将中国高铁网络图覆盖到美国地图上，美国人对着图片幻想：“不打仗的话，我们都可以建100个这样的高铁网了”

kingsheperdI
magine what the US would have been with more trains, free healthcare and education… insane

想象一下，如果美国有更多的铁路、免费医疗和教育…… 那会是多么不可思议。

LibertyCap10
Would be truly beautiful and inspirational.. alas, here we are.

那将会非常美好、振奋人心…… 可惜，现实却是现在这样。

WuWeiLife
The were maybe a bit too quick with naming your country*美国 Měiguó - It means "beautiful country"

当初给你们国家起名的人，可能有点太心急了。美国 —— 意思是 “美丽的国家”。

LibertyCap10
damn

该死。

PorkMaster37

The full name 美利坚合众国 - Beautiful Sharp Sturdy United Country.They were THAT generous with the name.
全名是美利坚合众国 —— 美丽、刚强、坚固的联合国家。当初起名的人真的太 “大方” 了。

obiwanjablowme
It is beautiful.

确实很美。

Icy-Stock-5838
Should change the name then..Even with Trump the name is stuck, as is the WANT for Chinese children (esp CCP children) to go to school in America (despite Trump)...US to revoke visas for Chinese students; politicization of educational exchange erodes US competitiveness: experts - Global TimesChinese student numbers at Harvard rise despite Trump visa crackdown | South China Morning Post

那干脆改名字算了……就算是特朗普在任，这个名字也没变，而且中国孩子（尤其是某些人的孩子）还是想去美国上学（尽管特朗普在打压）……
《环球时报》：美国将撤销中国学生签证，教育交流政治化削弱美国竞争力
《南华早报》：尽管特朗普打压签证，哈佛中国学生人数仍在上升

Reckochet
It pretty much comes down to the fact that a decent set of grades for Chinese universities often gets you into at least a high ranked US state uni if not something even higher. Then, you get good enough education and also the bragging rights since the unis are well known. In gaming terms, this is smurfing.

说白了就是：在中国大学里成绩还不错的人，通常至少能进美国一所排名靠前的州立大学，甚至更好的学校。然后既能接受不错的教育，又能因为学校名气大而有面子。用游戏的话说，这就是 “炸鱼”。

Icy-Stock-5838
I was talking about C's leaders saying "the Beautiful Country" is backwards and unsafe.. Yet they send their kids to live and study there..A US not safe for own citizens is not qualified to lead the world - Global Times

我是说，C的高层一边说 “美丽国” 落后又不安全，一边却把自己的孩子送去那里生活和读书……
《环球时报》：一个对本国公民都不安全的美国，没有资格领导世界。

Reckochet
Of course, sending your kids to some of the really rich areas where it is still very safe is different from the typical topic of these articles (the poorest areas, where China does have quite the advantage in terms of safety, due to the MUCH lower rates of drug abuse and violent crime). There is a reason foreign students are stereotyped as obscenely rich, because it is at least partially true.It is stupid not to game the system while you still can because of some sort of perceived hypocrisy or whatever. Getting sent to what is essentially a 4-year vacation in a nice and rich area while getting that sweet credential would be enticing to anyone really.If you can't afford such a thing though and end up in a rougher area... then good luck lol

当然，把孩子送到那些非常富裕、依然很安全的地区，和这些文章通常讨论的（最贫困的地区）是两码事。在贫困地区的安全问题上，中国优势确实很大，因为吸毒和暴力犯罪率低得多。
外国学生被刻板印象认为超级有钱，是有原因的，至少部分是事实。趁着还能钻空子就去利用规则，仅仅因为所谓的 “虚伪” 就不去，那才是傻。本质上就是去富裕又安全的地方度四年假，还能拿到亮眼的文凭，对谁都很有吸引力。但如果你负担不起，最后去了治安差的地方…… 那就自求多福吧，哈哈。

dexetemptemp
Yeah you can thank our politicians balls clamped by oil and car lobbies for this

是啊，这都得归功于我们的政客被石油和汽车行业游说集团拿捏得死死的。

RecommendationFit766
Wake up, you are a capitalistic country, you shouldn't look for anything socialistic.

醒醒吧，你们是资本主义国家，就别指望什么社会主义福利了。

redditsublurker
Would of could of.

本来可以、本来能够。

featherknife
Would have*, could have*.

应该是本来有，能够有。

sweatierorc
Russia would own Ukraine, Serbia would not be stopped, Ghadaffi would still be alive.Maybe a few more country would go the Pakistan/India route and get the bomb.The dollar would be less useful since there is no military power to back it up.

俄罗斯会控制乌克兰，塞尔维亚不会被阻止，卡扎菲还活着。可能还会有几个国家走巴基斯坦 / 印度的路线，拥有核武器。美元会没那么有用，因为没有军事力量支撑。

mrCore2Man
So everything would be much better.

那一切都会好得多。

sweatierorc
More nuclear weapon good ?

更多核武器就好吗？

mrCore2Man
Could be for better. Especially for Iran.

可能会更好。尤其是对伊朗来说。

husky11223
can you remind me what happened to ukraine after giving up their nukes?

你能提醒我一下，乌克兰放弃核武器之后发生了什么吗？

sweatierorc
Cf. South Africa giving up their nukes

参考南非放弃核武器的情况。

Martha_Fockers
Im alive today because the United States acted when we were being ethnically cleansed and GENOCIDEd.They flew us out of the country into America as refugees as we had lost our home being burnt down were living in the woods and random highway areas moving south to avoid being massacred by Serbian special police forces in Kosovo

我今天还活着，是因为在我们遭受种族清洗和屠杀时，美国出手了。他们把我们当作难民空运到美国，我们的家被烧毁，只能住在树林里、公路边，一路向南躲避科索沃塞尔维亚特种警察的屠杀。

mrCore2Man
I am glad that you and your family made it alive because of the USA. But also keep in mind how many didn't make it or suffered because of them. There is no way to make everyone happy, and USA did a lot of great things, but I really don't agree with it's foreign policy.

我很高兴你和家人因为美国活了下来。但也要记住，有多少人因为美国而死去或受苦。不可能让所有人都满意，美国确实做过很多好事，但我真的不认同它的外交政策。

Sad-Excitement9295
I am saddened every day as an American by how far short of that we are. We have had great success with manufacturing here, but our tax money is never used to support the country. It amazes me that we could afford all of it and still fund the military smartly. The cost of this stuff is a fraction of what we have wasted, and all so a few people can have some more 1s and 0s in their bank account. It's absurd the direction we are headed in when we have such prosperity already available to us here at home. I would say the country has been neglected about 50 years behind what it should be in terms of public infrastructure. We could fund everything properly right now and be in a much better postion going forward, and for some reason we have a bunch of NewZ leaders bombing other countries and suppressing the population at home. It's all about money and control. Our society is far below the living standard of what it is capable of right now.I will say our diesel trains and truck transport are still pretty good, but we should clearly be investing in green technologies right now due to additional advantages it would provide. It doesn't really make any sense for countries not to be investing in this sort of thing right now, and other public infrastructure as well.

作为美国人，我每天都为我们离理想状态差得太远而难过。我们的制造业曾经很成功，但税收却从未用来建设国家。我们明明负担得起这一切，还能合理地供养军队，这一点让我很震惊。这些项目的成本只是我们浪费掉的零头，却只是为了让少数人银行账户里多几个数字。我们国内明明已有如此丰厚的家底，现在的走向却荒谬至极。

我想说，在公共基础设施方面，这个国家被耽误了大约 50 年。我们现在本可以把所有项目都建好，未来前景会好得多，但不知为何，我们有一群无能的领导人，忙着轰炸其他国家、压迫本国人民。一切都是为了钱和控制。我们社会现在的生活水平，远低于它本可以达到的程度。
我得说，我们的内燃机车和货车运输还不错，但显然现在应该投资绿色技术，因为它能带来额外优势。现在任何国家不投资这类项目、不建设其他公共基础设施，都说不过去。

Clearwater_9196
Don't have to imagine. Just look at China.

