The United States lags significantly behind countries like Japan, China, and much of Europe in developing high-speed passenger rail systems. While nations abroad have invested in efficient, modern rail networks, the U.S. has remained heavily reliant on automobiles and air travel.
A key reason for public resistance to increased taxation is the perception of government inefficiency and waste. However, channeling funds into visible, impactful projects—such as high-speed rail infrastructure—can rebuild trust and demonstrate tangible benefits. This approach mirrors the success of the Interstate Highway System, initiated by the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956, which authorized $25 billion for the construction of 41,000 miles of highways, fundamentally transforming American transportation and commerce.
Public support for high-speed rail is strong. A 2024 Newsweek poll found that 60% of U.S. voters favor the construction of new high-speed rail lines, with bipartisan backing: 67% of Biden voters and 59% of Trump voters expressed support.
Investing in high-speed rail is a strategic move to modernize U.S. infrastructure, reduce carbon emissions, and enhance connectivity. By learning from past challenges and committing to efficient project management, the nation can build a transportation system that meets 21st-century needs
If we got rid of the debt-backed currency system (End the Fed), we could go back to Greenbacks, which could only be created to fund and maintain public infrastructure. If we had infrastructure-backed currency, we could do away with most state, property and school taxes. And we would have the best trains.
They’d have to be built along most current highway systems, though, so as not to slow down construction by various environmental impact concerns.
I can see high speed rail being an asset for the coasts where cities are much closer together. I do not think high speed rail would work for the middle of the country with many small towns and very few larger ones. Currently, Amtrak does not even go to many larger cities in the Midwest.
I guess you just have to consider whether or not there is significant air travel between midwestern cities and other cities. Personally, I wish there were a train from Albany to Cleveland.
This keeps getting brought up and shot down for all the negatives. The Route just connecting LA to NYC without other stops would be a 14-16 hour trip, people are going to rather fly the majority of the time. High speed rail would be decently appropriate running down coast but a transcontinental route would be extremely problematic. Who gets a stop, who doesn’t, each stop eating up time. The massive tunneling projects to get through the Rockies to maintain the same speed.
China has 35K miles of trains that go 250 mph, and new trains that go 500 mph are being tested. Building infrastructure is hard. It’s also the one job that government is supposed to do. (Cultural and social welfare should not be controlled by the government.) China used fiat money to fund construction of its rail system. No taxes. No debt. But that fiat created currency was transformed into valuable infrastructure, a true asset for the people.
The best routes to choose for a train system in the US is down the existing highway system, which is extensive.
For people who live at least two hours from any major airport, any six hour flight has an additional four hours traveling/waiting time added onto it. For me to fly non stop NY to LA, it takes about 10 hours traveling time (with a round trip to drop me off at the airport), plus extra waiting time at the airports. I’d rather take a train with a sleeping car.
California project to be complete by 2020 at $33B. $17B already invested. No tracks laid. Estimated cost to complete $135B. $100B over budget. Timeframe…who knows??? A complete joke.