你认为美国未来会拥有像欧洲、中国和日本那样规模的高速客运铁路网络吗
正文翻译
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，这是可能的。美国拥有世界上排名前两的技术学院（加州理工学院、麻省理工学院），而中国许多壮观的摩天大楼都是由美国建筑师设计的。
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，这是可能的。美国拥有世界上排名前两的技术学院（加州理工学院、麻省理工学院），而中国许多壮观的摩天大楼都是由美国建筑师设计的。
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，美国拥有建设高速铁路所需的人才。但美国的大部分地区人口密度不足以支持高速铁路。它在东北部、东南部和加利福尼亚州可能会有效。美国其他地方人口稀少，无法使高速铁路具有经济可行性。如果费城和纽约市之间的高速铁路每天有10,000名乘客，那么孟菲斯和俄克拉荷马市之间的高速铁路每天只有300名乘客。要使第二条线路运营，每名乘客的成本将是第一条线路的30倍，大多数人不会愿意支付如此高的费用。中国以其先进的列车闻名，这些列车在大城市之间行驶，其中一些城市的人口比纽约市还要多。旅行的总费用由乘客人数分摊，因此每位乘客的费用较低。
因此，美国拥有建设高速铁路所需的人才。但美国的大部分地区人口密度不足以支持高速铁路。它在东北部、东南部和加利福尼亚州可能会有效。美国其他地方人口稀少，无法使高速铁路具有经济可行性。如果费城和纽约市之间的高速铁路每天有10,000名乘客，那么孟菲斯和俄克拉荷马市之间的高速铁路每天只有300名乘客。要使第二条线路运营，每名乘客的成本将是第一条线路的30倍，大多数人不会愿意支付如此高的费用。中国以其先进的列车闻名，这些列车在大城市之间行驶，其中一些城市的人口比纽约市还要多。旅行的总费用由乘客人数分摊，因此每位乘客的费用较低。
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.
总结来说，美国有可能拥有高速铁路，但仅在美国的三个地区实现是现实的。
总结来说，美国有可能拥有高速铁路，但仅在美国的三个地区实现是现实的。
评论翻译
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.
美国铁路的未来将与今天非常相似。
OP提到的那些国家比许多美国州要小。
日本的城市人口主要集中在其西海岸的一个狭长地带，基本上是一个几百英里长、只有几英里宽的超级大城市，面积大致相当于加利福尼亚州。
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.
美国铁路的未来将与今天非常相似。
OP提到的那些国家比许多美国州要小。
日本的城市人口主要集中在其西海岸的一个狭长地带，基本上是一个几百英里长、只有几英里宽的超级大城市，面积大致相当于加利福尼亚州。
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.
法国的面积是典型美国州的三倍，但每平方英里335人，人口密度是美国的10倍。巴黎人口250万，面积42平方英里。而一座人口为5万的美国城市的面积几乎和巴黎一样，达到35平方英里。一个50万人口的都市区则占地超过3000平方英里，没有足够的集中人口来使铁路高效运行。美国人认为过于拥挤的城市，其人口密度为每平方英里125人。往返于铁路车站的旅程将消耗掉在实际旅行中节省的所有时间。
法国的面积是典型美国州的三倍，但每平方英里335人，人口密度是美国的10倍。巴黎人口250万，面积42平方英里。而一座人口为5万的美国城市的面积几乎和巴黎一样，达到35平方英里。一个50万人口的都市区则占地超过3000平方英里，没有足够的集中人口来使铁路高效运行。美国人认为过于拥挤的城市，其人口密度为每平方英里125人。往返于铁路车站的旅程将消耗掉在实际旅行中节省的所有时间。
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.
美国人口稀疏——平均每平方英里不到35人，部分地区的面积甚至大于一些国家，而人口密度几乎是“每人几平方英里”。
美国人口稀疏——平均每平方英里不到35人，部分地区的面积甚至大于一些国家，而人口密度几乎是“每人几平方英里”。
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.
高速铁路的最大驱动因素是商务旅行（没人专程去美国城市度假，我们才是离开它们）。但商务旅行的需求已经大幅减少。自从新冠疫情以来，我没有遇到过任何客户要求现场工作——一切都是远程进行。客户能够获得更好的服务和价格。会议通过Zoom、WebEx或其他竞争对手进行。
高速铁路越来越像是20世纪的解决方案，针对的是19世纪的问题，而这个问题在21世纪的互联网解决方案面前已经被绕过了。
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.
