Why The US Has No High-Speed Rail


China has the fastest and largest
high-speed rail network in the world. The country has more than 19,000
miles of high-speed rail, the vast majority of which was built
in the last decade. Japan’s bullet trains can reach speeds
of almost 200 miles per hour. And date back to the 1960s. They’ve become a staple for domestic travel
and have moved more than 9 billion people without a
single passenger casualty. France began service of the high-speed TGV
train in 1981 and the rest of Europe quickly followed. And high-speed rail is quickly expanding all
over the world in places like India, Saudi Arabia, Russia
Iran and Morocco. And then there’s the U.S. The U.S. used to be one of the world’s global
leaders in rail but after World War II there was a massive shift. If you look at the United States prior
to 1945, we had a very extensive rail system everywhere. It all was working great except a number
of companies in the auto and oil industries decided that for them to
have a prosperous future they really needed to basically help phase out all the
rail and get us all into cars. The inflexible rails permanently embedded
in cobblestones were paved over to provide smooth, comfortable transportation
via diesel motor coach. General Motors, Firestone Tire, Standard Oil
and a few other companies that got together and they were able to
buy up all the nation’s streetcar systems and then quickly start
phasing out service and literally dismantling all the systems over
about a 10-year span. In the 1950s, President Dwight Eisenhower
signed a bill to create the National Interstate System. It allocated about $25 billion dollars
to build 41,000 miles of highways. The federal government paid for 90% of
that, the states covered the final 10 and rail fell by the wayside. Can’t you see that this highway means a
whole new way of life for the children? And a way of life that we have
a chance to help plan and, and to build. We dedicated a huge amount of
dollars to building automobile infrastructure in the middle of the 20th century and
we’re still kind of attached to that model of development. We went from a rail-served country to
a auto-dependent nation by the 1960s. We’ve become a car culture and it’s
hard to break out of that cycle. Not to mention the fact that in
our political system we have very powerful oil lobbies, car manufacturing lobbies,
aviation lobbies, all the entities that the high-speed rail would
have to compete with. This is the American dream
of freedom on wheels. We average some 850 cars per
thousand inhabitants in the U.S., in China it’s only 250. And we’ve never gone back. But according to some this
country’s transportation ecosystem is reaching a tipping point. When you look at what’s happening
with the corridor development, again states across the U.S. who are recognizing they are running out
of space to expand their highways or interstates. There are limits at airports, there
is aviation congestion, so what are the options? A better rail system is one
and could come with significant benefits. It’s largely an environmental good to
switch from air traffic and car traffic to electrified
high-speed rail. That’s a much lower
emission way of traveling. When the high-speed rail between Madrid
and Barcelona in Spain came into operation, I mean air travel just
plummeted between those cities and everyone switched over to high-speed
rail which was very convenient. People were happier. They weren’t forced to switch, they did
it because it was a nicer option to take high-speed rail. There’s a sort of a rule of thumb
for trips that are under three or four hours in trip length from city to city,
those usually end up with about 80 or 90 percent of the
travel market from aviation. Where rail exists and it’s convenient
and high-speed, it’s very popular. America I think is waking up to this
idea that rail is a good investment for transportation infrastructure. One survey showed 63% of Americans would
use high-speed rail if it was available to them. Younger people want it even more. Right now the main passenger
rail option in the U.S. is Amtrak. It’s operated as a for-profit company
but the federal government is its majority stakeholder. Train systems reaching top speeds of over
110 to 150 miles per hour are generally considered high-speed and only one
of Amtrak’s lines could be considered as such. That’s its Acela line in the
Northeast Corridor running between D.C., New York and Boston. One of the challenges we face is that
the Northeast Corridor has a lot of curvature, a lot of geometry. We really operate Acela Express on an
alignment that in some places was designed back in the nineteen hundreds and
so it really was never designed for high-speed rail. And while the Acela line can reach up
to 150 miles per hour, it only does so for 34 miles of its 457 mile span. Its average speed between New York and
Boston is about 65 miles per hour, which is in stark contrast to
China’s dedicated high-speed rail system which regularly travels at over
200 miles per hour. But some people are
trying to fix that. In 2008 California voted
yes on high-speed rail. Now, a decade later, construction is underway
in the Central Valley of the state. And right now it is the
