Nothing has worked. High-speed rail would be a life-changer for Trick and other commuters in southwestern Ontario. Introducing electric trains that can travel kilometres an hour and more , would shrink a two-hour-plus trip from London to Toronto to an hour and 10 minutes.
The Liberal government pledged in to introduce high-speed rail to the region. By it had proposed a kilometre line with seven stations. It would be built in two stages: a Toronto to London segment by , to be followed by an extension to Windsor with a target completion goal of Amanda Stratton, the NDP candidate in Elgin—Middlesex—London, said her party wants the assessment to look at other routes and technologies, including high-performance rail — and to analyze transportation in the region to come up with an all-encompassing plan.
The Green Party would be prepared to scrap high-speed rail altogether in favour of high-performance rail, said Bronagh Morgan, the candidate in Elgin—Middlesex—London. In the Waterloo Region, three municipal governments — Kitchener, Waterloo, and the Region of Waterloo — have endorsed a request to the provincial government to move ahead not only with high-speed rail but also all-day two-way GO transit service. Some local residents and businesses, however, worry that a focus on developing high-speed rail might scuttle plans to introduce all-day two-way GO Transit to Kitchener.
Moreover, GO service expansion is likely more achievable in the short term. Even in Windsor, where high-speed trains are expected to breathe new life into the local economy, people are uncomfortable with the current proposal. For these reasons, Dilkens would rather see the whole plan implemented at once. Rail advocates say that if you build it, passengers will come. But conservatives rightly think that spending "tens of billions of dollars" on a risky proposition is a bad bet.
The Right thinks trains will turn us into socialists: Yes, rail projects can be dismissed as risky investments, says Weigel at Slate. But there's also a more complex, "cultural" reason why conservatives dislike them. They believe the primary reason liberals want to fund train travel is to "change [Americans'] behavior," towards a collectivist, European-style society where we all ride trains together. The real question is, why do liberals love rail? I find it hard to understand why liberals are so wedded to "a technology that was the future two centuries ago," says George Will at Newsweek.
Perhaps it's because trains diminish Americans' individualism. As of , highways accounted for 87 percent of passenger travel and airlines 12 percent, but Amtrak only. It is a rounding error on American transportation.
Our freight-rail system is world-class. Deregulated by the Staggers Rail Act, the freight sector has benefited from abundant private investment. Cheap and efficient, freight rail is doing booming business. Amtrak may be many things, but it is emphatically not an argument for more government investment in passenger rail.
May 18, pm. Amtrak is the DMV in an Uber world.
0コメント