高速铁路的最大驱动因素是商务旅行（没人专程去美国城市度假，我们才是离开它们）。但商务旅行的需求已经大幅减少。自从新冠疫情以来，我没有遇到过任何客户要求现场工作——一切都是远程进行。客户能够获得更好的服务和价格。会议通过Zoom、WebEx或其他竞争对手进行。
高速铁路越来越像是20世纪的解决方案，针对的是19世纪的问题，而这个问题在21世纪的互联网解决方案面前已经被绕过了。
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，不能与其他国家的规模相比。
美国的地形、人口密度以及庞大的面积，再加上民众的需求和愿望，使得客运铁路服务，尤其是高速铁路，成为美国过去的事情。
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，不能与其他国家的规模相比。
美国的地形、人口密度以及庞大的面积，再加上民众的需求和愿望，使得客运铁路服务，尤其是高速铁路，成为美国过去的事情。
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世纪的前半叶，客运铁路服务很常见，但汽车的普及和全国高速公路网络的扩展导致了铁路服务在1950年代逐渐衰退，除了在人口密集的地区，主要是在东海岸。随后，飞机成为了美国境内长途旅行的首选方式，因为速度更为重要。
在20世纪的前半叶，客运铁路服务很常见，但汽车的普及和全国高速公路网络的扩展导致了铁路服务在1950年代逐渐衰退，除了在人口密集的地区，主要是在东海岸。随后，飞机成为了美国境内长途旅行的首选方式，因为速度更为重要。
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，需求和成本的结合使得高速铁路变得不太可能。那些有足够需求支持客运铁路服务并能够自负盈亏的地区，已经有了相应的铁路服务。
美国唯一一次尝试跨大陆的客运铁路服务，即美铁（Amtrak），一直是财务上的失败，并且仅仅因为政府多年来的大量资助才得以存在。
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，需求和成本的结合使得高速铁路变得不太可能。那些有足够需求支持客运铁路服务并能够自负盈亏的地区，已经有了相应的铁路服务。
美国唯一一次尝试跨大陆的客运铁路服务，即美铁（Amtrak），一直是财务上的失败，并且仅仅因为政府多年来的大量资助才得以存在。
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.
为什么要浪费钱建什么愚蠢的火车？喷气客机更快。所谓的“高速”火车连接的是大城市，喷气飞机也是如此，而且飞得更快。我们的城市相隔远得多，远远超过日本的城市。火车可能适用于像日本这样的小国，或像欧洲这样人口密集的地方，但对像美国这样的大国来说不合适（也许只有东海岸那种人口密集的地方例外）。至于美国大城市之间的所有空旷地带，公共道路对私人车辆来说更合适，而不是火车、地铁或公共汽车。我们不是欧洲，我们也不是亚洲。我们以自己认为最适合我们的方式解决问题。高速火车既不实际，也不实用，更不需要。如果你们国家需要高速火车？好啊，祝你们好运。如果在你们国家有意义，去做吧。我们选择不做，因为在这个国家，它们将是一个愚蠢的、巨大的浪费。
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.
为什么要浪费钱建什么愚蠢的火车？喷气客机更快。所谓的“高速”火车连接的是大城市，喷气飞机也是如此，而且飞得更快。我们的城市相隔远得多，远远超过日本的城市。火车可能适用于像日本这样的小国，或像欧洲这样人口密集的地方，但对像美国这样的大国来说不合适（也许只有东海岸那种人口密集的地方例外）。至于美国大城市之间的所有空旷地带，公共道路对私人车辆来说更合适，而不是火车、地铁或公共汽车。我们不是欧洲，我们也不是亚洲。我们以自己认为最适合我们的方式解决问题。高速火车既不实际，也不实用，更不需要。如果你们国家需要高速火车？好啊，祝你们好运。如果在你们国家有意义，去做吧。我们选择不做，因为在这个国家，它们将是一个愚蠢的、巨大的浪费。
Hara Shidho
Unless the U.S. improves its tendency to dislike socialism as much as Communism, 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 Communism 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.
除非美国改变它对社会主义的厌恶程度，否则我认为高速铁路行不通。
目前高速铁路运行良好的国家，都是采取了某种形式的改良社会主义或共产主义的国家。
这是因为，如何通过有限数量的车站来高效地搭载大量乘客，这种方法与社会主义提高效率的方式有某种相似性。
Unless the U.S. improves its tendency to dislike socialism as much as Communism, 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 Communism 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.