only truly high-speed rail system under construction in the U.S. Ultimately high-speed rail is a 520
mile project that links San Francisco to Los Angeles and
Anaheim, that’s phase one. And it’s a project that’s
being built in building blocks. So the one behind me is the
largest building block that we’re starting with, this 119 mile segment. This segment will run
from Bakersfield to Merced. Eventually the plan is to build a
line from San Francisco to Anaheim, just south of L.A. But as it stands the state is almost
$50 billion short of what it needs to actually do that. The current project as planned would
cost too much and, respectfully, take too long. There’s been too little oversight
and not enough transparency. We do have the capacity to complete
a high-speed rail link between Merced and Bakersfield. After Gavin Newsom made that speech
President Trump threatened to pull federal funding for the project. We will continue to
seek other funding. We hope the federal government will
resume funding the, contributing new funds to the project. I think in the future, as
the federal government has funded major construction of infrastructure over time
they’ll again direct money to high-speed rail because in fact it’s
not just California but other states are also interested in
high-speed rail systems. To complete the entire line as planned,
the official estimate is now over $77 billion and it’s unclear where
the money will come from. So why is it so expensive? Part of the problem in California, the
big price tag is getting through the Tehachapi, very expensive tunneling, or over
the Pacheco Pass to get into San Jose from the Central Valley. You know, Eastern China, the flatlands
of Japan where they’ve built the Shinkansen, all of those are settings
where they have, didn’t incur the very high expense of boring and tunneling
that we face so the costs are different. And a lot of the money is
spent before construction can even begin. Just in this little segment here
alone we’re dealing with the private property owner, we’re dealing with a
rail company, we’re dealing with the state agency and so
just the whole coordination. Then we’re dealing with a utility
company, just in this very small section; we had to relocate two miles
of freeway and that was roughly $150 million per mile. So there’s a lot of moving pieces
to, you know, anywhere we start constructing. China is the place
that many folks compare. They have like 29,000 kilometers of high-speed
rail and 20 years ago they had none. So how have they been able
to do it so quickly? And part of it is that the state
owns the land, they don’t have private property rights like we
have in the U.S. You don’t have the regulations we have
in terms of labor laws and environmental regulations that
add to cost. It also delays the projects. For some reason and I’ve never really
quite seen an adequate explanation as to why costs to build transit or
many big infrastructure projects are just dramatically higher than in other parts
of the world, including in other advanced countries. But the bottom line is we’re really
bad at just building things cheaply and quickly in the U.S. in general. So it’s not just rail infrastructure
that is expensive, all transportation infrastructure is. Just the physical investment in the freeway usually
will be 5 to 8 to 10 million per mile but if you add
seismic issues and land acquisition and utilities and environmental mitigation and
remediation of soils and factors like that it can become as high
as 100 or 200 million a mile. The numbers for high-speed rail can vary
anywhere from 20 to 80 million per mile. The big reason why America is behind
on high-speed rail is primarily money. We don’t commit the dollars needed to
build these systems, it’s really as simple as that. And it’s largely a political issue. We don’t have political leaders who
really want to dedicate the dollars needed. There’s a lot of forces in America
that really don’t want to see rail become our major mode of transportation
especially because it will affect passenger numbers on airplanes, it’ll
affect the use of autos. So you have the politics, the
message shaping and then the straight advertising and all three of those
coordinate and work together to keep America kind of focused on cars
and not focused on rail. Some of the earliest support for
rail came from the Nixon administration. Some of the original capital subsidies
and operating subsidies for urban transit came from the Republican party, so
I think it’s only more recently that maybe this has shifted that more
liberal leaning folks who care about climate and a whole host of urban
issues have really argued for investing very heavily in rail. If you had Democratic leadership on the
Senate and a different president or potentially some leverage for a president to
sign a new budget bill with some dollars for high-speed rail,
that could override those objections from Republicans in Congress. But I think it’s mostly ideological. They’re big on highways. They’re big on things
like toll roads. They just, they don’t want the government
spending dollars on this kind of project and they see it as
something those socialist European countries do but not something that should be
