你認(rèn)為美國(guó)未來(lái)會(huì)擁有像歐洲、中國(guó)和日本那樣規(guī)模的高速客運(yùn)鐵路網(wǎng)絡(luò)嗎

Do you think the USA will ever have a high speed passenger rail network on the scale of what is found in Europe, China, and Japan?

2025-02-19 Rayla 5553 25 5 收藏糾錯(cuò)&舉報(bào)

譯文簡(jiǎn)介

網(wǎng)友：是的，這是可能的。美國(guó)擁有世界上排名前兩的技術(shù)學(xué)院（加州理工學(xué)院、麻省理工學(xué)院），而中國(guó)許多壯觀的摩天大樓都是由美國(guó)建筑師設(shè)計(jì)的。

正文翻譯

Scott Wood
Yes, it is possible. The USA has the top two technical institutes in the world (Cal Tech, MIT) and many of the spectacular skyscrapers in China were designed by American architects.

是的，這是可能的。美國(guó)擁有世界上排名前兩的技術(shù)學(xué)院（加州理工學(xué)院、麻省理工學(xué)院），而中國(guó)許多壯觀的摩天大樓都是由美國(guó)建筑師設(shè)計(jì)的。

Thus, The USA has the talented professionals to construct high speed rail. Much of The USA does not have the population density to support high speed rail. It could work in the north east, the south east and California. The rest of The USA is too sparsely populated to make high speed rail affordable. If high speed rail between Philadelphia and New York City had 10,000 passengers per day, high speed rail between Memphis and Oklahoma City would have 300 passengers per day. To make the second route operate, it would cost 30 times more, per passenger, and most people would not want to pay that much. The sophisticated trains that China is famous for travel between huge cities, some of which are more populated than New York City.

因此，美國(guó)擁有建設(shè)高速鐵路所需的人才。但美國(guó)的大部分地區(qū)人口密度不足以支持高速鐵路。它在東北部、東南部和加利福尼亞州可能會(huì)有效。美國(guó)其他地方人口稀少，無(wú)法使高速鐵路具有經(jīng)濟(jì)可行性。如果費(fèi)城和紐約市之間的高速鐵路每天有10,000名乘客，那么孟菲斯和俄克拉荷馬市之間的高速鐵路每天只有300名乘客。要使第二條線路運(yùn)營(yíng)，每名乘客的成本將是第一條線路的30倍，大多數(shù)人不會(huì)愿意支付如此高的費(fèi)用。中國(guó)以其先進(jìn)的列車(chē)聞名，這些列車(chē)在大城市之間行駛，其中一些城市的人口比紐約市還要多。旅行的總費(fèi)用由乘客人數(shù)分?jǐn)?，因此每位乘客的費(fèi)用較低。

The total cost of the trip is divided by the number of passengers, thus it is cheaper, per passenger. In summary, it is possible to have high speed rail in The USA, but only realistic in three parts of The USA.

總結(jié)來(lái)說(shuō)，美國(guó)有可能擁有高速鐵路，但僅在美國(guó)的三個(gè)地區(qū)實(shí)現(xiàn)是現(xiàn)實(shí)的。

評(píng)論翻譯

David Johnson
The future of rail in the USA will be very much like today.
The countries that OP named as examples are smaller than many US states.
Japan's population is concentrated heavily in a single urban strip on its west coast, essentially a single megacity that is hundreds of miles long and only a few miles wide, in a country roughly the size of California.

美國(guó)鐵路的未來(lái)將與今天非常相似。
OP提到的那些國(guó)家比許多美國(guó)州要小。
日本的城市人口主要集中在其西海岸的一個(gè)狹長(zhǎng)地帶，基本上是一個(gè)幾百英里長(zhǎng)、只有幾英里寬的超級(jí)大城市，面積大致相當(dāng)于加利福尼亞州。

France is only three times the square mileage of the typical state, but at 335 per square mile has about 10 times the population density of the USA. Paris, population 2.5 million, covers 42 square miles. A US city of 50,000 covers almost as much land at 35 square miles. A metropolitan area of 500,000 covers over 3000 square miles, and has no concentrators to make rail effective. A city that Americans consider too crowded has a population density of 125 people per square mile. Travel to and from rail heads would eat up any savings that occurred in the actual travel.