不用想象，看看中国就知道了。

New-Entertainer703
Delta Airlines has joined the chat

达美航空已加入聊天。

BusinessReplyMail1
A high speed train is more comfortable, more spacious, more punctual and carries a large number of people efficiently. They're faster for short to medium distances but planes are better for long distances.

高铁更舒适、更宽敞、更准点，还能高效运送大量乘客。中短途高铁更快，长途则飞机更优。

Mr_Axelg
How do trains compare to planes in terms of cost? My understanding is that flying Tokyo to Osaka is cheaper than trains for example.

火车和飞机的成本相比如何？我印象里，比如东京到大阪，坐飞机比坐火车便宜。

BusinessReplyMail1
Google said high speed trains are typically 10-50% cheaper in China but flights can be cheaper during off season or long hauls

谷歌显示，中国高铁通常便宜 10%–50%，但淡季或长途航班可能更便宜。

Benlex
Unfortunately that’s just not true anymore. HSR in China has lost too much money to be kept cheaper than airlines.

可惜现在已经不是这样了。中国高铁亏损太多，没法一直比航空便宜。

Nimbus-Studio
Public Transportation is one of those area where making money shouldn't be a priority

公共交通本来就不该把赚钱放在首位。

AFKosrs
Yeah but you can't just bleed money; especially for something that isn't basic transportation. A continental high-speed rail system is a completely different animal than a regional bus systemEdit: I say this as someone who'd love to be able to take a high speed train across the country

话是这么说，但总不能一直亏钱吧；尤其是对于非基础交通的项目。全国性高铁系统和区域性公交系统完全是两码事。补充：我本人其实很希望能坐高铁横穿全国。

in2thedeep1513
But also not losing money.

但也不能亏钱。

PorkMaster37
There hasn't been a HSR price increase in like 18 years. The base rate has always been around 0.4rmb/km, except recently it has been allowed to float +/-20% depending on the hours.

中国高铁票价差不多 18 年没涨过。基准票价一直是每公里 0.4 元左右，只是最近才允许按时段上下浮动 20%。

Benlex
While that is true from end to end from my experience there has also been more price fluctuations if you are not riding large stop to large stop. Ended up flying more on business trips due to this as the price is more stable and cheaper in many cases.

直达大站确实是这样，但根据我的经验，如果不是大站直达，票价波动会更大。我出差因此更多选择坐飞机，因为票价更稳定，很多时候还更便宜。

quevuelvacatania
It depends, you have to include the cost of getting to and from the airport and fairs vary. It is generally cheaper but that’s one specific case, in Italy planes got hard outcompeted by the trains.

看情况，你得把往返机场的成本算进去，而且票价浮动很大。高铁通常更便宜，但那只是个别案例，在意大利，飞机就被火车彻底碾压了。

itsmeemilio
And waiting to check in, waiting to take off, waiting to deplaneEasily an extra 2 hours at the absolute minimum, ignoring the fact that traffic to and from airports is usually a solid chunk of time

还有值机等待、起飞等待、下机等待，就算不算往返机场的堵车时间，最少也得多花 2 小时。

EvercoreRX
High speed rail is cheaper iirc but the government subsidizes it to make it sustainable

我没记错的话高铁更便宜，但政府有补贴才能维持。

Striking-Somewhere44
Trains can stop at cities between Tokyo and Osaka say Kyoto. Can plane easily do it?

火车可以停靠东京到大阪之间的城市，比如京都。飞机能轻松做到吗？

e136
Yes, if you didn't have to go through crazy security to take a domestic flight, our airplane system would kind of rival Chinas train system. But having to get to the airport at least 45 mins before a flight kills the efficiency. As opposed to 15 mins or less for the China trains.

可以啊，如果国内航班不用过那么严格的安检，我们的航空系统其实能和中国高铁抗衡。但坐飞机至少要提前 45 分钟到机场，效率直接拉胯。反观中国高铁，15 分钟甚至更短就能上车。

Geoffboyardee
The way some Americans will blame security regulations for capitalism's inefficiencies to overlook the corruption of industries colluding with governments to sink competition. Meanwhile, planes dump massive amounts of pollution into everyone's atmosphere.

有些美国人就是这样，把资本主义的低效甩锅给安检规定，却无视行业与政府勾结打压竞争对手的腐败。与此同时，飞机还在向大气中排放大量污染物。

e136
Woah, I'm just saying from a rider point of view. Of course each has their advantages and disadvantages. Also look at China, they're not perfect either. Ever taken a domestic flight there? Crazy delays all the time.

哇，我只是从乘客角度说而已。当然各有优劣。而且中国也不完美，你坐过中国国内航班吗？延误经常离谱。

Plenty-Reporter-9239
It's not just the airlines. It's a cultural issue as well. Every single American family has a car if not 2 or 3. The incentive for americans to pay 20$ a person to take a train ride to a city 2 or 3 hours away to get there slower, pay more and have to schedule around the train just isnt there. I'm all for building a better train system in the US, but at least currently, our culture isn't set up for it right now tbh. It's much bigger problem than just "build the tracks"

不只是航空公司的问题，还有文化问题。几乎每个美国家庭都有车，至少一两辆。美国人没动力花 20 美元一个人坐火车去两三个小时车程的城市，又慢又贵，还得按火车时刻表安排行程。我完全支持美国建设更好的铁路系统，但说实话，至少现在我们的文化还不适应。这远不只是 “修铁轨” 那么简单。

Geoffboyardee
Having a HSR network would also include inter-city trains and incentivize the market to construct more cost-effective transit-oriented development with it.

建成高铁网后，也会有城际列车，还能推动市场建设更多性价比高、以公共交通为导向的开发项目。

Plenty-Reporter-9239
Honestly, I think it'd work in new england pretty good, but outside of that I'm not so sure. I think step 1 is to start future development of metro areas to make them walkable and fix intra city public transportation.Like could you imagine taking HSR from your town to some larger metro area and you immediately need to rent a car because like 85% of our cities aren't built to be walkable.

说实话，我觉得新英格兰地区会很适合，但其他地方就不好说了。我认为第一步是先规划建设适合步行的都市区，改善市内公共交通。你能想象吗？坐高铁从自己的小镇到某个大城市，一下车就得租车，因为我们 85% 的城市都不适合步行。

Geoffboyardee
It's better to do HSR development and walkable development at the same time.

高铁建设和步行友好城市建设同步推进会更好。

Plenty-Reporter-9239
Yeah I guess that's ideal. Hopefully i see it in my lifetime lol

嗯，我觉得那是最理想的。希望有生之年能看到，哈哈。

bcalmnrolldice
Road trip is a thing and even a genre of movie. Not so much about railway trip

公路旅行是一种文化，甚至是一种电影类型。铁路旅行就没这么流行。

2CommaNoob
It’s the cheap gas. The oil and car markers companies lobbied for cheap gas prices so the car culture lives on. Nowhere else is gas so cheap except the Middle East whose oil and gas is their entire economy.If gas were $8-10 like Europe or Asia, you will see public transportation become a priority

是因为汽油便宜。石油和汽车制造商游说压低油价，汽车文化才得以延续。除了靠油气吃饭的中东，没有哪个地方汽油这么便宜。如果油价像欧洲或亚洲那样涨到 8–10 美元，你就会看到公共交通变成优先事项。

Plenty-Reporter-9239
Yeah, I agree. Kind of a catch 22 now tho because theres lots of people commute to work and physically couldn't afford gas if we didnt subsidize it so heavily. There would be a period of time where it's too expensive to drive but public transportation isn't readily available yet. A lot of people would be affected

是啊，我同意。但现在有点进退两难，因为很多人通勤上班，如果不大力补贴油价，他们根本加不起油。会出现一段开车太贵、公共交通又跟不上的真空期，很多人都会受影响。

RavenWolf1
Also airports are never at center of cities.

而且机场从来都不在城市中心。

This_Loss_1922
But has China ever helped Israel achieve their political obxtives? Thats the only priority for Americans.

但中国有没有帮助以色列实现他们的政治目标？这才是美国人唯一关心的重点。

2CommaNoob
Wasting Money isn’t the issue. The US just doesn’t have the foresight and forward thinking to build something like this. Too many lobbyists and outside interests.We couldn’t even build a nation wide EV charging network. We used to ; we built the interstate systems and the original railroads. It’s sad what our government has become.