done in, you know, car-loving America. In my judgment, it would take a
very strong federal commitment, almost sort of a post-Second World War interstate
highway kind of large scale national commitment. This is why some high-speed rail
projects are trying to avoid public funding altogether. One company, Texas Central, plans to build
a bullet train from Houston to Dallas without using a
dime of taxpayer money. We’re taking what is laborious, unreliable
four-hour drive if you’re lucky and turning that into a
reliable, safe 90 minutes. And when you look at that as a
business plan being driven by data, this is the right place to build the first
high-speed train in the United States. The Texas project is backed by investors
motivated to make a profit and will use proven
Japanese rail technology. Texas Central’s goal is to
complete the project by 2025. Another private company is even further
along with its rail system, in Florida. It’s expanding its higher-speed
train from Miami to Orlando. Orlando’s the most heavily visited
City the United States. Miami is the most heavily visit
international city in the United States. It’s too far to drive, it’s too short
to fly, we had the rail link and that was really the
genesis of the project. Wes Edens has invested heavily in Florida’s
rail project which used to be called Brightline. Brightline recently rebranded to Virgin
Trains as the company partnered with Richard Branson’s Virgin Group. The team at Brightline, which is now
called Virgin Trains, has proven that it can work. The people actually want to get out of
their cars and they’d love to be on trains. In order to reach profitability, the
company sacrificed speed to save money. If you want to really go
high-speed you have to grade separate. So you basically have to build a bridge
for 250 miles that you then put a train on. That sounds hard, and it sounds expensive
and it’s both of those things. So a huge difference in cost, a huge
difference in time to build and not that much of a reduction in service. And now tech companies are
getting involved with infrastructure projects. In the Pacific Northwest a high-speed
rail plan is underway to connect Portland, Seattle and Vancouver. Microsoft contributed $300,000 towards
research for the project. Our number one priority from Microsoft as
well it to really see and pursue this high-speed rail effort happen. If you look around the United States
and where all of the Fortune 500 companies are located they all are
in a similar situation to Microsoft. The housing is unaffordable,
traffic congestion is epic. It’s too hard to get
anywhere and to get employees. So high-speed rail can solve this
same exact problem in numerous regions around the United States. So is the private sector the answer
to bringing high-speed rail to the U.S.? If the private sector wants to invest
in transportation and as long as it’s not impinging on the public taxpayers I
don’t see a problem with private sector moving forward. And I think there is some truth that
the private sector is gonna have much more of an incentive to hurry up
on the construction and get things done more quickly, more cheaply. That said, the private sector still has
to operate with the oversight and regulatory responsibilities of
the public sector. So for example environmental review doesn’t
go away just because it’s a private sector project. Labor standards don’t go away. The difference is that they don’t have to
keep trying to sell a project to the public for a vote to
raise taxes or sell bonds. Some people remain optimistic
that the U.S. can catch up to the rest of the
world and have a robust, high-speed rail system. We’re building that right
now behind us. This 119 mile segment that we want
to expand with the money we already have to 170 miles, it’s going to serve
a population of 3 million people in the Central Valley. So it’s, not only do I
believe, but it’s under construction. A lot of activity is now taking
shape, state rail authorities have been shaped in four or five states, so
they’re actually taking these on now as a legitimate project
and moving forward. I think the future is very bright
for train travel in the United States. There’s broad consensus with our policy
leaders in industry that it’s time to move an infrastructure bill and
that will certainly help kickstart U.S. rail. Others are much less confident. I wish I were
a little more optimistic. It’s just very difficult to
make the economics work here. No one has embraced it as a
strong part of their political platform. There’s just too many other
tough pressing problems we’re facing. I don’t see us catching up
to where the world is. It would take such a massive infusion
of dollars for that to happen in California and probably waving a
number of environmental requirements and some other government regulations that
hinder the quick deployment of these projects in favor
of other values. My own instincts are that it’s going
to be decades and decades of decades before you’ll be able to go a
one-seat trip from San Diego to Sacramento or San Francisco. It’d be nice if there was just
one simple answer, it’s this litany of factors that collectively add up that make this
so hard to pull off in the United States.

