I like your “skin of the peach” analogy, but I think the bigger problem is the finite amount of juice under the skin…and hte fact that it’s availability is artificially controlled by a few conglomerates.
With the exception of the wealthy like AL Gore that travel with cavalcades of monsterous SUVs and private jets, the problem isn’t really our standard of living but the fact the we are a very spread out continent. Commuting is the norm, and the self-sufficient communities with all the thinge you need within walking distance no longer exist. For most of the country except the cities grocery stores, clothing stores, shoe stores, and even our jobs have to be driven to. And the distances and lack of population density make mass transportation impractical and even unaffordable for the taxpayers that would have to support it.
We are a product of our times. We should stop blaming ourselves. Unless we travel in long SUV cavalcades and private jets. Those that do need to look in the mirror.
I like Michael Moore. I’ve liked his documentaries since “Roger & me” But I think his ideas for resolving this leave a lot to be desired. In a perfect Utopian society of sheep that all conform and always do the right thing, bullet trains and mass transit for everyone would be great.
But in the real world, no one would willingly give up the freedom that owning an automobile brings, nor the joy of simply being able to go for a drive whenever and wherever you want. And don’t get me started about how people would freak out about a $2/gal gas tax.
About #3 - how much might it cost to lay an entire new rail system to ‘criss crossing this country’?? Current tracks are used by all trains, freight trains having priority. So there is no room on the current tracks for these new trains.
“…there is no room on the current tracks for these new trains.”
And almost all the tracks would have to be replaced to accommodate high speed rail. And I don’t mean just the rails. All of the rail ties would to be replaced, too. That’s what was done for Amtrak Acela in the Northeast.
It is a bit disingenous isnt it? Some people try to tell the rest of us how to live and dont take their own advice-I’m glad someone finally has the wisdom to tell us we shouldn’t feel guilty about bettering our lives-when I was young, my family was a bit poverty stricken-so I dont want to do that again.But I could get by on a bit less,I would just like to see more parity.It would be swell to actually walk to the corner grocery but around here it is 45-60 minutes to any appreciable towns with any good services.
Yes I guess the ol’ peach is getting a bit dessicated-but mark my words,topsoil& freshwater will run out before petroleum-Kevin
“Why do all these great ideas involve spending my money…not their money?”
Because only you and 305,000,000 of your closest friends can fund it.
“I’m not going to pick a 5 hour train ride over a 2 hour plane trip”
“Yes you will if the train ticket costs $100 and the plane ticket costs $600…
There is no upper limit on the price of oil once it truly gets in short supply…”
Currently there is no contest between flying and taking the train. An Amtrak ticket from Boston to New York costs $264 round trip, taking 7 1/2 hours total.
Flying (South West Airlines) would cost $118 round trip, 3hrs, 55 min. total (INCLUDING A LAYOVER).
“And almost all the tracks would have to be replaced to accommodate high speed rail. And I don’t mean just the rails. All of the rail ties would to be replaced, too. That’s what was done for Amtrak Acela in the Northeast.”
This was done on a limited scale for the Acela trains. They mostly run on older track at reduced speed.
Most people have no idea how expensive a national high speed service would be. I not saying it couldn’t be done, but the expense would be through the roof.
I live in Southeast MA., and it took the state 15 years (15!) to add two additional lines to the commuter rail. The total track for both lines is 37 miles. Fifteen years to build 37 miles of track for a conventional train. Of course, much of the tie up was due to right-of-way issues, which a national high speed train would encounter by the thousands.
It’s easy to pronounce that everyone should live with five miles of his or her job. It’s far more difficult (impossible, actually) to reconcile such a limitation with:
- changing jobs
- periodic reassignment by your employer to different locations
- field work at multiple locations
- multiple jobs
- short term contract work with a new location for each job.
Most people have no idea how expensive a national high speed service would be. I not saying it couldn’t be done, but the expense would be through the roof.
And example of this.
NY has been looking into the idea of putting in a high-speed rail system form Buffalo to NYC. Right along the NYS Thruway. All new rail.
Last I heard the cost for this 400 miles stretch was well over $50B and climbing. If you’re talking THOUSANDS of miles…then that cost will be in the TRILLIONS.
Agree; the Japanese “Bullet Trains” lose $1.5 billion per year. Of course there is really no alternative in Japan; if everyone in Tokyo tried to drive to work they would end up with a 3 hour work day; the rest spent sitting in traffic.
High speed trains need to be subsidized to make sense and the costs avoided (external costs) of building more freeways, lost time, etc be compared with those losses.
Export Moore to Cuba, a country he prizes for medical care.
He needs help.