浪费钱根本不是问题。美国只是没有远见和前瞻性去建造这样的东西，游说团体和外部利益集团太多了。我们甚至连全国性的电动汽车充电网络都建不起来。我们以前能做到的 —— 我们建了州际公路系统和最初的铁路。我们的政府变成现在这样，真的很可悲。

Angelus_25
it's a little bit the issue.... iran, who's missiles can't even reach us if we gave them a free uber ride, is such a threat to our existence according to the government...meanwhile no US citizen was being threatened by Iran.how many of our sons are dead now? how will Iran respond? remember 9/11? now try imagining that across entire manhatten. that's what we are doing and the kind of people wé are apparently.

这多少还是个问题…… 政府说伊朗对我们的生存构成了巨大威胁，可就算我们给伊朗的导弹免费搭顺风车，它们都飞不到我们这里。而且根本没有美国公民受到伊朗的威胁。我们现在有多少儿女牺牲了？伊朗会作何反应？还记得 9・11 吗？现在想象一下这种事发生在整个曼哈顿。这就是我们正在做的事，显然我们就是这样一群人。

2CommaNoob
For reals lol. All the fear lingering of Iran, Russia and China who by the way is 5000 miles away. The Chinese Navy can’t even get past Japan let alone get close to Hawaii lol.Their missiles will fall into the ocean before reaching the continental US….I guess Alaska COULD be at risk of the Russian army walking over but they are kinda busy at the moment lol

说真的，笑死。一直活在对伊朗、俄罗斯和中国的恐惧里，要知道中国离我们有 5000 英里远。中国海军连日本都过不去，更别说靠近夏威夷了，哈哈。他们的导弹还没到美国本土就会掉进海里…… 我猜阿拉斯加或许有可能被俄罗斯陆军徒步过来威胁，但他们现在好像挺忙的，哈哈。

2nd-4851
No need highspeed railways in US

美国不需要高铁。

BoomBoomBear
Probably is, if it can’t be built it 4 years, it won’t be approved. Politicians are like. Why start it so someone else gets the credit at completion.

大概就是这样，如果不能在 4 年内建成，项目就不会获批。政客们的想法是：为什么要我启动，最后功劳却归别人。

Qs9bxNKZ
HSR isn’t the mandate of the US Federal Government. You can talk to the States like CA and see how it is a failure of local GovernmentUnderstanding how a system without central planning is different is a fundamental part of being an American. States rights.

高铁不是美国联邦政府的职责。你可以去问问加州这样的州，就知道这是地方政府的失败。理解没有中央计划的体系有何不同，是作为美国人的基本认知。这是州权。

TemporaryCow9085
Yet another required opinion to be American that I did not know about! Here I thought I was safe being white and born here but it turns out my like for trains will have to be reeducated as well.

又一个我之前不知道的、当美国人必须持有的观点！我还以为自己是白人、出生在美国就万事大吉了，结果现在连我喜欢火车都得被 “再教育”。

ResponsibleClock9289
If there was demand for trains in the US then they would build themPassenger rail almost went bankrupt in the 70s before the government stepped in the save AmtrakAmericans prefer to fly which is why the US has the most and busiest airports in the world

如果美国有火车需求，自然就会有人建。70 年代，在政府出手救助美铁之前，客运铁路几乎破产。美国人更喜欢坐飞机，这也是为什么美国拥有世界上数量最多、最繁忙的机场。

SevenTwoSix9
“If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.” - Henry Ford.

“如果我当初问人们想要什么，他们只会说想要更快的马。”—— 亨利・福特。

Large-Asparagus2063
he literally never said that

他根本没说过这句话。

SevenTwoSix9
Probably not, I’m not a historian. But is it not true?

可能没说过，我不是历史学家。但这句话说得不对吗？

Large-Asparagus2063
nah it just got famous on the internet for some reason

没有，只是不知道为啥这句话在网上火了。

SevenTwoSix9Coz
it’s likely what customer really would say. It surely didn’t just catch on coz ppl like horses.

因为这很可能就是顾客真实会说的话。这句话流行起来，肯定不只是因为人们喜欢马。

kinkhorse
China can also be like "HIGHSPEED RAIL TIME EVERYBODY OUT" and drive a bulldozer through your house the next week. So...

中国也可能会说 “要建高铁了，所有人都搬出去”，然后下周就开推土机推平你的房子。所以……

2CommaNoob
You'll also get a fat premium for your land/house in China. Lots of rural villages became rich because of this.Unlike here where they will eminent domain your ass.

在中国，你的土地和房子会得到丰厚的补偿。很多农村都因为这个富起来了。不像这里，他们只会用国家征用权强行收走你的东西。

Naive_Ad7923
That’s just not the case. They just build around you if you refuse to move even with a compensation of 3 to 10x the market price.

事实根本不是这样。就算给出市场价 3 到 10 倍的补偿你还拒绝搬迁，他们也只会绕着你的房子建。


empty_graph
Yeah, that's the difference. In the US we have eminent domain, but you can fight that for years in court. Also any NIMBY group can come up with fake "environmental" reasons which have nothing to do with actual pollution (e.g. buildings casting shadows) and fight those with lawsuits for years. In China it's just expected that part of your responsibility as a citizen is that you have to take one for the team from time to time, and you will be paid for it, but if that's not good enough for you it's FAFO. You don't have the right to delay a project that benefits the public.

没错，这就是区别。在美国我们有国家征用权，但你可以在法庭上抗争好几年。而且任何邻避主义团体都能编造出和实际污染无关的虚假 “环保” 理由（比如建筑遮挡阳光），然后用诉讼拖上好几年。
在中国，作为公民的责任之一就是偶尔要为集体牺牲，而且你会得到补偿，但如果你还不满足，那就是自作自受。你无权拖延惠及公众的项目。

WilliamLeeFightingIB
That's also how you get insanely rich overnight without doing anything in China.

在中国，这也是人们什么都不用干就能一夜暴富的方式。

nexus22nexus55
More uninformed, ignorant nonsense.

又是些无知又愚蠢的废话。

Robot9004
I thought these "nail houses" would be famous by now

我还以为这些 “钉子户” 现在已经很出名了。

HouseOf42
Less developed nations like China rely on outdated modes of travel like trains, they also have an underdeveloped aviation sector.The primary reason trains are not as prent, is because planes are the primary mode of travel.In simple terms, the technology differences are huge gaps between the two cultures. One is an innovator, the other relies on copying and pasting.

像中国这样的欠发达国家，还在依赖火车这种过时的交通方式，他们的航空业也很落后。（美国）火车不普及的主要原因，是飞机才是主要的出行方式。简单来说，两种文化之间的技术差距巨大。一个是创新者，另一个只会照搬复制。

Impressive-Juice-163"
Outdated modes of travel like trains"

“火车这种过时的交通方式”

GuiltyArmy455
The copy and paster uses high speed efficient and sustainable rail and the innovator flies and burns fossil fuels to transport a few measly people with hiked ticket prices? Your system is greedy is broken

那个只会照搬的国家用着高效、可持续的高铁，而所谓的创新者却靠燃烧化石燃料、抬高票价，只为运送寥寥几个人？你们的体系既贪婪又崩坏。

Efficient-Rich-9975
You're a victim of american propaganda if you think China is a "less developed country".

如果你认为中国是 “欠发达国家”，那你就是美国宣传的受害者。

Cognitive_Spoon
You really think people wouldn't use public train transport in the US? It's one of the consistently highest polling asks.https://railpassengers.org/happening-now/news/releases/new-poll-78-of-americans-want-increased-investments-in-passenger-rail-in-the-u.s/

你真的以为美国人不想用公共铁路交通吗？这一直是民调里支持率最高的诉求之一（链接略，译注）

Independent-Fruit4
my favorite was when they tasked AI to solve traffic / shipping / logistics issues and it kept answering trains. they kept revising the question saying trains weren’t an option and the AI basically reinvented the concept of trains over and over again lol

我觉得最搞笑的是，他们让 AI 解决交通、运输、物流问题，AI 一直给出的答案都是火车。他们不断修改问题，说火车不算解决方案，结果 AI 一遍又一遍地重新发明了火车的概念，哈哈。

Legote
I would take high speed rail in a heartbeat. Flying sucks.