About the author

Comments

  1. USA is so full of it, it's so obvious they want to keep people inside of cars due to city police won't be able to ticket as often as they do and won't have the leverage to suspend people's drivers license because they can't afford the mandatory high dollar insurance that is now a law to have if you own a car and it's all bull that will one day fall on the heads of the entire economy of the USA,

  2. most of it built in the last decade………….but the trains were built in the 60's….that's real fast for the 60's . must have built a lot of extra trains!

  3. US:we need democracy and freedom for everyone opinion first !
    other countries :we build the HSR first, it's your freedom to choose

  4. The lack of courteousness and civility (and choice of not taking a daily shower) of riders on the average city bus or subway shows why people prefer their cars

  5. They just need gas at 10 dollars a gallon like in Europe, then demand will go up like crazy for long distance trains

  6. Because high speed rail is not needed when you make frequent stops from town to town.People fly mostly. The middle of the country is considered "fly over territory" according to the democratic party. Why have high speed from LA to the bay area. Why would I go to liberal Berkeley?

  7. My God I am very happy to know that America don't have any high speed train finally GOD help whole the world to remove American threat all over the world because if American infrastructure will poor then it's will die one day then whole world is going to war with sick America😂😂

  8. Short answer, we like cars. We do not want to get where we're going and then not have our car. Amtrak wouldn't exist without government subsidies. They are missing the point they first have to get Americans to want to use a train, then the market will make it happen. With no demand there will be no supply.
    Also, "most of the money is spent before construction begins" – welcome to California

  9. It would probably help if the government didn't give workers twice the pay per hour as if the same construction worker was doing a none government project I found this out a few years back when the construction company I worked for painted a government building and I got paid twice my nominal wages just because it was a government job but my job was to paint the building just like I would if I was painting someone's house the government in most things wast a lot of money

  10. The US is a big country…. people just fly everywhere to get somewhere because it's cheaper and quicker. If rail is ever gonna become successful in the US, it would have to be on a micro level like within states or within cities (lightrail) but european-style railway will never be a thing as long as the airline industry has a stronghold on the market.

  11. To all the non Americans commenting like they know something, shut up please for everyone’s benefit.

  12. Congress feel that it is more important to spend $4 billion dollars a MONTH IN Afghanistan (close to $50 BILLION a year) than a few billion a year on transportatiom infrastructure improvement. Though President Trump has expressed support for infrastructure improvements, what he is referring to are telecommunications, fossel fuel pipelines, inland freight rail "ports", etc., which is nothing but Corporate Welfare.

  13. Because they dont want to change from car and air travel because the us government would NOT make as much money if we had high speed rail

  14. The slow decline to 3rd world country status. Indicative of the lack in innovation and new technology implementation, reflective of the continuing downward trend in US competitive economic power.

  15. Everyone wants USA to be like rest of the world. Well we are not and I hope never. We have larger cars, homes and acreage to put our homes. Europeans and the rest of the world are squashed in apartments and tiny cars. We do need intercity rapid transportation because our roads are constrained.

  16. Should the question be why the United States doesn't have high speed rail, or why not one of the 50 States has high speed rail? That's 50 different governments, all with differing population densities, differing numbers of major cities, and differing distances between popular destinations. Has not one government nor one private entity in any state seen fit to invest in high speed rail? Why are so many people rejecting this one technology?

  17. CNBC… you like Chinas high-speed rail so much? Then move there and live in communist China. I heard so much B.S. in this video, it's pathetic. Plus, rail is nice if you want to move on their time schedule only. The US is such an individual based country, we all want to travel "when" we travel. You have a husband or wife or kids that alway make you late? On a train, they aren't going to wait. You'll have to learn to be on time and plan your schedule around the trains. We've gotten used to going when we want to go, or when we have the time to go. That's why high speed trains will NEVER work in the U.S.A.

  18. You mean we should have less government and less regulation? Because government and regulation make everything exponentially more expensive?

  19. Close the roads, scrap the cars, lay the tracks where there were once roads, lay hyperloops, cars only serve the individual and are a major cause of pollution and are ultimately selfish

  20. Regardless of why the US is not a world player with High Speed Rails, can anyone explain why Canada has no High Speed Rails? After all, if Canada's government is very similar to the European governments where HSR's exist, shouldn't Canada have already set the standard for the rest of the Americas to follow? I'm not picking on Canada so much as trying to point out that HSR is not so easy for North America. Otherwise, Canada would have done it already.

  21. I think it's a bad idea to let private companies take over the rail system, yes it's the future but if the government doesn't make it public from the beginning it'll just end being another expensive class divider. A mode of transportation for the rich. History is repeating itself can't wait to see train heists.

  22. Go to Australia , they do not even have a train from Melbourne airport to the city a distance of 25 klm . Talked about if 20 years ago and still has not happened .

