Is High Speed Rail a good idea?

[The Brain]

There are only two profitable rail lines in the entire world. 

Source?

[Hansmeister]

There are only two profitable rail lines in the entire world. 

Source?

Sorry, I just read an article on that a few days ago, but I don't remember where.  I found it interesting that those two particular routes would be profitable.

[Habbaku]

There are only two profitable rail lines in the entire world. 

Source?

Sorry, I just read an article on that a few days ago, but I don't remember where.  I found it interesting that those two particular routes would be profitable.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703389004575033672230734364.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopOpinion

[Habbaku]

Note that it is actually only two successful high-speed rail lines.  Traditional rail is, of course, profitable in many places.

[The Brain]

Note that it is actually only two successful high-speed rail lines.  Traditional rail is, of course, profitable in many places.

That's better.

[DGuller]

If we want some automated transit system to compete with the automobile the only sensible one would be an individual rail transit.  elevated rail lines connecting neighborhoods to commercial districts along already existing streets with customers ordering individual cars as needed via cell phone to the nearest stop in their neighborhood.  Top speed of about 35 mph would suffice.  It would be much more useful at a similar price.

The first part is predictable blah-blah, but this sounds interesting.  Just yesterday I ran into the PRT concept on the Wiki as I was reading up on mass transit due to this thread.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_rapid_transit  It sounds like an interesting concept, and it's a shame that such public works are not pursued more aggressively.

[The Brain]

Note that it is actually only two successful high-speed rail lines.  Traditional rail is, of course, profitable in many places.

That's better.

Oh and this also means that X2000 isn't considered high speed rail. IN YOUR FACE DUQUE

[Barrister]

Note that it is actually only two successful high-speed rail lines.  Traditional rail is, of course, profitable in many places.

Yeah, I scratched my head at the initial statement, as I know some freight rail lines are enormously profitable.  The clarification makes sense though.

[Hansmeister]

Note that it is actually only two successful high-speed rail lines.  Traditional rail is, of course, profitable in many places.

Thanks, that's the problem with quoting from memory.  Since we're talking about high-speed rail in the US it is safe to assume that these proposals, if carried out, would just create another huge fiscal hole.

[Hansmeister]

Note that it is actually only two successful high-speed rail lines.  Traditional rail is, of course, profitable in many places.

Yeah, I scratched my head at the initial statement, as I know some freight rail lines are enormously profitable.  The clarification makes sense though.

Freight lines are not passenger lines.  Of course freight-lines are often very profitable.  There aren't any profitable passenger rail lines in the US, the only one approaching the break-even point is the northeast corridor from Boston to DC.  the rest are incredibly wealth-destroying entities.

[The Brain]

If anyone is really interested in Swedish rail and its profits check out this link: http://www.sj.se/content/1/c6/11/42/61/SJ%20Eng_Financial%20report.pdf

[alfred russel]

Indeed, the lefts fascination with mass transit has an aspect of religious fanaticism

What is with the trend of conservatives saying their opponents' beliefs have religious characteristics? Is this new or did I just not notice before?

[Faeelin]

I do find Han's sudden willingness to look abroad for examples interesting. Quick, somebody find out how much European countries spend on health care, and its effectiveness compared to the American system.

[Duque de Bragança]

Note that it is actually only two successful high-speed rail lines.  Traditional rail is, of course, profitable in many places.

That's better.

Oh and this also means that X2000 isn't considered high speed rail. IN YOUR FACE DUQUE

For the US, it is Not France

Only 2  high-speed rail lines profitable ? Really ?
On the other hand, it's a WSJ opinion piece about a plan by a Democrat president so it shouldn't take at face value...
I honestly cannot believe the Paris-Londres/Bruxelles links are not making a profit. TGV Est between Paris and Strasbourg quickly became popular and the high-speed line does not reach Strasbourg yet.

Maybe he meant by "have ever broken even" saturated because that's the problem between Paris and Lyon (bi level carriages have been used to increase capacity). I wouldn't be surprised if the Tokyo-Osaka is saturated as well.

"The LGV Sud-Est from Paris to Lyon is the busiest high-speed line in France, and since its opening in 1981 it has rapidly reached capacity. The mitigation of this problem was to run two trainsets coupled together in multiple-unit (MU) configuration, but even this has not provided enough capacity, and has the added disadvantage of requiring very long station platforms. If you can't make a train longer or wider, then the remaining option is to make it taller; hence the TGV Duplex, with passenger seating on two levels, and 45% more passenger capacity than an equivalent single-level TGV."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNCF_TGV_Duplex

[Zanza]

Running at full capacity does not mean that the TGV is profitable. It could still run at a loss.

In fact, if SNCF was not government-owned, the reasonable thing to do would be to rise prices so much that they can sell exactly as many tickets as they have seats available. That would increase their income after all.