法國(guó)的面積是典型美國(guó)州的三倍，但每平方英里335人，人口密度是美國(guó)的10倍。巴黎人口250萬(wàn)，面積42平方英里。而一座人口為5萬(wàn)的美國(guó)城市的面積幾乎和巴黎一樣，達(dá)到35平方英里。一個(gè)50萬(wàn)人口的都市區(qū)則占地超過(guò)3000平方英里，沒(méi)有足夠的集中人口來(lái)使鐵路高效運(yùn)行。美國(guó)人認(rèn)為過(guò)于擁擠的城市，其人口密度為每平方英里125人。往返于鐵路車(chē)站的旅程將消耗掉在實(shí)際旅行中節(jié)省的所有時(shí)間。

The USA is sparsely populated - average less than 35 people per square mile, with areas larger than some countries population density being measured in square miles per person.

美國(guó)人口稀疏——平均每平方英里不到35人，部分地區(qū)的面積甚至大于一些國(guó)家，而人口密度幾乎是“每人幾平方英里”。

The largest driver for HSR is business travel (no one goes to us cities for recreation, we leave them). But the need for business travel has been reduced enormously. Since COVID-19, I have not had a single customer ask for on-site work - it's all remote. The customers get better service and better prices. Meetings are handled through zoom, WebEx, or one of their many competitors.
HSR is increasingly looking like a 20th century solution to a 19th century problem that is simply sidestepped by the 21st century solution of Internet.

高速鐵路的最大驅(qū)動(dòng)因素是商務(wù)旅行（沒(méi)人專(zhuān)程去美國(guó)城市度假，我們才是離開(kāi)它們）。但商務(wù)旅行的需求已經(jīng)大幅減少。自從新冠疫情以來(lái)，我沒(méi)有遇到過(guò)任何客戶(hù)要求現(xiàn)場(chǎng)工作——一切都是遠(yuǎn)程進(jìn)行?？蛻?hù)能夠獲得更好的服務(wù)和價(jià)格。會(huì)議通過(guò)Zoom、WebEx或其他競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手進(jìn)行。
高速鐵路越來(lái)越像是20世紀(jì)的解決方案，針對(duì)的是19世紀(jì)的問(wèn)題，而這個(gè)問(wèn)題在21世紀(jì)的互聯(lián)網(wǎng)解決方案面前已經(jīng)被繞過(guò)了。

Blair Blakely
No, not on the scale of other nations.
The topography and population density and the sheer size of the U.S. as well as the needs and wants of it’s people made passenger rail service, much less high speed rail, a thing of the past in the U.S.

不，不能與其他國(guó)家的規(guī)模相比。
美國(guó)的地形、人口密度以及龐大的面積，再加上民眾的需求和愿望，使得客運(yùn)鐵路服務(wù)，尤其是高速鐵路，成為美國(guó)過(guò)去的事情。

In the first half of the 20th century passenger rail service was common but developments of the automobile and expansion of a highway network across the nation caused passenger rail service to fade in the 1950s except in highly populated areas, mostly on the eastern seaboard. Then, the airplane became the mode of choice for travel within the U.S. over longer distances when speed was important.

在20世紀(jì)的前半葉，客運(yùn)鐵路服務(wù)很常見(jiàn)，但汽車(chē)的普及和全國(guó)高速公路網(wǎng)絡(luò)的擴(kuò)展導(dǎo)致了鐵路服務(wù)在1950年代逐漸衰退，除了在人口密集的地區(qū)，主要是在東海岸。隨后，飛機(jī)成為了美國(guó)境內(nèi)長(zhǎng)途旅行的首選方式，因?yàn)樗俣雀鼮橹匾?/b>

Today, the combination of demand and cost makes high speed rail unlikely. Areas of the country where there is a demand for passenger rail service that would support itself financially already has it in place.
The U.S.’s only attempt at transcontinental passenger rail service, Amtrak, has been a financial failure and only exists because of heavy funding by the government for decades.