我绝对会毫不犹豫选择高铁。坐飞机太糟了。

ResponsibleClock9289
Ok so then why did passenger rail almost go extinct in the 70s before the federal government stepped inWhy is Brightline Florida has running deficits and low passenger numbers

那好吧，那为什么 70 年代联邦政府介入之前，客运铁路几乎绝迹了？为什么佛罗里达的亮光铁路一直亏损、乘客数量稀少？

Mistwraithe
Because your trains are slow. It’s a circular argument. If trains are slow the obviously people prefer other transport options. But in countries with really fast trains they are very popular.

因为你们的火车太慢了。这是个循环论证。火车慢，人们自然会选其他交通方式。但在有真正高铁的国家，高铁非常受欢迎。

ResponsibleClock9289
Nope. This is just France, but even in Europe people just prefer cars, even for longer trips.If we look at international travel, it’s largely dominated by planes

才不是。也就法国这样，就算在欧洲，人们也更喜欢开车，就算是长途旅行。如果看国际旅行，主要还是靠飞机。

ResponsibleClock9289
What a shit headline. Amtrak wouldn’t even be in business if it weren’t federally subsidizedThe US government didn’t kill rail, airplanes and low ridership didIf there was widespread demand for rail, then companies would be running trains to make profit. That demand isn’t there. Of course the article only passingly mentions that and no mention of planes eitherRail was popular in the US in the 19th century; when planes didn’t exist. The simple reality is that planes are faster and cheaper. That’s what Americans care aboutEven in Europe, trains only make up around 15% of domestic trips. Cars make up the vast majority, and those countries are relatively small and condensed.Like your article mentions, the northeast corridor has good ridership and is profitable, because it is large population clusters along the coast. That’s the same reason rail makes sense in China and Japan

这标题烂透了。如果没有联邦补贴，美铁根本经营不下去。不是美国政府毁了铁路，是飞机和低迷的乘客量毁了它。如果铁路真的有广泛需求，企业就会开火车赚钱。这种需求根本不存在。这篇文章当然只是一笔带过，连飞机都没提。
19 世纪的美国，铁路很流行，因为那时候还没有飞机。简单的事实是，飞机更快更便宜，这才是美国人在乎的。就算在欧洲，火车也只占国内出行的 15% 左右，绝大多数人还是开车，而且那些国家面积小、人口密集。就像你发的文章里说的，美国东北走廊的铁路乘客量高、能盈利，因为沿海是人口密集区。这也是中国和日本适合发展铁路的原因。

blankarage
the US has the most extensive freight train network in the whole world, we prioritized businesses over people

美国拥有世界上最庞大的货运铁路网，我们把企业利益放在民众利益之上。

ResponsibleClock9289
It does you are rightBut it also has the most expansive air travel network in the world

你说得对，确实是这样。但美国也拥有世界上最庞大的航空交通网。

RavenWolf1
Because you build you cities wrong and trains wrong. Look at any East Asian big cities and you see that trains are superior in anyway.

因为你们的城市规划和铁路建设都错了。看看任何一个东亚大城市，就知道火车在各方面都更优越。

ResponsibleClock9289
They’re different countriesThere was an exodus OUT of American cities during the 20th century. Only now are people starting to move back

国家不一样。20 世纪的时候，人们大批迁出美国城市。直到现在，人们才开始搬回去。

Striking-Somewhere44
Because car makers and airlines are lobbying really hard to destory public transportation. that is capitalism.

因为汽车制造商和航空公司拼命游说，想要摧毁公共交通。这就是资本主义。

ResponsibleClock9289
So trains don’t have lobbyists?

那铁路就没有游说团体吗？

Striking-Somewhere44
Are you kidding？Amtrak is state owned.

你在开玩笑吗？美铁是国有的。

ResponsibleClock9289
Yeah, since 1971Was lobbying invented in 1971?

是啊，1971 年才国有化的。游说难道是 1971 年才出现的吗？

Striking-Somewhere44
So you think Amtrak is doing very well then?

那你觉得美铁现在经营得很好吗？

ResponsibleClock9289
No it’s losing money which is why the federal government was forced to buy itMy point was that passenger rail was unpopular with falling ridership in the US after airlines began offering commercial flightsYour response was to blame car and airline lobbyists, without acknowledging that train companies also had lobbyistsMaybe people just prefer to fly (which they do, even in countries with strong passenger rail)

不，它一直在亏损，所以联邦政府才被迫收购了它。我的意思是，在航空公司开始提供商业航班后，美国的客运铁路就不受欢迎、乘客量持续下降。你却把责任推给汽车和航空的游说团体，却不承认铁路公司也有游说团体。也许人们就是更喜欢坐飞机（事实也是如此，就算在客运铁路发达的国家也是）。

Exploding_Pie
Trains are actually the better mode of transportation for trips lasting between 2 and 6 hours. With planes you need to check in, drop bags off, go through security, wait for boarding, then taxi to the runaway. When you land, you have to deboard the plane, go through customs again, pick up your bags adding hours of time and stress. With high speed rail it's much faster and without carbon emissions.

其实对于 2 到 6 小时的行程，火车是更好的交通方式。坐飞机需要办理登机、托运行李、过安检、等登机，然后滑行到跑道。降落之后，还要下飞机、过海关、取行李，这会增加好几个小时的时间和压力。而高铁快得多，还没有碳排放。

cbusmatty
2-6 hours I’m driving, because then I am not renting a car when I get to my destination

2 到 6 小时的行程我会开车，这样到目的地就不用租车了。

Exploding_Pie
Exactly. China already has an extremely robust public transportation system, so cars are not needed to begin with. This is when high speed rail is most effective. America doesn't have any public transport, so a high speed rail network won't be the miracle everyone thinks it is

没错。中国已经有非常完善的公共交通系统，所以从一开始就不需要那么依赖私家车。这才是高铁能发挥最大效用的环境。美国几乎没有公共交通，所以高铁网络不会成为人们想象中的奇迹。

sarges_12gauge
Right? I don’t understand why people so badly want the cart before the horse here. A high speed rail station in a city that you need a car to
get around in is simply not going to get very much use

对吧？我真不明白为什么大家非要本末倒置。在一个必须开车出行的城市里建高铁站，根本不会有多少人用。

cbusmatty
You mean they are forced into cattle cars because they are too poor to own cars. You look at any China train no one can afford to take the nice
ones, they all are on the shitty ones

你是说他们因为穷得买不起车，只能挤那种运牲口一样的车厢吧。你去看看中国的火车，没人坐得起好车厢，全都挤在破车厢里。

Exploding_Pie
That's a lie. China's high speed rail network makes up for the majority of all passenger trips taken by rail. Slow trains mainly serve smaller rural communities.

这是谎言。中国高铁承担了绝大部分铁路客运量。普通慢车主要服务偏远农村地区。

cbusmatty
https://youtu.be/7cFcgJcaajA?si=uoJD3Q1rqO74H_b1
Uh no not lying. Probably should inform yourself and not listen to propaganda to push an agenda

啊我可没撒谎。你最好自己去了解一下，别听那些带节奏的宣传。

Exploding_Pie
Bro you just lixed AI slop. Even the comments are roasting him.
Edit: dexed his comment after realising he made a fool of himself

兄弟你发的这就是 AI 瞎编的垃圾视频，连评论区都在喷他。
补充：他发现自己丢人现眼之后，把评论删了。

Willing_Motor6240
I'm from China, and I can prove you wrong. China's railways are losing money because ticket prices are too low, and the government, or rather the national railway company, is bearing this loss.

我来自中国，我可以证明你错了。中国铁路之所以亏损，是因为票价太低，政府，或者说国家铁路公司，一直在承担这份亏损。

cbusmatty
Let’s see the proof then. That aligns with my point. Poor little people can’t afford the expensive trains, take the lowest price, and they can’t get anyone to pay for the good seats

那就拿出证据来。这正好印证了我的观点。穷人们坐不起贵的高铁，只能买最便宜的票，根本没人愿意花钱买好座位。

ControlAgreeable4180
Yeah. People just refuse to believe. All just want the good stuffs. No one wants to know the cost .Only a few lines make money, but overall in huge loss.Rise ticket price? Lose ridership to green skin trains, planes and car.Keep the same price? Continue to bleed until government steps in.