除非美国改变它对社会主义的厌恶程度，否则我认为高速铁路行不通。
目前高速铁路运行良好的国家，都是采取了某种形式的改良社会主义或共产主义的国家。
这是因为，如何通过有限数量的车站来高效地搭载大量乘客，这种方法与社会主义提高效率的方式有某种相似性。
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，美国对这些改进方法有排斥，甚至对全民医保都感到厌恶。
这些国家即使具备建设高速铁路的潜力，也不一定会推动其建设和使用。
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，美国对这些改进方法有排斥，甚至对全民医保都感到厌恶。
这些国家即使具备建设高速铁路的潜力，也不一定会推动其建设和使用。
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.
北美甚至没有低速铁路网络。1945年，每周有2,000列定期客运列车，但大约30年前，这个数字降到了不到50列。今天，少数铁路线路仍提供客运服务。城际巴士服务也几乎不复存在。最近的复兴，例如美铁，扭转了这一趋势，但客运铁路仍然是少数。我可以大胆预测，在未来，当碳或电池使用变得对小规模道路交通来说过于昂贵时，可能会有一个铁路复兴，类似于喷气机时代前的航空交通。
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.
北美甚至没有低速铁路网络。1945年，每周有2,000列定期客运列车，但大约30年前，这个数字降到了不到50列。今天，少数铁路线路仍提供客运服务。城际巴士服务也几乎不复存在。最近的复兴，例如美铁，扭转了这一趋势，但客运铁路仍然是少数。我可以大胆预测，在未来，当碳或电池使用变得对小规模道路交通来说过于昂贵时，可能会有一个铁路复兴，类似于喷气机时代前的航空交通。
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.
保守势力和成本可能会阻止美国尽快建成任何单一的高速铁路。唯一有可能的地方是蒙特利尔到汉密尔顿的走廊，大约有一半的加拿大人生活在这里。政府对新想法更加开放，现有的高速公路也超负荷。多伦多、蒙特利尔和其他城市有发达的公共交通系统，因此在每个终点城市的旅行是可能的。租车也很常见。此外，现有的客运铁路服务相当受欢迎，提升速度正在讨论中。
保守势力和成本可能会阻止美国尽快建成任何单一的高速铁路。唯一有可能的地方是蒙特利尔到汉密尔顿的走廊，大约有一半的加拿大人生活在这里。政府对新想法更加开放，现有的高速公路也超负荷。多伦多、蒙特利尔和其他城市有发达的公共交通系统，因此在每个终点城市的旅行是可能的。租车也很常见。此外，现有的客运铁路服务相当受欢迎，提升速度正在讨论中。
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。目前没有市场能够证明这样做的成本是合理的。就是这么简单。
许多轨道可以追溯到19世纪。所有这些都必须更换。但它们目前正在使用，这意味着现有的铁路交通必须减少（之后再恢复）或必须铺设新的轨道。铺设新轨道需要得到途经每个市镇的许可，这可能需要数年时间，而且任何一个反对者都可能会进一步延迟项目的推进。然后，必须有足够的交通量，即满载的列车，才能支付成本，如果没有足够的乘客，铁路就必须与其他列车共享轨道，这可能会导致高速列车被慢速货运列车挡住，就像现在的情况一样。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
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。目前没有市场能够证明这样做的成本是合理的。就是这么简单。
许多轨道可以追溯到19世纪。所有这些都必须更换。但它们目前正在使用，这意味着现有的铁路交通必须减少（之后再恢复）或必须铺设新的轨道。铺设新轨道需要得到途经每个市镇的许可，这可能需要数年时间，而且任何一个反对者都可能会进一步延迟项目的推进。然后，必须有足够的交通量，即满载的列车，才能支付成本，如果没有足够的乘客，铁路就必须与其他列车共享轨道，这可能会导致高速列车被慢速货运列车挡住，就像现在的情况一样。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
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.
再考虑列车必须停靠的次数。为了确保列车满员，路线必须经过大城市。每停靠一次都会减缓列车的速度。然后就是票价问题。除非你有很多时间，否则长途火车票和飞机票的价格差异很小。而且这是非高速铁路的情况。如果是高速铁路，票价差异就更小了。为了让火车旅行在四小时以上的行程中具有竞争力，必须大幅削减飞机的航班量。
再考虑列车必须停靠的次数。为了确保列车满员，路线必须经过大城市。每停靠一次都会减缓列车的速度。然后就是票价问题。除非你有很多时间，否则长途火车票和飞机票的价格差异很小。而且这是非高速铁路的情况。如果是高速铁路，票价差异就更小了。为了让火车旅行在四小时以上的行程中具有竞争力，必须大幅削减飞机的航班量。
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.