今天，需求和成本的結(jié)合使得高速鐵路變得不太可能。那些有足夠需求支持客運(yùn)鐵路服務(wù)并能夠自負(fù)盈虧的地區(qū)，已經(jīng)有了相應(yīng)的鐵路服務(wù)。
美國(guó)唯一一次嘗試跨大陸的客運(yùn)鐵路服務(wù)，即美鐵（Amtrak），一直是財(cái)務(wù)上的失敗，并且僅僅因?yàn)檎嗄陙?lái)的大量資助才得以存在。

Alan Peterson
Why would we waste money on some stupid train? Jet passenger planes are faster. A “high speed” train goes between big cities. So does a jet. And a jet does it faster. Our cities are much, much farther apart than Japanese cities. A train may make sense for a small country like Japan, or densely populated Europe, but not for a huge country like the US (except for the densely populated east coast, maybe). As for all the spaces between big American cities, public roads for private vehicles make more sense than a train, subway, or bus. We are not Europe. We are not Asia. We solve our problems the way we feel is best for us. High speed trains are not practical, useful, or needed. You want high speed trains in your country? Great. Good for you. If they make sense in your country, go for it. We choose not to, because in this country, they would be a stupid, colossal waste of money.

為什么要浪費(fèi)錢(qián)建什么愚蠢的火車(chē)？噴氣客機(jī)更快。所謂的“高速”火車(chē)連接的是大城市，噴氣飛機(jī)也是如此，而且飛得更快。我們的城市相隔遠(yuǎn)得多，遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超過(guò)日本的城市?；疖?chē)可能適用于像日本這樣的小國(guó)，或像歐洲這樣人口密集的地方，但對(duì)像美國(guó)這樣的大國(guó)來(lái)說(shuō)不合適（也許只有東海岸那種人口密集的地方例外）。至于美國(guó)大城市之間的所有空曠地帶，公共道路對(duì)私人車(chē)輛來(lái)說(shuō)更合適，而不是火車(chē)、地鐵或公共汽車(chē)。我們不是歐洲，我們也不是亞洲。我們以自己認(rèn)為最適合我們的方式解決問(wèn)題。高速火車(chē)既不實(shí)際，也不實(shí)用，更不需要。如果你們國(guó)家需要高速火車(chē)？好啊，祝你們好運(yùn)。如果在你們國(guó)家有意義，去做吧。我們選擇不做，因?yàn)樵谶@個(gè)國(guó)家，它們將是一個(gè)愚蠢的、巨大的浪費(fèi)。

Hara Shidho
Unless the U.S. improves its tendency to dislike socialism as much as Com...ism, I don't think high-speed rail will work.
The areas where high-speed rail is currently doing well are in countries that have adopted modified Com...ism or socialism.
This is because there is an affinity between the method of boarding large numbers of people from a limited number of stations to improve overall efficiency and the way efficiency is increased in socialism.

除非美國(guó)改變它對(duì)社會(huì)主義的厭惡程度，否則我認(rèn)為高速鐵路行不通。
目前高速鐵路運(yùn)行良好的國(guó)家，都是采取了某種形式的改良社會(huì)主義或GCZY的國(guó)家。
這是因?yàn)?，如何通過(guò)有限數(shù)量的車(chē)站來(lái)高效地搭載大量乘客，這種方法與社會(huì)主義提高效率的方式有某種相似性。

The United States, however, is allergic to these methods of improvement, to the extent that it abhors universal health care.
Such countries are not motivated to promote the construction and use of high-speed rail, even if they have the potential to do so.

然而，美國(guó)對(duì)這些改進(jìn)方法有排斥，甚至對(duì)全民醫(yī)保都感到厭惡。
這些國(guó)家即使具備建設(shè)高速鐵路的潛力，也不一定會(huì)推動(dòng)其建設(shè)和使用。

KC Armstrong
North America does not even have a low speed rail network. In 1945 there were 2,000 scheduled passenger trains per week but by 30 or so years ago it was down to less than 50. Few rail lines today carry passengers. Intercity bus service is also a shadow of the past.A recent revival aka Amtrack has reversed the trend but passenger rail is still small. I can stretch my neck out and say that there might be one in the future when carbon or battery use become too expensive for small scale road traffic, sort of a return to the pre-jet era of aviation.