是啊，大家就是不愿意相信。只想要好东西，却没人想知道成本。只有少数线路盈利，整体亏损巨大。涨价？乘客就会去坐绿皮车、飞机或者开车。不涨价？就一直亏到政府兜底。

applemasher
You have to realize how much faster trains are. A car goes around maybe 70mph, but basic high speed rail operates at 190mph. This makes your 6 hour trip by car 2 hours and 13 minutes by train. With that you can take a day trip 6 hours away and leave in the morning and be back in the evening.

你得认清火车有多快。汽车大概每小时 70 英里，而普通高铁时速 190 英里。开车 6 小时的路程，火车只要 2 小时 13 分钟。这样你早上出发，晚上就能回来，6 小时外的地方都能当日往返。

cbusmatty
And you have to wait in line for the train. And you have to drive to the train station and you have to wait. And you have to pay. And you have to wait and pay for the rental car and everything in between

坐火车还得排队。你得开车去车站，还得等。还要花钱。到了地方还得等、花钱租車，还有一堆杂七杂八的事。

applemasher
In other countries, the wait time is really small. You just go through security less than 60 seconds. And then you have up to 15 minutes to board. So, about 15 mins of waiting time or so. In other countries, it's cheaper than driving. This is because gas for one car is way more expensive than moving 100s of people at once. You also don't need a rental car, if you take an uber or other form of transportation. I drive a nice car, but I'd take a high speed train over driving any day.

在别的国家，等待时间很短。安检不到 60 秒，最多 15 分钟就能上车，总共也就等 15 分钟左右。而且比开车便宜，因为一辆车的油费，比一次性运送几百人的火车成本高多了。你也不用租车，打个车或者坐别的交通工具就行。我自己开着不错的车，但我宁愿坐高铁也不想开车。

cbusmatty
We do not live in other countries, this is america and we're talking about america

我们又不是住在别的国家，这里是美国，我们聊的是美国。

Billions13
Sounds like a skill issue to me

听着像是你自己能力有问题。

DenisWB
within 6 hours high speed train can go 1500km

高铁 6 小时能跑 1500 公里。

RedBrowning
They'll add security to high speed rail soon. Just takes one terror attack. High speed rail is more vulnerable too because it can have the rail attacked anywhere along the route. Once a plane is airborne it doesn't have that problem.

高铁很快就会加强安检的，只要发生一次恐怖袭击就会。高铁也更脆弱，因为铁轨沿线任何地方都可能被袭击。飞机一旦起飞就没这个问题。

Exploding_Pie
They already have security when you walk into the station.

进车站的时候就已经有安检了。

RedBrowning
Not to the same level as airline security.

和机场安检不是一个级别。

Exploding_Pie
You walk through an x-ray scanner and your bags go through one too. It's the exact same level as airport security.

你要过安检机，行李也要过，和机场安检完全一样。

blackakainu
Wow, you might need to upxe your info on China’s current conditions because its not factual.A train’s capacity to load passengers is way
higher than a plane. Between 600-1200 can fit on a train. The biggest airline plane in the US holds ~200 domestically and ~300 internationally

哇，你该更新一下对中国现状的认知了，你说的根本不符合事实。火车的载客量比飞机高得多，一列火车能载 600 到 1200 人。美国国内最大的民航客机也就载 200 人左右，国际航班也就 300 人。

quevuelvacatania
You are highly regarded

你可真会抬举自己。

GeneralKanoli
My brother you just called the owner of the second largest air fleet in the world underdeveloped. Chinese airports are some of the largest and most over engineered marvels in the world, China is also the third country to produce domestic passenger jets

兄弟，你刚把世界第二大航空机队的拥有国称为欠发达国家。中国机场是全球规模最大、建设最顶尖的奇迹之一，中国还是第三个能自主制造民用客机的国家。

Striking-Somewhere44
let's compare airports between US and China then?

那要不我们比比美国和中国的机场？

aliquotsplit
The bloat, grift, and plain inefficiency of CA HSR will hopefully scare off any future attempts at building more.

加州高铁的臃肿、腐败和低效，希望能吓退以后所有想建高铁的人。

MARSHALCOGBURN999
Redditors when they don't realize we have planes lMao

红迪网网友连我们有飞机都不知道是吧，笑死人。

xxxHAL9000xxx
we have airports. why is this nonsense still discussed?

我们有机场，为什么还在扯这些废话？

nono3722
I love how all the highspeed rails avoid places where people might actually use it ie: no NY, New England, the entire west coast. Hell 1/4 of it is in Canada...

我笑死，所有高铁都避开了真正有人用的地方，比如纽约、新英格兰、整个西海岸。见鬼，四分之一都建到加拿大去了……

Fox-Flimsy
Assuming you are cracking a joke right?

你是在开玩笑吧？

nono3722
gah im an idiot lol

啊我是个傻子，哈哈。

Turbulent-Phone-8493
Nah. Passenger rail in the US bleeds money. Amtrak requires $50 in government subsidy per trip. Compare this to regional airlines, which are (barely) break even without subsidies, and all the airport infrastructure is already built out. Innaddition, 92% of American households own a car.What’s the argument for high speed rail in a country that has extensive regional airlines network, high car ownership, and no HSR business model?https://www.buses.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Report-Modal-Subsidies-ABA.pdfhttps://www.forbes.com/advisor/car-insurance/car-ownership-statistics/

得了吧。美国客运铁路一直在亏钱。美铁每趟车要花政府 50 美元补贴。再看看支线航空，不用补贴也能勉强盈亏平衡，而且机场基建早就建好了。另外，92% 的美国家庭都有车。在一个拥有完善支线航空网络、私家车普及率极高、又没有高铁盈利模式的国家，建高铁的理由在哪？

Low-Temperature-6962
Highways and roads are subsidized in the US ... it's called asphalt socialism.

美国的高速公路和公路全靠补贴…… 这叫沥青社会主义。

Turbulent-Phone-8493
But cars and operation are not subsidized. Why add an additional subsidized middle class of transport. What’s the specific benefit over existing modes?

但汽车本身和使用是没有补贴的。为什么还要多搞一种需要补贴的交通方式？比现有交通方式好在哪？

Mr-MuffinMan
But the thing cars require are subsidized...

但汽车需要的配套设施是有补贴的啊……

Turbulent-Phone-8493
But if you built HSR, the car dubsidies would still remain.

可就算建了高铁，汽车的补贴照样还在。

KoaKumaGirls
Cars and operation are totally subsidized, our money is all up in oil production and auto manufacturing

汽车和使用全程都有补贴，我们的钱全都投在了石油生产和汽车制造业上。

Johnrays99
They are totally subsidized, think of all the taxes we pay to use cars. The land we lost, the air quality we sacrifice the entire focus on oil we have, from our military to specific wars. The oil business that get free reign of their business with tax cuts

汽车完全是补贴出来的。想想我们为了用车交的税，牺牲的土地，变差的空气质量，还有我们为了石油投入的一切，从军队到各种战争。石油行业靠着减税肆无忌惮地赚钱。

Turbulent-Phone-8493
But even if we build HSR, those costs remain

可就算我们建了高铁，这些成本还是不会消失。

Low-Temperature-6962
If roads are subsidized then operation is subsidized. Please be logical,at least.

如果道路有补贴，那使用就等于有补贴。麻烦至少讲点逻辑。

Whanksta
so does the military, the police, your sports stadium, any public service.

军队、警察、体育馆、任何公共服务不也一样有补贴。

Turbulent-Phone-8493
But it’s duplicative of transportation that doesn’t require subsidies.

可这是在重复建设本来就不需要补贴的交通系统。

KoaKumaGirls
The us auto industry bailouts and road maintenance etc ?

美国汽车业的救助资金、道路养护费这些不算？

Turbulent-Phone-8493
lix to study that compares HSR costs to road maintenance?

