Anything but trains.

  • ChicoSuave@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    14 hours ago

    The reason for busses is simple and seems to be ignored by literally everyone.

    The private property between SF and LA keeps increasing in price so the costs for the project are in the billions before anything is even built. The signing of the land is in the billions. Now build a rail in Trump’s economy and it becomes nearly impossible to succeed at anything rail.

    Busses builds an audience that can be used to later justify rail to get buses off the road. Americans hate big trucks on the road but there they are anyway. It’s a slow burn turn to morph the car brain into train brain.

    • teft@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Weird how cities used eminent domain to bulldoze entire black and Hispanic neighborhoods to build highways yet can’t use eminent domain to get some rich assholes overpriced real estate for this.

      • Mac@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        The city would lose the legal battle due to The Rich’s lawyers.

    • bryndos@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Same reason we can’t have it in the UK. We won’t just pass a bill to CPO the land off (or take something else off) all the tory cunts at a nominal /cost price instead of market price.

      Or even if we do we’ll elect tories back in before it can be built, and give them the land back, probably for less than they were already compensated.

      I think almost all of our railway routes were set out in 1800s when parliament and financiers went nuts for trains. We’re just lucky enough that some low speed rail survived the 50s-90s when they tried to wipe them out totally. Even the carpilled couldn’t fly that hard in the face of facts.