北美甚至沒(méi)有低速鐵路網(wǎng)絡(luò)。1945年，每周有2,000列定期客運(yùn)列車(chē)，但大約30年前，這個(gè)數(shù)字降到了不到50列。今天，少數(shù)鐵路線路仍提供客運(yùn)服務(wù)。城際巴士服務(wù)也幾乎不復(fù)存在。最近的復(fù)興，例如美鐵，扭轉(zhuǎn)了這一趨勢(shì)，但客運(yùn)鐵路仍然是少數(shù)。我可以大膽預(yù)測(cè)，在未來(lái)，當(dāng)碳或電池使用變得對(duì)小規(guī)模道路交通來(lái)說(shuō)過(guò)于昂貴時(shí)，可能會(huì)有一個(gè)鐵路復(fù)興，類(lèi)似于噴氣機(jī)時(shí)代前的航空交通。

The forces of conservatism and the costs will probably prevent any single high speed line in the US anytime soon. The one possible place on the continent is the Montreal to Hamilton corridor along which about half of the Canadian people live. The government is more open to new ideas and the existing highways are overloaded. Toronto, Montreal, and other cities there have well developed public transit so travel at each end is possible. Car rentals are practiced too. Also, there is an existing passenger rail service that is quite popular and speeding it up is under discussion.

保守勢(shì)力和成本可能會(huì)阻止美國(guó)盡快建成任何單一的高速鐵路。唯一有可能的地方是蒙特利爾到漢密爾頓的走廊，大約有一半的加拿大人生活在這里。政府對(duì)新想法更加開(kāi)放，現(xiàn)有的高速公路也超負(fù)荷。多倫多、蒙特利爾和其他城市有發(fā)達(dá)的公共交通系統(tǒng)，因此在每個(gè)終點(diǎn)城市的旅行是可能的。租車(chē)也很常見(jiàn)。此外，現(xiàn)有的客運(yùn)鐵路服務(wù)相當(dāng)受歡迎，提升速度正在討論中。

Ronald Weinger
No. There is no market that could justify the costs involved. It is that simple.
Many tracks go back to the 19th century. They would all have to be replaced. Except that they are currently in use, which means current rail traffic would have to be curtailed (and later regained) or new track would have to be laid. For new track to be laid, permission must be granted by every municipality along the way. That could take years, and one holdout could delay the project even longer. Then, there must be enough traffic, ie full trains, to pay the cost, and if there are not, the tracks would have to be shared with other train traffic, which could result in the high speed train being stuck behind a slow freight, which is what happens now.

不。目前沒(méi)有市場(chǎng)能夠證明這樣做的成本是合理的。就是這么簡(jiǎn)單。
許多軌道可以追溯到19世紀(jì)。所有這些都必須更換。但它們目前正在使用，這意味著現(xiàn)有的鐵路交通必須減少（之后再恢復(fù)）或必須鋪設(shè)新的軌道。鋪設(shè)新軌道需要得到途經(jīng)每個(gè)市鎮(zhèn)的許可，這可能需要數(shù)年時(shí)間，而且任何一個(gè)反對(duì)者都可能會(huì)進(jìn)一步延遲項(xiàng)目的推進(jìn)。然后，必須有足夠的交通量，即滿載的列車(chē)，才能支付成本，如果沒(méi)有足夠的乘客，鐵路就必須與其他列車(chē)共享軌道，這可能會(huì)導(dǎo)致高速列車(chē)被慢速貨運(yùn)列車(chē)擋住，就像現(xiàn)在的情況一樣。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

Then consider the number of stops the train must make. To attempt to assure it travels full, major cities must be on the route. Each stop slows the train. Then there is the cost of the ticket. Unless you have a lot of time, the price difference between a long distance train trip and the same trip by plane is small. And that is for a non-high speed train. When you get to the high speed trip cost the difference is very small. Airplane trip availability would have to be cut significantly to make rail competitive for rail trips over 4 hours.

