Live data from Hacker News

The hunt for dollars to build the $64B bullet train

latimes.com

91–100 of 138 posts

Re: The hunt for dollars to build the $64B bullet train

#91
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We actually did this with the Chinese and Irish immigrants [1], and some rail lines would kill off workers to avoid paying them once a rail line was complete. That being said, American labor isn't the issue, Chinese already cost $4/hr and importing them costs quite a bit, whereas the labor market stateside is pretty soft in that segment. It likely would not make sense unless your good with mass executions to cut cost…

China and India do not currently execute their train construction crews, so I don't see why we would need to. If we can hire American labor for cheap (i.e. less than Davis Bacon wages) let's do that - but then don't use labor costs as an excuse why CA rail costs > 10x what Chinese rail does.

It is part of the reason why it'd cost more, we also have much higher safety standards (our rail cars are only allowed to crush in 1 inch, as compared to over a foot of crush allowed in Europe), an expensive right of way acquisition process, massive environmental impact statements ("Lets quantify the impact on the average person in this area"), and much more community involvement in the design process.

Unless we can steal land and cut corners when building, the costs are unlikely to drop much.

Re: The hunt for dollars to build the $64B bullet train

#92
post #72
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good luck with that, our safety standards for train cars in the US are head and shoulders above Europe, and in a whole different universe than India & China. Add to that that it is illegal to buy up all the land around rail lines and lease it out to subsidize the rail company, and its no wonder we have to spend more! This is before we even talk about fault lines, soil conditions, land cost, lawsuits, etc. that are in…

> our safety standards for train cars in the US are head and shoulders above Europe It's strange to regulate something you don't have. Maybe Europe has learned from actual experience with trains what standards are needed? Lets see what President Trump does with these sorts of things in his $1tn infrastructure package.

We do have rail currently, passenger rail is a thing all over the US, whether it be commuter rail, light rail, or Amtrak. Its a common misconception, I had to explain to a MS exec the other day that passenger rail service from Seattle to Portland already exists, and her plans she was going to go push had been implemented a decade ago already.

Re: Trump's infrastructure plan, I highly doubt we'll see any rail improvements, whether it be light rail or heavy gauge rail in West Virgina to unbottleneck their coal exports. He is very happy to walk back on promises he made on the campaign trail it seems, which is quite sad.

Re: The hunt for dollars to build the $64B bullet train

#94
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm afraid the same kind of security theater would apply to a high speed train, though the chances of it being driven into a building are low, it still would be a choice target. I would take a few billion out of that 64B price tag and improve air travel security to make the checkin process take less time and be less intrusive.

Uhh, you can't take a train very far off its tracks, unlike a car, truck or plane.

> the chances of it being driven into a building are low

That was a joke by the way.

Re: The hunt for dollars to build the $64B bullet train

#95
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am reminded of Thiel's op ed in the Wapo[0]: "Our government used to get things done [..] Our newest fighter jet has already been under development for more than 15 years and it costs more than 15 times as much as the Manhattan Project (adjusted for inflation), but last year it lost a dogfight to a plane from the 1970s [..] Instead of spending a fortune, Trump won the primaries by saying things that made sense to v…

>>Instead of spending a fortune, Trump won the primaries by saying things that made sense to voters. I'm afraid Peter is misinformed. Trump did spend a fortune to win the primaries. $63.3 million, to be exact. Only Ted Cruz spent more than him, at $85.8 million. You can look at the numbers by the Federal Elections Commission here: http://www.fec.gov/press/summaries/2016/tables/presidential/...

[deleted]

Re: The hunt for dollars to build the $64B bullet train

#96

I'm pretty sure the people calling it a boondoggle are correct. Obama included $3B in the 2009 stimulus package for it back in 2009. Not a single yard of track has been laid. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/07/us/high-speed-train-in-ca... http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/263782-obama-high-s... The project is hoped to finish in 2029, which is 12 years from now. For comparison, China build the Qinhuangdao–Sheny…

> (Incidentally, anyone mentioning purchasing power or worker costs doesn't know what they are talking about. Paris, Hong Kong, Spain and Singapore are all wealthy nations with costs far closer to India and China than to the US.)

You think Paris has worker costs closer to India than the US? I think you might be the one who doesn't know what you're talking about.

The minimum wage in France is $10.11 per hour (at the exchange rate right now), compared with $7.25 for the US. It is at at best 50% more than China or India (where minimum wage varies by location), and labour in France is highly unionized so workers are on more than the minimum as-is. The current Paris - Lyon HSR link in France is budgeted at $12.5 billion [1].

Your idea that a California HSR project could be done for $2-4 billion is simply unreasonable. It can't be done. You're off by an order of magnitude. Is $64 billion a lot of money? Yes. Is it too much? Probably. Can it be done for $2 billion? Absolutely not. Go look at comparable mega-projects in western Europe. Crossrail in London is about $18 billion. The Gotthard Base Tunnel was $12 billion. The Moscow-Kazan HSR railway is going to cost at least $29 billion, and that's being built with Chinese assistance.

[1] http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/snit-mak... [2] https://themoscowtimes.com/articles/chinese-to-invest-10-bil...

Re: The hunt for dollars to build the $64B bullet train

#97

I'm pretty sure the people calling it a boondoggle are correct. Obama included $3B in the 2009 stimulus package for it back in 2009. Not a single yard of track has been laid. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/07/us/high-speed-train-in-ca... http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/263782-obama-high-s... The project is hoped to finish in 2029, which is 12 years from now. For comparison, China build the Qinhuangdao–Sheny…

I don't have the study readily at hand, but per-kilometer costs for rail infrastructure are 5-10 times higher in the US than in developed countries like Spain and Germany, and 20-40 times higher than in developing countries like China and India.

Labour costs do play a major role in the 4x cost differential between developing and developed countries -- as do higher land acquisition / right-of-way re-engineering costs, and greater safety regulations. That does not, explain the 5x-10x cost differential between the rest of the developed world and the US.

That difference is explained by the fact that in the US, corruption is legal.

Transport projects are always optimised for the value they will create for the greatest number of beneficiaries. In the rest of the world, "beneficiaries" means "people who will use the transport system, or benefit from its secondary effects such as economic uplift". In the US, "beneficiaries" means "campaign contributors".

Those campaign contributors are, primarily, unions and corporations. The more union jobs are created, the more political support a project will receive. The more money goes to corporations (eg., PFI often just ensures that 20%-30% of the cost of the project ends up being interest payments to private banks.), the more political support a project will receive. Union donations swing democratic and corporate donations swing republican, so if you want bipartisan support for a project, you need to ensure that both sides are feeding generously at the trough.

So you see, in this system, the cost is the benefit, and its correlation to actual beneficiaries (eg., the general public) is tenuous at best. It's insanely corrupt. This pattern of corruption is not unique to public transport infrastructure: it can be seen most egregiously in the defence sector. I honestly believe that, left unchecked, this will undermine both America's economic and military competitiveness to an ultimately fatal degree.

(FWIW: I was born in Silicon Valley, and 10 years ago when I decided that I wanted to work on real transport infrastructure innovation, I emigrated to the UK. The US political system is simply too broken to get anything done, and offers no hope of any change in the future.)

Re: The hunt for dollars to build the $64B bullet train

#98
post #45
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am reminded of Thiel's op ed in the Wapo[0]: "Our government used to get things done [..] Our newest fighter jet has already been under development for more than 15 years and it costs more than 15 times as much as the Manhattan Project (adjusted for inflation), but last year it lost a dogfight to a plane from the 1970s [..] Instead of spending a fortune, Trump won the primaries by saying things that made sense to v…

That's the problem. There has been so much propaganda about the impossibility of government to do anything right that people don't even try to run an efficient government. But they also don't try to shrink it so money just gets wasted. This happens with healthcare, defense and infrastructure. I think this may get even worse with Trump. During Bush's the Republicans just cut taxes while spending a lot of money on war…

Yes, I think the biggest reason for that happening, as well as the obstructionism in general is the extreme partisanship that has come from the FPTP voting system.

Republicans say big government doesn't work, for which they are partly right, but they usually say it for the wrong reasons - wanting to cut some services so they can cut taxes for corporations or spend that money for Defense, not because they want to make the gov more efficient.

Then to oppose them in a partisan way, the Democrats come and say "you're wrong! big government does work! and the people need it!" So they just end up wasting a lot of money not trying to make things more efficient, because doing so would "prove the Republicans right" or something.

Same issue with electoral rigging. Republicans yell about it but mainly referring to "voter fraud" (probably a non-issue for the most part, but I haven't looked at the data), while real electoral fraud issues do exist, voter suppression being included in that. But for the most part Democrats don't call for audits and such either, because "voter fraud is not real" (even if other type of fraud is) and they think they might be helping Republicans by admitting it.

This toxic partisanship is what's ruining politics in the U.S. Everything has to be black or white, red or blue. This is why I said it before when I criticized Sam Altman here for "simply encouraging young people to vote" as an obvious political ploy to get the Democrats to win.

If Altman and others here are actually serious about democracy and fairness of the political process in the U.S., then they should be supporting stuff like removing electoral processes that don't work anymore and aren't democratic. Processes like the FPTP voting system for Congress as well as primaries and other elections (to proportional representation or RCV/approval voting for single-winner elections), as well as removing the electoral college, and the caucus system from primaries.

They should also fight to make the "money vote" equal, just like the real vote is, and fight to limit individual political campaign donations. A rich person shouldn't have a "1,000 times stronger voice" than a regular or poorer person that can donate to a campaign.

There are other real issues they can fix as well, such as fighting to eliminate electronic voting machines. Even when they aren't hacked to steal the elections have a ton of other issues like not working properly, and thus making a lot of people's vote not count, which should be a crime in itself.

Fix the fundamental problems in the U.S. electoral process and everything else take care of itself in time, including climate change, and all the other important issues. As Elon Musk says, go at the problem from a "first principles" angle, rather than try to fix the symptoms (get more young people to vote so the "bad" Republicans don't win - the point is to make it so there aren't any "bad" Republicans anymore, at least not any worse than the typical right-wing party in Europe).

Re: The hunt for dollars to build the $64B bullet train

#99
post #79
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldnt want China or India to build it for us, but I would offer Japan, Germany, or Switzerland a premium.

Uhh, they cut corners on their train cars. Where we allow 1 inch of crush when an impact happens and limited twist, they allow a foot & change, with significantly more twist allowed. There are other safety standards they are not bound to too, unlike rail in the US.

There's a fundamentally different approach to rail safety in Europe. The US mandates rail cars built like a tank, but has tons of open grade crossings and simple signaling systems. Europe builds lighter (== faster, cheaper, less track-damaging, more fuel-efficient) cars and invests a ton of time and money making sure they don't crash in the first place.

Even given that, the survivability of a crash in a modern European train is very good. The Grayrigg derailment in the UK, for example, had an Italian-built express train jump the rails at 95mph and jackknife down an embankment. One death (she was 84).

UK railways carried 64.4 billion passenger kilometers last year. The Grayrigg derailment was the last accident involving the death of a passenger. It was in 2007. How many road traffic accidents avoided by rail travel since then?

Re: The hunt for dollars to build the $64B bullet train

#100

I'm pretty sure the people calling it a boondoggle are correct. Obama included $3B in the 2009 stimulus package for it back in 2009. Not a single yard of track has been laid. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/07/us/high-speed-train-in-ca... http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/263782-obama-high-s... The project is hoped to finish in 2029, which is 12 years from now. For comparison, China build the Qinhuangdao–Sheny…

I dont think the comparison with China is fair. A big chunk of that $64b is due to permitting and land acquisition costs; China's solution when building the Three Gorges Dam was to forcibly relocate over a million people. Totalitarian states have options that are not available to a functioning democracy when it comes to constructing huge infrastructure projects.
Post reply on HN