  23. Easiest explanation is that most people in the U.S have cars for transportation with some of the lowest gas prices on Earth with much lower population densities than Europe/Asia, while the distance between metropolitan areas in the northeast are all driveable.

  24. This is one of my pet peeves. The US does not have high-speed rail because it does not have the WILL to have it. The unions don't want it because it will eliminate the 1950s choo-choo train system that Amtrak has in force now, the government doesn't want it because it requires some expertise from Asia that we can't seem to grasp for political reasons, and Americans are so in love with their cars, they would rather drive six hours to get to a city that can be reached in just over an hour with these trains. Americans just do not realize the economic benefit of living in an inexpensive city and working in an expensive one that is a few hundred miles away that you can get to in less than an hour. Tell me it's not cheaper to live in Philadelphia and work in New York City taking a train that gets there easily in less than a half-hour. So sad.

  25. No offense guys but as a German I felt like in a 3. world country, when I was taking a train from NY Penn Station to DC.

  26. You are the wrong people to put on this program, you are not "Qualified", you have no "Experience" and all you talk about is the money Not what the money will do, You are not saying anything about how to make it happen, go find some other "Desk" to park you feet under!!

  27. I think some people in the comment section just don't understand.
    The most valuable "Freight" that can be transported is a person. Sure, it doesn't seem as apparent as hauling coal, cars, or the like, but it's the truth. Moving people (workers, money, time), driving up competition (people can get jobs in neighboring cities/states and not have to worry about the commute), and of course also reducing our environmental impact and traffic in general.
    The interstate was our first massive boon, and has helped this country grow to where it's at now. A HSR would do the same.

  28. Once full disclosure takes place, the secret high speed anti-grav rail system underground will be revealed. MUCH faster than anything China or Japan has, trips from east coast to west coast in 2 hours…

  29. If high speed rail is viable, why hasn't the free market created it? In Colorado, private firms can use eminent domain for such things.

    It may turn out that automobile plus air travel is as efficient, and more flexible. All that infrastructure costs (money and CO2 emissions from cement mixing). I've traveled high speed rail, and it can be pleasant, but I wonder if Americans would welcome having to live in city centers in order to be able to use it, at least once their children are born and want to play outside. Air travel can be just as convenient.

  30. The Globalists gave all this tech to everyone else so they could continue the USA's path to being a 3rd world country. It isn't that hard to figure out look into Kissinger/Rockefellers in the early 70s plan

  31. haven't own a car in 12 years, after living in south beach, and having my BMW vandalized twice, i realized, living in an island i didn't need a car, later i moved back home, west palm beach Florida, to a historic neighborhood, i travel to work in a scooter,up and down the coast, safe and free of car expenses, $3 gas per week, 49 ccc no insurance needed…with uber and lift, new Brightline train,no car needed. i wrote today to my dr in Miami, from WPB, then back home, for about $20 each way, the service is superb, even on the "smart" level, wine, water coffee, even the bathroom features are environmentally smart, to minimized waste and save trees… luxury, affordable. it is a shame Avis rental car bought all Zipcar a car-sharing company i have been using, they are doing same as the oil companies, tires and car industry did to public transportation, i can no longer find any cars available; at one point we had 4 locations, 6 vehicles available, with gas and insurance included, for an average of $12 an hour, membership $70 a year.. they claim there os no demand, total BS, i will never rent from Avis, they are not good for the environment, if i can never find a car available at Zipcar, that means there is a demand…obviously they are full of it,k they also employed people out of this country, for phone customer service, the wait time has increased, their English is worst then mine lol, love the Brighline, about an hr to get to Miami with worry-free ride from congested I-95

  32. if the democrats wanted to effect climate change they would put in high speed rails to get people out of their cars and possibly get 1 % of the population or transporting goods faster cheaper

  33. A homogenous population is the reason public transportation works there. Or, in other words: who in their right mind wants the disease carrying great unwashed moved rapidly thru their neighborhood…

  34. With Elon Musk at the helm as far as technology goes… and the fact that he's US based, we'll be way ahead of the other countries in no time. Elon will fix the broken transportation system and it will happen faster than you think.

  35. It's to do with the distance. Rail is better around 150 to 300 miles distance and you need to be nearer the station. The US should have a similair system on the East coast to France and China. In the US the Cities are too far apart generally.

  36. They should put a gas tax on to pay for high speed Rail. Its the Oil and Car companies that had purchased the rail companies 80 years ago and ripped out the the tracks to make more Roads. They are the reason it is taking so long to produce trains and good public transportation.