再考慮列車(chē)必須?？康拇螖?shù)。為了確保列車(chē)滿員，路線必須經(jīng)過(guò)大城市。每?？恳淮味紩?huì)減緩列車(chē)的速度。然后就是票價(jià)問(wèn)題。除非你有很多時(shí)間，否則長(zhǎng)途火車(chē)票和飛機(jī)票的價(jià)格差異很小。而且這是非高速鐵路的情況。如果是高速鐵路，票價(jià)差異就更小了。為了讓火車(chē)旅行在四小時(shí)以上的行程中具有競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力，必須大幅削減飛機(jī)的航班量。

Unci Narynin
I personally believe that high-speed rail is a great solution to mass passenger transportation over a certain range, as long as there is a steady demand on that route that justifies the investment. (Too short and it’s not worth to go that fast, too long and air travel will be faster even considering the way to the airport and the hours before the flight you have to be there.) It’s safe, reliable, comfortable, environmentally friendly and has very convenient total travel times.

我個(gè)人認(rèn)為，高速鐵路是解決一定范圍內(nèi)大規(guī)?？瓦\(yùn)運(yùn)輸?shù)囊粋€(gè)好方案，只要該路線有穩(wěn)定的需求，足以支撐投資。（如果距離太短，就不值得去那么快，太長(zhǎng)的話，即使考慮到去機(jī)場(chǎng)的時(shí)間和提前到達(dá)登機(jī)口的時(shí)間，航空旅行也會(huì)更快。）它安全、可靠、舒適、環(huán)保，且總旅行時(shí)間非常方便。

The USA like all industrialized countries have a great number of cities that fall into this range and have enough demand. Considering that fossile fuel prices have a tendency of going up and the climate crisis will only get worse (so we have to move to using regenerative primary energy sources … electric railways are the mode of transportation that’s best at this) high-speed rail becomes more and more the obvious solution. It needs a different government to make this kind of investment, so … just wait a few years. You’ll get there, I’m quite sure of that.

像所有工業(yè)化國(guó)家一樣，美國(guó)有許多城市符合這個(gè)范圍，并且有足夠的需求。考慮到化石燃料價(jià)格有上漲趨勢(shì)，氣候危機(jī)只會(huì)越來(lái)越嚴(yán)重（所以我們必須轉(zhuǎn)向使用再生能源……電氣化鐵路是最適合這種轉(zhuǎn)型的交通方式），高速鐵路變得越來(lái)越明顯是一個(gè)解決方案。它需要不同的政府來(lái)做出這樣的投資，所以……再等幾年吧。我很確定你們會(huì)實(shí)現(xiàn)的。

Joseph Perez
It could someday, but likely it would only be regional isolated systems designed to serve metro areas.
Transcontinental high speed rail in the USA simply cannot be made profitable by private investment, and the government wisely has no interest in spending many billions of tax dollars on a transportation system that would only be used by a tiny percentage of the population.

未來(lái)有可能，但很可能只會(huì)是一些地區(qū)性的孤立系統(tǒng)，旨在服務(wù)于大都市區(qū)。
美國(guó)的跨洲高速鐵路在私營(yíng)投資者眼中無(wú)法盈利，政府明智地對(duì)花費(fèi)數(shù)十億美元的稅收資金在一個(gè)只會(huì)被少數(shù)人使用的交通系統(tǒng)上沒(méi)有興趣。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

Alex Uzun
American political system allowed rapid country development in 19th and 20th century to become No. 1 in the world. It’s system became outdated now and stands in a way of country’s progress. We got a gridlock in Congress and Senate, and very difficult coordination between State, local and Federal government. Public opinion of badly educated population is ignorant.
Any meaningful project of big size is doomed.

美國(guó)的政治體制曾經(jīng)允許國(guó)家在19世紀(jì)和20世紀(jì)迅速發(fā)展，成為世界第一。但現(xiàn)在這個(gè)體制已經(jīng)過(guò)時(shí)，阻礙了國(guó)家的進(jìn)步。國(guó)會(huì)和參議院的僵局，州政府、地方政府和聯(lián)邦政府之間的協(xié)調(diào)困難，民眾的公共意見(jiàn)由于教育水平低下而顯得無(wú)知。
任何有意義的大型項(xiàng)目都注定要失敗。

Louis Cohen
Nope, because of geography.
Fast passenger trains make sense connecting high population density areas not more than about 200 - 300 miles apart. At any greater distance, trains are not competitive with flying because of the travel time.
There are some areas in the USA like that, like the Northeast Corridor and a few other places. But most population centers in the USA are farther apart than in Europe, China, or Japan.

不行，因?yàn)榈乩碓颉?br /> 高速客運(yùn)列車(chē)在連接人口密集、相距大約200到300英里以?xún)?nèi)的地區(qū)時(shí)有意義。在更遠(yuǎn)的距離，列車(chē)就無(wú)法與飛機(jī)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)，因?yàn)槁眯袝r(shí)間太長(zhǎng)。
美國(guó)有一些這樣的區(qū)域，比如東北走廊和其他幾個(gè)地方。但美國(guó)的大多數(shù)人口中心之間的距離比歐洲、中國(guó)或日本更遠(yuǎn)。

Harald Tambs-Lyche
It is obviously possible - though the US hardly has the necessary technological know-how at present, so advice and expertise might come from France, Japan or China. The main problem is who would make the investment. No private investor is likely to do it: high-speed rail may be a paying proposition, but the investment is huge and there are more profitable opportunities for capital. Amtrak is hardly in a position to undertake such a gigantic project, so the only solution would be massive state funding. Politically, that does not seem likely any soon.
The obvious choice for a line would be the New York- Philadelphia corridor, possibly extended to Boston.

顯然是可能的——盡管美國(guó)目前幾乎沒(méi)有必要的技術(shù)能力，因此可能需要從法國(guó)、日本或中國(guó)獲取建議和專(zhuān)業(yè)知識(shí)。主要的問(wèn)題是誰(shuí)來(lái)進(jìn)行投資。沒(méi)有私人投資者愿意做這件事：高速鐵路或許能盈利，但投資巨大，資本有更多盈利機(jī)會(huì)。Amtrak（美國(guó)鐵路公司）顯然沒(méi)有能力承擔(dān)這樣一個(gè)龐大的項(xiàng)目，因此唯一的解決方案可能是大規(guī)模的國(guó)家資金支持。在政治上，近期似乎不太可能實(shí)現(xiàn)這種投資。
紐約-費(fèi)城走廊顯然是建造線路的最佳選擇，可能還會(huì)延伸到波士頓。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

John Fernandes
US is a vast Country, from West to East the time difference being 4 hours. It is not compact like Japan or China. US has one of the best Air Connectivity, which is cheaper and dose not require much infrastructure as bullet train will need. So Americans are happy with their Air Connectivity.

美國(guó)是一個(gè)廣闊的國(guó)家，從東西海岸之間的時(shí)差有4小時(shí)。它不像日本或中國(guó)那么緊湊。美國(guó)的航空連接非常好，票價(jià)便宜，也不需要像高速列車(chē)那樣的大量基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施。所以美國(guó)人對(duì)航空連接感到滿意。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

Gary Jorbahn
Probably not. The USA with over 300 million people doesn't have vast open spaces to lay the high speed rail tracks. The north has open spaces in States like Oregon, Montana, Wyoming and Minnesota. In Japan there is populous cities plus the open spaces for the bullet trains to travel between major cities. Canada is larger than the USA, but has 1/10th of the population. We don't even have these type of trains and probably never will.