拿一份对比高铁成本和道路养护成本的研究报告来看看？

jubileevdebs
People who cant afford cars are still paying to subsidize roads and freeways through taxes.There are many areas of the US where toll roads are the only timesmart way to drive between two points. People who cant afford tolls dont make the trip.An HSR line that serves even just those 2 populations is definitionally non-duplicative.Add to the fact that car owners may forego driving and prefer HSR for reasons (like theyre going INTO a city with good public transit and bad parking) then those people are not wearing down the roads/freeways with their vehicles.What do you mean youre ordering a chicken sandwich?? I told you that you could eat half of my giant ham omelette. Whats with the duplicative food ordering?

就算买不起车的人，也还在交税补贴公路和高速。美国很多地方，收费公路是两点之间唯一省时的路线，付不起过路费的人就只能不去。就算高铁只服务这两类人，也绝对不算重复建设。更何况有车一族也可能放弃开车选择高铁（比如去公共交通好但停车难的城市），这样就不会用车去磨损道路。你点鸡肉三明治是什么意思？我都说了你可以分我大半块火腿蛋卷。干嘛非要重复点吃的？

spkgsam
You think regional airlines aren’t subsidized?Airlines also pay basically no taxes on jet fuel.Almost all roads are built and maintained with public funds.But somehow, rail travel has to be self sustainable?

你以为支线航空没有补贴？航空公司的航空燃油几乎不交税。几乎所有道路都是用公共资金修建和养护的。怎么到了铁路，就必须自负盈亏？

KoaKumaGirls
Stop us from relying on air transport and cars, duh.

让我们别再过度依赖航空和汽车啊，废话。

Turbulent-Phone-8493
What’s wrong with airplanes and cars. How will HSR help.

飞机和汽车有什么问题？高铁能解决什么？

Possible-playful
planes and cars are great for individual convenience, but terrible for many reasons outside of that.Noise pollution and ocean acidification are things. Plus concrete production for infrastructure like overpasses and runways is actually a pretty large source of CO2 emissions.

飞机和私家车在个人便利上很不错，但除此之外在很多方面都很糟糕。噪音污染和海洋酸化都是问题。此外，建造立交桥、跑道等基础设施所需的混凝土生产，实际上是二氧化碳排放的一大来源。

Turbulent-Phone-8493
I don’t see how ocean acidification is relevant. If you have lived near a train track, noise pollution is really bad. It takes a lot of concrete to build rail lines and overpasses. Not convinced.

我不明白海洋酸化和这有什么关系。如果你住在铁轨附近，噪音污染也非常严重。修建铁路和立交桥同样需要大量混凝土。我不认同。

DD4cLG
Rail infrastructure cost lesser to build and maintain than road infrastructure in practice. While having between 20-40x more capacity.

实际上，铁路基础设施的建设和维护成本比公路更低，运力却是公路的 20 到 40 倍。

Possible-playful
That's fine, I don't care about convincing someone with their mind already made up.CO2 in the air becomes CO2 in the water, and it's mildly acidic. It's actually the same in the body; it doesn't sense a lack of oxygen, but rather low pH of the blood, which triggers a breathing response. But, the ocean doesn't have the option to purge out CO2 and suck in a bunch of oxygen to correct the pH like we do.

没关系，我不在乎说服一个已经打定主意的人。空气中的二氧化碳会溶入水中，使海水呈弱酸性。这和人体的原理其实是一样的：人体感知到的不是缺氧，而是血液 pH 值过低，从而触发呼吸反应。但海洋无法像我们一样排出二氧化碳、吸入大量氧气来调节 pH 值。

Turbulent-Phone-8493
Co2 could be an interesting argument if the marginal abatement cost of HSR is lower than other strategies. Typical carbon abatement options are $100/ton. How does HSR compare? lix?

如果高铁的边际减碳成本低于其他方案，那二氧化碳这个论点还有点意思。常见的减碳方案成本是每吨 100 美元。高铁相比之下如何？给个链接？

Commercial_Paint_557
there's plenty wrong with cars and planescars are incredibly inefficient and time consuming compared to trains. its also a shitty stressful lifestyle, there's a reason Europeans don't express the insane road rage Americans do. Americans just snap under the stress of constant drivingSitting around in traffic for 4 hours a day is economically harmful and also imparts a poor lifestyle. LA traffic? Jesus christ. Driving into NYC at rush hour? Traveling around American cities is shit compared to european ones with nice public transportationAmerica needs good public transportation. Not only does it need new public transport the existing public transport is so bad its actually comical. Its an embarrassment

汽车和飞机有一大堆问题。和火车相比，汽车效率极低、又浪费时间，这种生活方式还糟糕又压抑。欧洲人不会像美国人那样有疯狂的路怒症，是有原因的 —— 美国人就是在持续开车的压力下绷不住了。每天堵在路上 4 小时，既损害经济，又造就糟糕的生活方式。
洛杉矶的堵车？我的天。高峰时段开车进纽约？和公共交通发达的欧洲城市比，美国城市的出行体验烂透了。美国需要优质的公共交通。不仅需要新建，现有的公共交通烂得简直可笑，太丢人了。

Turbulent-Phone-8493
Public transport won’t grow if it requires operating subsidies.

如果公共交通需要运营补贴，就不可能发展起来。

Antoine8811
Even in China (a country with 3-4x the density of us), HSR still bleeds money.The economics just aren't there to implement anything like this in the US.

就算在人口密度是美国三四倍的中国，高铁也一直在亏损。从经济角度来看，美国根本不具备建这种东西的条件。

Efficient-Rich-9975
But building and maintaining large massive roads doesn't bleed money?Is your car that you buy for money, need to maintain and buy gas for, free?Explain "bleeding money"?

可修建和维护大规模的公路就不烧钱吗？你花钱买的车、需要保养和加油，难道是免费的？你解释一下什么叫 “烧钱”？

Exploding_Pie
Public transport is designed to bleed money because it serves more than what it itself is worth. Trains are just the best mode of transportation for trips between 2-6 hours.

公共交通本来就不是为盈利而建的，因为它的价值远不止自身营收。火车就是 2 到 6 小时行程里最佳的交通方式。

Antoine8811
In the US once you reach you're destination you need a car.

在美国，你到了目的地还是得开车。

Exploding_Pie
And there's your entire problem.

这就是你们所有问题的根源。

Antoine8811
But this problem is a mix of cultural, structural, NIMBY problem that no amount of investment in rail or "urban planning" is going to solve.Pragmatically all we can do is hope mass networks of cheap self driving cars will solve / make up for it.If that train was running in most places in the US it would have 15 people on it (10 of which would be homeless just riding it to get some rest).I've lived in China for a few years, I get it, public transit is great there.But many places (including most of the US) simply isn't built for it, and building out trains here isn't going to change that.

但这个问题是文化、城市结构、邻避主义综合导致的，砸再多钱在铁路或 “城市规划” 上也解决不了。务实点说，我们只能指望廉价自动驾驶汽车的大规模网络化能解决或弥补这个问题。如果这种火车在美国大部分地区运行，车上可能就 15 个人（其中 10 个还是无家可归的人，只是坐车休息）。
我在中国住过几年，我知道，那里的公共交通很棒。但很多地方（包括美国大部分地区）的城市规划根本不适合公共交通，在这里建铁路也改变不了这一点。

Exploding_Pie
Yup, high speed rail is only effective when you have a robust public transportation system to support it. But hey let's put all that money into the AI bubble and wars in the middle east because the Epstein class comes first.

没错，只有在有完善的公共交通系统支撑时，高铁才能发挥效用。但行吧，咱们把钱都投进 AI 泡沫和中东战争里好了，毕竟权贵阶层才是第一位的。

ai_art_is_art
Rail always loses money. In every. Single. Country.planes are our super power.Cars are our super-duper power.Once we have self-driving cars, it's game over. The roads become an internet-like network of on-demand routing of everything. Nobody will have to pay attention to anything.Way better than HSR or heavy rail of any kind.

铁路在每个国家都亏钱。飞机是我们的超级能力。汽车是我们的特大能力。等我们有了自动驾驶汽车，一切就尘埃落定了。道路会变成像互联网一样的按需调度网络，所有人都不用操心任何事。比高铁或任何重型铁路都强得多。

NoAd4402
Lol this is God tier level bait with the name and everything holy moly whats even the point of being this blatant

笑死，这名字和言论简直是顶级钓鱼，我的天，这么明目张胆图啥啊。

Left_Somewhere_4188
Yeah it looses money, it's still the best and much faster than planes for intermediate distances.

