.
@9NGYM5M5 days5D
I feel like this could be a good option in the future but there is a lot to fix currently that isn't this.
@9NGPSGW5 days5D
the decision to provider such subsides should be made after careful consideration of potential benefits and cost
@9NGFNMT5 days5D
The government should not provide subsides for the development of highspeed rail networks unless the citizens have free excise for the at least 10 years.
@9NFW5SCLibertarian6 days6D
No, perhaps this would be acceptable if the government had funds available that were not stolen tax dollars and had not already driven itself into such a dysfunctional level of debt, but the current reality is they have no funds available for this.
@9NFRJYD6 days6D
Yes, but only if politicians are prevented from meddling in the design of the system and supplier selection.
@97LJVRW 6 days6D
No. Look at what happened to the high-speed rail project in California as the poster child for the result: far over budget and practically never really started construction.
@9NCWKS81wk1W
Only if the need would ooffer better long term solutions on a county to county basis on the state level.
@9N8JFLXRepublican1wk1W
Yes, as long as the subsidies were monitored and did not result in a higher profit for the real company.
@9N6ZRYNRepublican1wk1W
I think that the government has put enough money into it already. I think that the problem is the people who are driving.
@9N6RHRB1wk1W
As I see the benefit, it should run throughout communities, but it also begs to ask, what about roads and stations, as many former train stations are in bad shape.
@9N5SLVHLibertarian2wks2W
No, simply because America is past the point of return, we do not have the necessary budget to meet the demands for new high speed rail lines, these lines will also very likely not be profitable for decades, leading to more inflation of the currency.
@9N552QS2wks2W
Yes, as a dollar-matching scheme, with the Federal Government as an equal partner, with corporations and other bodies; half of all revenue from HSR networks shall then go to the Federal Government.
@9N4KBVF2wks2W
No. The government isn't capable of doing anything without massively overspending with low quality work.
@9N4DF4T2wks2W
No, and yes. It's unhealthy for the environment and can spread disease, but if its cleaned well as well as environmental friendly I see no problem, but most aren't. So, no.
@9N28HDMIndependent2wks2W
Polling in population centers should be done to determine where development should be done for high speed rail and to not penalize areas where it is not wanted by the general public.
@9MYS7FH2wks2W
I feel like it would cause too much construction/damage to the area and will create more havoc in the community.
@9MYMGYN2wks2W
Yes, but great care should be taken to avoid using eminent domain to displace landowners, whenever possible. If they must be displaced, pay them well above market value for their trouble.
@9MSGYVD2wks2W
No, instead we should deregulate the rail industry so that private companies are more likely and able to invest in these forms of transportation.
@9MPCXDD2wks2W
Every attempt in the U.S. to subsidize high-speed rail infrastructure has turned out to be a money hole. Like the California High-Speed Rail Authority! If the organization being subsidized could actually produce results, then I'd be all for it. 100%
@9MNVNTT2wks2W
A survey should be held across the country that shows how many citizens would be interested in using these high-speed rail networks, and a decision should be made based on those numbers.
@9MNJHQL 3wks3W
Yes, to make touring more affordable and easier for traveling to other parts to the US.
@9L4Z23BIndependent 3wks3W
Yes, the federal government should issue grants and PABs for states with projects on designated high speed corridors (186+ MPH MAS, 155 MPH Average Speed) and higher speed corridors (110-125 MPH MAS, 90-110 MPH Average Speed). States should utilize P3s to help increase efficiency of project development
@9MNBK5MProgressive3wks3W
Yes but require that they be developed to run using clean, renewable energy
@9MN5B4L3wks3W
We should continue researching the implementation of high-speed rail to determine if it will be economically viable to invest in the technology.
@9MMY27HWomen’s Equality 3wks3W
Yes, it would be a better way to improve congestion within roads, and make travelling easier and more accessible to others
@9K99V29 3wks3W
Yes, and encourage increased development in intracity transport
@9MM84RK 3wks3W
I feel that they could do this but there would still be many who would rather drive or do something else because it might be cheaper to drive as a family rather than to buy 4 train tickets.
@9MM6FRHConstitution3wks3W
Not until they’ve proven they can actually get the job done according to their set project timeframe.
@9MM5PH43wks3W
Yes, but do not waste resources on our infrastructure.
@9MLY32X 3wks3W
Yes, but ensure safety regulations and protecting the environments it impacts.
@Dry550Independent 3wks3W
Yes, make it affordable for people to use, and the investment is worth it to minimize time it takes to travel
@9MLF5VJ3wks3W
No, I feel like if someone is gonna do something dumb on the highway they have to pay the consequences if something happens.
@9ML95N2Independent3wks3W
This is a state level issue that should be decided by the voters
@9ML8J6BProgressive3wks3W
YES - public high speed rail networks are valuable, provide jobs and must be affordable for people to actually use. However, there are other problems that need to be solved - such as train station access, parking, not becoming congested terminals like city airports.
@RoryAveryJs 3wks3W
No, nationalize railroads and deveĺope high speed rail
@ISIDEWITH3wks3W
No
@9MNM5PL 3wks3W
Do high speed rails not provide the most efficient, cost effective method of public transportation? Why should the federal government not subsidize the developement of infrastructure that moves human capital safely, and efficiently.
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
