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.
@ISIDEWITH2wks2W
Yes
@9MNM5PL 1wk1W
High speed rails are so efficient in fact, that transportation researchers found that they can transport passengers at a competative rate to flying.
@ISIDEWITH2wks2W
No
@9MNM5PL 1wk1W
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.
@9L4Z23BIndependent 1wk1W
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
@9N8XVGK2 days2D
Yes, but only in areas where such a development is economically beneficial, such as the northeast corridor.
@9N8JFLXRepublican2 days2D
Yes, as long as the subsidies were monitored and did not result in a higher profit for the real company.
@9N6ZRYNRepublican3 days3D
I think that the government has put enough money into it already. I think that the problem is the people who are driving.
@9N6RHRB3 days3D
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.
@9N5SLVHLibertarian4 days4D
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.
@9N552QS4 days4D
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.
@9N4KBVF4 days4D
No. The government isn't capable of doing anything without massively overspending with low quality work.
@9N4DF4T4 days4D
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.
@9N28HDMIndependent5 days5D
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.
@9MYS7FH6 days6D
I feel like it would cause too much construction/damage to the area and will create more havoc in the community.
@9MYMGYN6 days6D
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.
@9MSGYVD1wk1W
No, instead we should deregulate the rail industry so that private companies are more likely and able to invest in these forms of transportation.
@9MPCXDD1wk1W
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%
@9MNVNTT1wk1W
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 1wk1W
Yes, to make touring more affordable and easier for traveling to other parts to the US.
@9MNBK5MProgressive2wks2W
Yes but require that they be developed to run using clean, renewable energy
@9MN5B4L2wks2W
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 2wks2W
Yes, it would be a better way to improve congestion within roads, and make travelling easier and more accessible to others
@9K99V29 2wks2W
Yes, and encourage increased development in intracity transport
@9MM84RK 2wks2W
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.
@9MM6FRHConstitution2wks2W
Not until they’ve proven they can actually get the job done according to their set project timeframe.
@9MM5PH42wks2W
Yes, but do not waste resources on our infrastructure.
@9MLY32X 2wks2W
Yes, but ensure safety regulations and protecting the environments it impacts.
@Dry550Independent 2wks2W
Yes, make it affordable for people to use, and the investment is worth it to minimize time it takes to travel
@9MLF5VJ2wks2W
No, I feel like if someone is gonna do something dumb on the highway they have to pay the consequences if something happens.
@9ML95N2Independent2wks2W
This is a state level issue that should be decided by the voters
@9ML8J6BProgressive2wks2W
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 2wks2W
No, nationalize railroads and deveĺope high speed rail
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...