就算亏钱，它在中短途行程里依然是比飞机好得多、快得多的选择。

Exploding_Pie
Actually you're wrong. WALKING IS ALWAYS BEST. YOU ARE 100% FREE TO TRAVEL WHEREVER INSTEAD OF BEING RESTRICTED BY METAL.

其实你错了。走路永远是最好的。你可以百分百自由地去任何地方，而不是被金属器械束缚。

ai_art_is_art
I want to go to Japan. And Australia.

我想去日本，还有澳大利亚。

Johnrays99
lol like the rails would push out any cars ?

笑死，就这还想取代汽车？

Low-Temperature-6962
CA HSR could have been finished years ago grabbing a portion of the 5 billion/yr LA/SF revenue. But it got intertwined with real estate speculation as a new commuter rail and corrupt planning and construction slow walking to stretch revenue until forever. Foreign wars have nothing to do with CA HSR failure.

加州高铁本可以在几年前完工，瓜分洛杉矶到旧金山每年 50 亿美元的交通收益。但它被捆绑上房地产投机，变成了新的通勤铁路，再加上规划腐败、施工拖延，想一直榨取收益。加州高铁的失败和对外战争毫无关系。

Swagastan
I remember when I voted for high speed rail while in college in CA 20 years ago. On ground and above ground transit innovation is basically over in the US, only hope of high speed non-air based transit between cities would be if we ever greatly improve tunneling.

我还记得 20 年前在加州上大学时投票支持高铁。美国的地面和高架交通创新基本已经死了，城市间非航空高速交通的唯一希望，就是大幅提升隧道挖掘技术。

Repulsive_Guy_1234
Chinese must be dumb to build railroads off the coast in america into the ocean!!!!!

中国人也太蠢了吧，居然在美国海岸外往海里修铁路！！！

Hayayeatrutgers
China recoups HSR investment through real property development around the stations, which usually covers tens of thousands acres of high density residential/commercial real property. Real property development of such scales are practically impossible in US.

中国通过高铁站周边的房地产开发收回高铁投资，通常涉及数万亩高密度住宅和商业用地。这种规模的房地产开发在美国几乎不可能实现。

ControlAgreeable4180
Only a few lines are profitable. The train company is in crazy debt and losing money everyday. Of course, such an infrastructure may not need to be "for profit". But it cannot run indefinitely with crazy losses unless the government is willing to pick up the tab.It only works on lines between heavy population centers.

只有少数线路盈利，铁路公司负债累累，每天都在亏钱。当然，这类基础设施未必需要 “盈利”，但如果亏损严重，除非政府愿意兜底，否则不可能一直这么运营下去。高铁只在人口密集的中心城市之间可行。

Hot-Train7201
People just want the shiny new toy and don't want to hear about all the problems that come with the toy.

人们就是想要光鲜的新玩具，不想听玩具带来的所有问题。

crowdl
No single public service needs to be profitable, as long as the State as a whole is.Has anyone ever asked for the police to be profitable? Sounds ridiculous right? Well, same with trains.

没有任何一项公共服务需要盈利，只要国家整体盈利就行。有人要求警察局盈利吗？听起来很荒谬对吧？火车也是一样的道理。

Far-Presence-7359
Has anyone ever asked for the police to be profitable? Sounds ridiculous rightThey ask that question. If there is no crime in area they don't have cops around there.

有人要求警察局盈利吗？听起来很荒谬对吧还真有人这么想。如果一个地方没有犯罪，就不会有警察驻守。

PorkMaster37
In 3 covid years China Railway Co. suffered huge losses each year, to the tune of 175 billion RMB in total. In all other years since 2016 it has turned a profit, though only a few billion each year. This is without taking into account of the real estate appreciations around the HSR stations.Overall, its debt to asset ratio has been holding steady at around 65% for over 10 years, with an uptick above 66% during covid, and has since improved to 62.5% in 2025.

疫情三年，中国铁路总公司每年都巨额亏损，总计约 1750 亿元人民币。2016 年之后的其他年份均实现盈利，尽管每年仅几十亿。这还没算高铁站周边的房产增值。总体来看，其资产负债率十多年来稳定在 65% 左右，疫情期间小幅升至 66% 以上，2025 年已改善至 62.5%。

Hayayeatrutgers
When talking about profit, the entity is the local municipal government, who invested in the HSR construction and land development. The train company always receives subsidies from the government. Its complicated and almost impossible to generate a clear picture.

说到盈利，主体是投资高铁建设和土地开发的地方市政府。铁路公司一直有政府补贴，情况很复杂，几乎不可能算得一清二楚。

blankarage
we do exactly the same, bright line (in CA) basically has rights to develop near the rail stops

我们也这么做，加州的光亮线铁路基本拥有车站周边的开发权。

Hayayeatrutgers
Don't know much about bright line. But my speculation is that the scale of the development right is much smaller, making it difficult to recoup the investment. Let alone the delay and budget overrun.

我不太了解光亮线，但我猜测其开发权规模小得多，很难收回投资，更别说工程延误和预算超支了。

IsItSafeToMine
Globally, high-rise residential and commericials areas are planned around stations even before they're built. While the population density might not exist at the start, the construction of even just light or medium rail results in urban development. People are more than willing to move and buy homes closer to where the public transportation is if it serves their needs. The US refuses to invest in their population and would rather waste that money on bombs and warplanes to deliver them. They lost just $400m+ in F-15Es the past week to friendly fire alone. Not to mention the tens to hundreds of billions in ordnance spent on attacking Iran.

在全球范围内，高铁站建设前就会规划周边的高层住宅和商业区。哪怕一开始人口密度不高，哪怕只是建轻轨或普速铁路，也会带动城市发展。只要公共交通便利，人们非常愿意搬到附近买房居住。美国拒绝为民众投资，宁愿把钱浪费在炸弹和战机上。光是上周，美军就因误击损失了价值 4 亿多美元的 F-15E 战机，更别说袭击伊朗花费的数百亿军火费了。

Hayayeatrutgers
You totally miss the point. In China, local government usually grab cheap land in secrecy, then announce the HSR plan, then auction the development right, to harvest all the speculation on land value. You build HSR to creat/gentrify a community, not to serve one otherwise with potential, because the value increase is limited in established areas.

你完全没抓住重点。在中国，地方政府通常先秘密低价拿地，再公布高铁规划，然后拍卖开发权，收割所有土地增值收益。建高铁是为了打造、升级一个社区，而不是服务本来就有潜力的区域，因为成熟区域的增值空间有限。

Hayayeatrutgers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrP5QeD5_zE 04:00-05:00. This is not a HSR, but the underlaying logic is the same. Expensive public transit projects have to ride the tide of real property boom.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrP5QeD5_zE 04:00-05:00。

这不是高铁，但底层逻辑一样。昂贵的公共交通项目必须依托房地产热潮。

crustyeng
It’s almost as if the vast majority of the US doesn’t have anywhere near the population density that would make such a thing sensible to do.

说白了，美国绝大部分地区的人口密度，根本达不到建高铁的合理标准。

Affectionate_Daddyx
On the east Coast, there are cities with millions of population hour or two apart. There isn't even a reliable slow train service, let alone the highspeed. Your statement is so bad, cope somewhere

美国东海岸有不少百万人口城市，相距仅一两小时车程。连靠谱的普速铁路都没有，更别说高铁了。你这话太扯了，别找借口了。

Patient_Leopard421
In my experience, the NE Amtrak ("Acela Corridor") is reliable. Portland Maine to Richmond Virginia is well-served. The actual express/Acela service is a bit limited (Boston to DC) but regional service is fine.It's definitely NOT high speed. It's slow and over lines shared with freight. But it is reliable (compared to air travel anyway).But the only "east coast" cities of that size that are either south of Richmond (and not two hours apart) or inland quite a bit like Pittsburg (and probably not two hours from anything).

以我的经验，美国东北部的美铁（阿西乐走廊）很靠谱。从缅因州波特兰到弗吉尼亚州里士满的服务很完善。真正的特快 / 阿西乐服务范围有限（波士顿到华盛顿），但区域线路还行。它绝对不是高铁，速度慢，还和货运铁路共用轨道。但至少比航空靠谱。
但东海岸符合规模的城市，要么在里士满以南（间距远超两小时），要么是匹兹堡这类内陆城市（到哪都差不多要两小时以上）。

crustyeng
Those millions of people typically live spread out in suburbs

那几百万人大都分散住在郊区。

BlueWonderfulIKnow
China doesn’t have a underclass that would throw e-scooters on the track and kill every living soul on the train.

中国不会有底层人士往铁轨上扔电动滑板车，害死整列车的人。

peathah
You only have those because mental health care and healthcare in general is bankrupting. Because you allow shit in your food and and still use asbestos and fire much longer lead in paints and gasoline.Then there should be less underclass to do these shenanigans.And China also has some people trying to open a window/ door in a plane or throw pennies in an airplane engine for good luck. But they manage them better.

你们会出现这种事，是因为心理健康和医疗体系彻底崩溃，是因为食品监管混乱，还在使用石棉，油漆和汽油里的铅超标太久。这样才会有这么多底层人士搞这种恶作剧。中国也有人试图在飞机上开窗、开门，或往飞机引擎里扔硬币求好运，但他们处理得更好。

Eastern_Ad6546
I wana cry. wtf... why can't we have nice things

我想哭。搞什么啊…… 为什么我们就不能拥有好东西。

YakResident_3069
Cuz we the poors and they the elites design it this way for maximum extraction

因为我们是穷人，权贵阶层把体系设计成这样，就是为了最大限度榨取利益。

Few_Inspector_9628
Be smart comrade. If you're poor, how can I make money with you? Why not design it so you're rich?

清醒点，同志。如果你是穷人，我怎么从你身上赚钱？我干嘛不把体系设计成让你变穷的样子？

n4spd2
Just imagine if americans rebuilt transportation with high speed rail,if we grew sustainable energy year after year and moved away from fossil fuelsif we lift the burden of higher education for a stronger workforce for the future.if we built basic universal health care for our hard working and proud citizens, removing burdening overhead and middlemenwe have much to do, with people that want to do the work, and the opportunity to proud on the world stage.wtf are we doing?

想象一下，如果美国人用高铁重建交通体系，如果我们逐年发展可持续能源，摆脱化石燃料，如果我们免除高等教育负担，打造未来更强的劳动力，如果我们为勤劳自豪的公民建立基础全民医保，剔除沉重的管理成本和中间商，我们有太多事可以做，有愿意做事的人，有在世界舞台上骄傲的机会。我们到底在干什么？

Flessuh
It's amazing how many engineering projects the Chinese manage to finish the last few decades.

过去几十年，中国人完成的工程项目数量惊人。

lazy-crazy-s
what is the cost of high speed railway in california? the problem is not technology but in land rights. in China land can be easily nationalized

加州高铁花了多少钱？问题不在技术，而在土地产权。在中国，土地可以轻松国有化。

Vietxa
The gov can force eminent domain too. Those caaes are rarely won by the people.

美国政府也可以动用国家征用权，民众几乎赢不了这类官司。

ChinaIsGood888
The US culture is to let the Private sector handle these things. This is why naïve gullible Japan copied USA private sector free market nonsense, and you end up with multiple different train companies and it's confusing AF as a tourist trying to use it the first time.

美国的文化是让私营部门处理这些事。这就是为什么天真易骗的日本照搬了美国私营部门自由市场那套鬼话，最后搞出一堆不同的铁路公司，游客第一次用简直一头雾水。

Due-Explanation1959
Not if , not wasted ( I mean it’s wasted) but you have to put it correctly Government and plp in power CHOSE to spend it on military in stead. John kiriaku and few others mentioned it in podcast. We could have star wars like cities with flying cars . But no we chose for military

不是建不成，也不是钱浪费了（我是说确实浪费了），但你要说清楚：是政府和掌权者选择把钱花在了军事上。约翰・基里阿库和其他人在播客里提过。我们本可以拥有星战里那样会飞的汽车的城市，但没有，我们选了军事。

NoItsRex
people cant drive their street ground car, what makes you think giving people flying cars will not end poorly

人们连地面的车都开不好，你凭什么觉得给他们飞车不会搞砸。

Due-Explanation1959
Flying cars won’t ofvourse It was a methaphore Point is it they wanted cheaper living or better social care they would have done it Instead they choose other priorities

飞车当然不会成真，我只是打个比方。重点是，如果他们想让生活成本更低、社会福利更好，本来可以做到，结果他们选了别的优先事项。

William_Ce
High speed trains in China are a product of a highly restricted airspace controlled by the military. It is cheaper to build airports in most places. Most train lines in China are losing money.

中国高铁是军方严格管控空域的产物。在大多数地方，建机场其实更便宜。中国大部分铁路线路都在亏损。

TurretLimitHenry
LOL, HSR is a scam.

笑死，高铁就是骗局。

Deeeeeeeer1895
Speed never lies.

速度不会骗人。

RedBrowning
Have you been to China?Their zoning laws mean population are concentrated in large housing districts and tall buildings. It makes it a lot easier and economical to connect population areas when the cities are concentrated. It wouldn't work in the US because our cities would require many, many more train stations and stops, they are too spread out.

你去过中国吗？他们的区划法律让人口集中在大型住宅区和高楼里。城市集中，连接人口区域就更简单、更经济。这在美国行不通，因为我们的城市太分散，需要多得多的车站和停靠点。

Patient-Tomato1579
This is true mainly for the public local transport, like bus & tram. However, high speed rail across largest US city centers would absolutely make sense - as a much more planet-friendly and cheaper mode of travel, instead of planes. Initial investment required would be extremely high, but then it would pay out.

这主要适用于公交、有轨电车这类本地公共交通。但连接美国核心大城市的高铁绝对合理 —— 作为比飞机更环保、更便宜的出行方式。初期投资极高，但后期会有回报。

RedBrowning
For high speed rail to work you need to minimize the number of stops. US citi3s just are not as population dense. It would take an extensive local transit system to connect enough of the population to your high speed rail hubs. Without local transit connections, what's the point of this vs just flying?

高铁要运行，就必须尽量减少停靠站。美国城市人口密度不够，需要庞大的本地交通系统把足够多的人口接到高铁枢纽。没有本地交通衔接，比起直接坐飞机，高铁还有什么意义？

NoOption7406
What's the population difference of the same area?China has ~141 cities over 1 million people. USA. 11.China has ~18 cities over 10 million people. USA. 0.China still has an extensive road network. Overlay it with the usa and it'll look crazy dense.Also, another thing to consider, USA choose air travel. Then 9/11 hit and sloeed that waaaay down. Non travelers used to be able to wait at the gate. Security was light. You could show up 30 minutes before your flight and be fine. China has really taken off over the last couple decades economically. Not sure if security is as bad as tsa, but if it is, You'll have the incentive to pick building trains over airplanes. airports also take up a lot of space which isn't good for high population density.

同等面积的人口差距有多大？中国有 141 座百万人口城市，美国只有 11 座。中国有 18 座千万人口城市，美国一座都没有。中国还有密集的公路网，和美国比起来密度高得吓人。还有一点，美国本来选择航空出行，结果 911 事件发生，航空流程大幅变慢。以前非乘客也能在登机口等候，安检宽松，起飞前 30 分钟到就行。中国过去几十年经济腾飞，不确定中国安检是否像美国 TSA 一样繁琐，但如果是的话，就更有理由建铁路而非飞机。机场还占地巨大，不利于高人口密度区域。

2nd-4851
Trilions of debt Not worth it

万亿债务，不值得。

Many-Manufacturer867
Yeah bc the us has the same population density to commercially support that. False comparison

是啊，因为美国有和中国一样的人口密度来支撑商业运营。这对比太假了。

Briz-TheKiller-
That California governor wasted billions, so its not certain, that money if not in war would be used for railways

加州州长浪费了数十亿，所以说不准，就算不花在战争上，这些钱也未必会用在铁路上。