可能不行。美國(guó)人口超過(guò)3億，無(wú)法像日本那樣在空曠的地方鋪設(shè)高速鐵路軌道。美國(guó)北部有一些空曠地區(qū)，比如俄勒岡、蒙大拿、懷俄明和明尼蘇達(dá)州。而在日本，人口密集的城市和開(kāi)闊的空間使得子彈頭列車(chē)可以在主要城市之間通行。加拿大的面積比美國(guó)大，但人口只有美國(guó)的十分之一。我們甚至沒(méi)有這種類(lèi)型的列車(chē)，可能永遠(yuǎn)也不會(huì)有。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

David
Our military-industrial system limits the ability of our productive capacity for advancement of domestic infrastructure. Our military is scattered throughout the earth. We spend trillions on other countries wars. Our elected officials are beholden to the arms manufacturers for reelection. If billions were diverted away from supporting millions of illegals and building bombs and missiles we’d could build a rail system to easily rival Japan.

我們的軍事工業(yè)系統(tǒng)限制了我們國(guó)內(nèi)基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施的進(jìn)步能力。我們的軍隊(duì)分布在世界各地。我們?cè)谄渌麌?guó)家的戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)上花費(fèi)了數(shù)萬(wàn)億美元。我們的民選官員依賴(lài)武器制造商的支持來(lái)連任。如果我們能把數(shù)十億資金從支持非法移民和制造炸彈導(dǎo)彈上轉(zhuǎn)移到建設(shè)鐵路系統(tǒng)上，我們就能建立一個(gè)輕松趕上日本的鐵路系統(tǒng)。

xiao Wen
I don't think it's possible.
The reason is simple. Most Americans don't need this mode of transportation.
It may be convenient and cool to take a ride once or twice, but unlike China, America does not have tens of millions or hundreds of millions of workers who need to cross thousands of kilometers to work in another city.
In America, financiers' time is as precious as gold. They fly. Ordinary people are engaged in local service industry, and they travel by car and subway.
Without enough passengers, the huge high-speed railway network cannot survive.

我認(rèn)為這不可能實(shí)現(xiàn)。
原因很簡(jiǎn)單。大多數(shù)美國(guó)人不需要這種交通方式。坐一次或兩次可能方便且很酷，但不像中國(guó)，美國(guó)沒(méi)有數(shù)千萬(wàn)甚至上億的工人需要跨越幾千公里到另一個(gè)城市工作。在美國(guó)，金融家的時(shí)間和黃金一樣寶貴，他們選擇坐飛機(jī)。普通人從事本地服務(wù)行業(yè)，出行一般靠汽車(chē)和地鐵。沒(méi)有足夠的乘客，龐大的高速鐵路網(wǎng)絡(luò)是無(wú)法維持的。

Doug Freyburger
“Do you think the USA will ever have a high speed passenger rail network on the scale of what is found in Europe, China, and Japan?”
Passenger trains are obsolete in any place that has cars, airplanes and parking spaces.
The reason those regions use trains at all is their lack of cars. The US does not lack cars so here trains are obsolete.

“你認(rèn)為美國(guó)是否會(huì)擁有像歐洲、中國(guó)和日本那樣規(guī)模的高速客運(yùn)鐵路網(wǎng)絡(luò)？”
在擁有汽車(chē)、飛機(jī)和停車(chē)位的地方，客運(yùn)火車(chē)已經(jīng)過(guò)時(shí)。
這些地區(qū)之所以使用火車(chē)，是因?yàn)樗鼈內(nèi)狈ζ?chē)。美國(guó)不缺汽車(chē)，所以在這里火車(chē)已經(jīng)過(guò)時(shí)。

Watch what happens when self driving cars become able to find their own parking spaces. Subway and commuter train use will plummet.
Watch what happens when drones reach the size of buses. Both commuter trains and parking lots near airports will fade away.
No. High speed trains have specific requirements that don’t apply in the US.

當(dāng)自動(dòng)駕駛汽車(chē)能夠自己找到停車(chē)位時(shí)，地鐵和通勤列車(chē)的使用將大幅下降。
當(dāng)無(wú)人機(jī)的大小達(dá)到公交車(chē)水平時(shí)，通勤列車(chē)和機(jī)場(chǎng)附近的停車(chē)場(chǎng)將逐漸消失。
不，高速列車(chē)有特定的要求，而這些要求在美國(guó)并不適用。

原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

美國(guó) 歐洲 中國(guó) 日本 高速客運(yùn) 鐵路網(wǎng)絡(luò)

很贊 ( 5 )

收藏