  37. I live in L.A. and used to work in San Jose, for more than 2 years I had to make monthly trips between SoCal and NorCal. Driving would be the lesser of two evils when you compare it to the hassle of flying… Every time I was on that long 5-1/2 hour drive, which is boring as hell, I could not help but wonder wouldn’t it be great if there is a high speed rail available as an option, it definitely would be my preferred mode of transportation.

    I have travelled by HSR in Japan, China and Taiwan before, I have nothing but good things to say about HSR, it is safe, relaxing, affordable, and of course, fast.

    I don’t see why High Speed Rail can not coexist with flying and driving, they actually complement each other quite well. HSR definitely makes more sense in densely populated areas and although the concept of a national network may seem unrealistic but multiple regional networks are certainly feasible.

    In the West Coast, wouldn’t it be nice to have a HSR line that connects Seattle, Portland, Sacramento, San Francisco, San Jose, Fresno, L.A., San Diego and Phoenix?

  38. Because we give billions to 100+ countries and maintain a massive, world-wide global "police force." Furthermore, we are chuck full of parasitic spongers.

  39. you can easily borrow money from China for that kind of high-speed rail network……. LOL, do you dare, America? LOL

  40. America does not want to build a railway mainly because of pressure from the oil and ice car and truck lobby. Americans also make several excuses as to why they don’t get it done Japanese rail system is old now and America won’t want to set or develop this technology

  41. Noticed that the map over Europe includes Sweden with high speed rail road, but this ain't true. The majority of the Swedish railroad is in a bad need of upgrading which should have already be done in the 1980's, the rail road do not hold for high speeds at all and there is a plan of building one from Stockholm to Malmö, but the question is if there will be any money for it.

  42. California is broke……and now they want to spend more money they don't have on high speed trains?? Our politicans never stop spending!!

  43. I don’t want to pay more taxes Missouri for high speed rail in California.
    California can’t even manage their own budget.
    If investors want to invest in high speed rail then great. The democrats will use tax dollars to buy votes or pursue endless smear campaigns and baseless investigations against the Trump White House.
    No matter how much money you give the democrats it will never be enough.

  44. On the political side of these issues, is pretty much entirely thanks to conservatives who are terrified of change. Especially if it upsets their rich friends.

  45. The US Government subsidizes our railway systems, yet it can't turn a profit… Seems anything the government touches, dies on the vine and fails to be profitable.
    How bout we just recognize that its the government that stands in the way of rail evolution.

  46. Not so crazy thing, is that many major BUS lines in high population areas of the USA have gone "BANKRUPT" Public Service Transit in New Jersey had to be rescued by the State of New Jersey & the irony is that the majority of NJTransit routes are either Commuter Rail or Light-Rail on rail tracks that used to be owned by bankrupt freight railroads.

    Now California and Texas among 2 states building a form of High Speed rail essentially designed to be very similar to JAPAN EAST Shinkansen High Speed elevated rail, but there remains rural areas which remain to highly oppose any form of rail on grounds of their fear of loosing their land. Nevermind the fact that a Interstate highway typically REQUIRES a Right of Way about 1 Mile WIDE compared to the 100 ft. typically used by railroads. 🤨

  47. In my homeland, Guizhou China, the cost of high-speed rail is $26 million / mile, where the GDP per capita is $3200 / year. I sincerely think, this is an example of lifting life standard and implementing equal right of every citizen to access high-speed transportation. (Guizhou has 1000 miles high-speed rail combined until 2018)

  48. The railway system in Germany too was and still is under attack of the car, truck and logistics industry. But till today they did better than the US. At least.

  49. If the US need money for the military it's not a problem.
    stop short changing your citizens and give them something useful.

  50. All politics. USA needs High speed train now. One more thing why nobody rides the train in USA is because it is tooooo Expensive! People would rather drive than take the train.

    Hey, Politicians, you want to decrease the traffic , make train rides affordable.

  51. I like to feel like I have a form of personal agency that sone would call liberty. The US will probably come up with some otherworldly type of airspace/traffic deconfliction program and have corridors for personal VTOL aircraft and self driving cars at typical suburban residences before I would adopt those types of transportation systems. I value our liberty and pursuit of happiness to a fault, and I'll not surrender agency.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *