Plans develop for high-speed rail in the PNW • Hacker News Board

Re: Plans develop for high-speed rail in the PNW

#271

Post by Karrot_Kream » Sat, Jul 29, 2023, 8:28 PM UTC

fnordpiglet wrote: post #212

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem in NYC [1] is that 21.4% of people have > 60 min commutes, which probably is the same problem with Tokyo and many US cities: COL is really high so commuters come in from long distances to commute. Fukuoka has a 30 min average commute time, closer to Seattle. Moreover the real important thing when it comes to commute time is that driving requires active participation. Sure you can listen to whatever music…

When I spent 10 years in Nyc everything is at least 45 minutes away no matter where you are. The walks between stations can be long, wait times are long, travel times slow. If you live far out on a local line it can be longer for sure. But even going downtown from UES is a 45 minute affair. I rarely left my neighborhood other than for work because I had to plan 2 hours of round trip travel. That sucks up most of a da…

I'm not sure what to say, your lifestyle in NYC sounds nothing like the lifestyles of any of my friends who live in the area, even those who live in Hoboken or Jersey City.

Re: Plans develop for high-speed rail in the PNW

#272

Post by cyberax » Sat, Jul 29, 2023, 8:42 PM UTC

bugglebeetle wrote: post #106

cyberax wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole WA is just around 7 million people. Portland area is around 2. Yet the distance between Seattle and Portland is the same as between Frankfurt and Munich. There's simply not enough traffic to justify a train. Another lane on I-5 would help a lot more.

> Another lane on I-5 would help a lot more. That rarely works out how you would think: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand

I fucking hate that argument.

Induced demand is a sign of success: it allows more people to move comfortably between points, and it increases the overall economic activity by inducing more trips.

The only reasonable part of that argument is that lane expansion doesn't increase the average _speed_. And this is indeed true. Instead of lane expansion we ideally should just increase the interconnectivity by building new roads.

In the case of the Puget Sound, I-605 that would bypass I-405 bottleneck is sorely needed.

Re: Plans develop for high-speed rail in the PNW

#273

Post by cyberax » Sat, Jul 29, 2023, 8:43 PM UTC

jaggederest wrote: post #115

bugglebeetle wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Another lane on I-5 would help a lot more. That rarely works out how you would think: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand

To play devil's advocate, induced demand is a good thing - more people getting to go where they want to go. I'm all in favor of HSR but you have to balance the viewpoint - roads are a good thing, in general, they just should be a (much smaller) part of the mix instead of the only answer. Most freight should move by boat and rail, most passengers should move by rail and bus, and roads should be mostly for adhoc trips…

Why should buses EVER be a part of any solution?

They are terrible, and always will be. It's simple math: buses have to either have long intervals, or be horribly wasteful (and thus too expensive).

At the moment, the most realistic solution is to just wait 10 years for the self-driving cars to mature and then build infrastructure around them.

Re: Plans develop for high-speed rail in the PNW

#274

Post by jaggederest » Sat, Jul 29, 2023, 8:47 PM UTC

cyberax wrote: post #273

jaggederest wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To play devil's advocate, induced demand is a good thing - more people getting to go where they want to go. I'm all in favor of HSR but you have to balance the viewpoint - roads are a good thing, in general, they just should be a (much smaller) part of the mix instead of the only answer. Most freight should move by boat and rail, most passengers should move by rail and bus, and roads should be mostly for adhoc trips…

Why should buses EVER be a part of any solution? They are terrible, and always will be. It's simple math: buses have to either have long intervals, or be horribly wasteful (and thus too expensive). At the moment, the most realistic solution is to just wait 10 years for the self-driving cars to mature and then build infrastructure around them.

Is that the most realistic? Because I don't think they're ever going to get L5 automation to work.

Re: Plans develop for high-speed rail in the PNW

#275

Post by 23B1 » Sat, Jul 29, 2023, 8:51 PM UTC

mynameisvlad wrote: post #254

23B1 wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

They clearly did read it. And the actual report, which is the thing that really matters. You clearly have not, on the other hand. Nor do you have the most basic understanding of the purpose of HSR, which you wouldn’t even need to read the report to know. It’s ok to say “I’m wrong”, you know. > Let me ask you a different question, since you brought up air travel; what sort of ticket/buyer do you think accounts for the…

You've confused ticket volume with profits.

Re: Plans develop for high-speed rail in the PNW

#276

Post by specialist » Sat, Jul 29, 2023, 8:52 PM UTC

s1artibartfast wrote: post #246

specialist wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. Those massive land grants begat timber companies. Which in turn begat real estate and development companies. The story's similar for ranching, mining, power, telecommunications, etc, etc. TLDR: The government is the source of all wealth. Which is terrific. So long as the government's ongoing investments are repaid in kind.

