Here's proof Japan is still stuck in the technological dark ages

[HeatDeath 430]

Japan has an enormously high population density - the vast vast majority of it's population lives in extremely dense urban zones. Their cities are extremely small and tightly packed for their populations, which are enormous. Moreover, their major cities are relatively short distances from each other. These factors make Japan one of the best countries in the world for train infrastructure. Great Britain, and to a slightly lesser extent Western Europe are good targets for rail as well, for the same reasons.

The US is the opposite: sprawling low density suburbs, and major cities literally days apart, even by high speed rail. Outside of a few very specific areas: San Diego-LA-Las Vegas, BosWash, Dallas-Ft.Worth, and Tacoma-Seattle-Vancouver, massive national passenger rail makes no economic sense. That's why there isn't any to speak of.

In Canada, Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal would be a logical place to install high-speed rail, with links perhaps up to Quebec City and down to New York, but that would require Canada to have a whole bunch of investment capital it just doesn't have at the moment [and frankly, hasn't had since the 60's].

[^_^ 5,021]

Outside of a few very specific areas: San Diego-LA-Las Vegas, BosWash, Dallas-Ft.Worth, and Tacoma-Seattle-Vancouver, massive national passenger rail makes no economic sense. That's why there isn't any to speak of.

Dallas-Ft Worth? Really, dense enough?

[HeatDeath 430]

Dallas-Ft Worth? Really, dense enough?

I could be wrong about that. It just came to mind as one of the few American urban areas big enough [in physical area] to use it and populous enough to even possibly economically justify it. If their combination of area and population can't justify it, certainly no other single-city urban in the US could.

[^_^ 5,021]

I could be wrong about that. It just came to mind as one of the few American urban areas big enough [in physical area] to use it and populous enough to even possibly economically justify it. If their combination of area and population can't justify it, certainly no other single-city urban in the US could.

Greater NYC already has an extensive and multi-modal network of mass transit options under a mix of public and private ownership, all of it heavily used. It's not high speed though.

Edited February 18, 2011 by \

[Dan and Judy 614]

It gives the Japanese men a chance to rub up against strange women on the way to work. It's a cultural thing.

[^_^ 5,021]

It gives the Japanese men a chance to rub up against strange women on the way to work. It's a cultural thing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXeO1fXsbcQ

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Required by who?

constitution.

don't listen to that racist german.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

oops double post

Edited February 18, 2011 by John Galt

[^_^ 5,021]

constitution.

Interesting. And strange.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

constitution.

Really? Can you substantiate that? As far as I remember, the big push in infrastructure spending was more the result of Japan's economic collapse in the late 80's - as a way to revive it's struggling economy. With mixed results due to many projects being funded that had no real future economic benefit but were more a case of putting people to work diging holes and then fill them in again. I'd really be interested to see some substance behind your claim rather than your typical cheap shots.

[HeatDeath 430]

It gives the Japanese men a chance to rub up against strange women on the way to work. It's a cultural thing.

If that was the goal, I have to call epic fail. I've been on Osaka's subway system during morning and evening rush hour. It's a bit of a sausage-fest.