>TLDR: The government is the source of all wealth. Which is terrific. So long as the government's ongoing investments are repaid in kind. Governments are important but I think this is terrible logic. The government didn't use magic to create the land out of nothing. It also seems to imply some sort of Perpetual debt, which can never be repaid. Like a parent that claim stuff on everything a child makes or creates. If…

I don't understand your objection.

You don't like the mental model (worldview)?

I gleened it from conservative economist Kevin Phillips' book Wealth & Democracy. I assume it's bog standard economic world building. Nothing I've read since has contradicted Phillips. (I'm noob, not some kind of economist. Though I did get to chat with Phillips one time and I felt like I understood his answers.)

What mental model do you prefer?

Or maybe you object to the implications ("logic") of this model. That notions like property, wealth, and government are social constructs. Just shared fictions which hopefully make the world a little bit more predictable (legible), without too much extra effort, so we can all muddle thru our daily lives.

Re: Plans develop for high-speed rail in the PNW

#277

Post by 23B1 » Sat, Jul 29, 2023, 8:55 PM UTC

a2xd94 wrote: post #264

23B1 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a hundred different ways to disincentivize commutes – without subsidies either: simple tax incentives.

I'm still unclear on how that could be accomplished. Its pretty obvious that most companies larger than startups are unwilling to fully embrace remote work and need to make themselves feel good about the money they invest into their leases/real estate and so force their employees into at least 2/3 days in office. Are you proposing that the government just give money to businesses so long as they keep their workers at…

Not just businesses but individuals too. And tax incentives ≠ giving money away.

Re: Plans develop for high-speed rail in the PNW

#278

Post by cyberax » Sat, Jul 29, 2023, 8:57 PM UTC

jaggederest wrote: post #274

cyberax wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should buses EVER be a part of any solution? They are terrible, and always will be. It's simple math: buses have to either have long intervals, or be horribly wasteful (and thus too expensive). At the moment, the most realistic solution is to just wait 10 years for the self-driving cars to mature and then build infrastructure around them.

Is that the most realistic? Because I don't think they're ever going to get L5 automation to work.

Erm. Waymo exists already. It's not perfect, but it works. You can get a ride in an actual human-free taxi in SF.

Extending Waymo to handle ALL possible situations autonomously (you put in "New York" in the address field and the car drives you there from Seattle) is probably a too big ask, but working within a pre-mapped area on semi-fixed routes seems plausible.

Re: Plans develop for high-speed rail in the PNW

#279

Post by specialist » Sat, Jul 29, 2023, 9:00 PM UTC

s1artibartfast wrote: post #246

specialist wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. Those massive land grants begat timber companies. Which in turn begat real estate and development companies. The story's similar for ranching, mining, power, telecommunications, etc, etc. TLDR: The government is the source of all wealth. Which is terrific. So long as the government's ongoing investments are repaid in kind.

>TLDR: The government is the source of all wealth. Which is terrific. So long as the government's ongoing investments are repaid in kind. Governments are important but I think this is terrible logic. The government didn't use magic to create the land out of nothing. It also seems to imply some sort of Perpetual debt, which can never be repaid. Like a parent that claim stuff on everything a child makes or creates. If…

PS- What's your view of the Homestead Act and such? Why would the govt just give people land, vs selling it?

Re: Plans develop for high-speed rail in the PNW

#280

Post by dkjaudyeqooe » Sat, Jul 29, 2023, 9:07 PM UTC

cyberax wrote: post #273

jaggederest wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To play devil's advocate, induced demand is a good thing - more people getting to go where they want to go. I'm all in favor of HSR but you have to balance the viewpoint - roads are a good thing, in general, they just should be a (much smaller) part of the mix instead of the only answer. Most freight should move by boat and rail, most passengers should move by rail and bus, and roads should be mostly for adhoc trips…

Why should buses EVER be a part of any solution? They are terrible, and always will be. It's simple math: buses have to either have long intervals, or be horribly wasteful (and thus too expensive). At the moment, the most realistic solution is to just wait 10 years for the self-driving cars to mature and then build infrastructure around them.

It'd be a shame if makers of self-driving cars stuck to actual cars and single trips.

Something in between that and buses might be very efficient and practical, especially for things like work commutes, visits to the supermarket and the like. Having say 6 or 8 seats and picking up multiple parties who are heading in the same direction or going to roughly the same destination. It would likely be quicker than waiting for a single trip car and definitely cheaper. Additionally it would likely reduce the number of autonomous vehicles on the road and use less resources.