我个人认为，高速铁路是解决一定范围内大规模客运运输的一个好方案，只要该路线有稳定的需求，足以支撑投资。（如果距离太短，就不值得去那么快，太长的话，即使考虑到去机场的时间和提前到达登机口的时间，航空旅行也会更快。）它安全、可靠、舒适、环保，且总旅行时间非常方便。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
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.
我个人认为，高速铁路是解决一定范围内大规模客运运输的一个好方案，只要该路线有稳定的需求，足以支撑投资。（如果距离太短，就不值得去那么快，太长的话，即使考虑到去机场的时间和提前到达登机口的时间，航空旅行也会更快。）它安全、可靠、舒适、环保，且总旅行时间非常方便。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
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.
像所有工业化国家一样，美国有许多城市符合这个范围，并且有足够的需求。考虑到化石燃料价格有上涨趋势，气候危机只会越来越严重（所以我们必须转向使用再生能源……电气化铁路是最适合这种转型的交通方式），高速铁路变得越来越明显是一个解决方案。它需要不同的政府来做出这样的投资，所以……再等几年吧。我很确定你们会实现的。
像所有工业化国家一样，美国有许多城市符合这个范围，并且有足够的需求。考虑到化石燃料价格有上涨趋势，气候危机只会越来越严重（所以我们必须转向使用再生能源……电气化铁路是最适合这种转型的交通方式），高速铁路变得越来越明显是一个解决方案。它需要不同的政府来做出这样的投资，所以……再等几年吧。我很确定你们会实现的。
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.
未来有可能，但很可能只会是一些地区性的孤立系统，旨在服务于大都市区。
美国的跨洲高速铁路在私营投资者眼中无法盈利，政府明智地对花费数十亿美元的税收资金在一个只会被少数人使用的交通系统上没有兴趣。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
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.
未来有可能，但很可能只会是一些地区性的孤立系统，旨在服务于大都市区。
美国的跨洲高速铁路在私营投资者眼中无法盈利，政府明智地对花费数十亿美元的税收资金在一个只会被少数人使用的交通系统上没有兴趣。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
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.
美国的政治体制曾经允许国家在19世纪和20世纪迅速发展，成为世界第一。但现在这个体制已经过时，阻碍了国家的进步。国会和参议院的僵局，州政府、地方政府和联邦政府之间的协调困难，民众的公共意见由于教育水平低下而显得无知。
任何有意义的大型项目都注定要失败。
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.
美国的政治体制曾经允许国家在19世纪和20世纪迅速发展，成为世界第一。但现在这个体制已经过时，阻碍了国家的进步。国会和参议院的僵局，州政府、地方政府和联邦政府之间的协调困难，民众的公共意见由于教育水平低下而显得无知。
任何有意义的大型项目都注定要失败。
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，因为地理原因。
高速客运列车在连接人口密集、相距大约200到300英里以内的地区时有意义。在更远的距离，列车就无法与飞机竞争，因为旅行时间太长。
美国有一些这样的区域，比如东北走廊和其他几个地方。但美国的大多数人口中心之间的距离比欧洲、中国或日本更远。
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，因为地理原因。
高速客运列车在连接人口密集、相距大约200到300英里以内的地区时有意义。在更远的距离，列车就无法与飞机竞争，因为旅行时间太长。
美国有一些这样的区域，比如东北走廊和其他几个地方。但美国的大多数人口中心之间的距离比欧洲、中国或日本更远。
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.
显然是可能的——尽管美国目前几乎没有必要的技术能力，因此可能需要从法国、日本或中国获取建议和专业知识。主要的问题是谁来进行投资。没有私人投资者愿意做这件事：高速铁路或许能盈利，但投资巨大，资本有更多盈利机会。Amtrak（美国铁路公司）显然没有能力承担这样一个庞大的项目，因此唯一的解决方案可能是大规模的国家资金支持。在政治上，近期似乎不太可能实现这种投资。
纽约-费城走廊显然是建造线路的最佳选择，可能还会延伸到波士顿。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
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.
显然是可能的——尽管美国目前几乎没有必要的技术能力，因此可能需要从法国、日本或中国获取建议和专业知识。主要的问题是谁来进行投资。没有私人投资者愿意做这件事：高速铁路或许能盈利，但投资巨大，资本有更多盈利机会。Amtrak（美国铁路公司）显然没有能力承担这样一个庞大的项目，因此唯一的解决方案可能是大规模的国家资金支持。在政治上，近期似乎不太可能实现这种投资。
纽约-费城走廊显然是建造线路的最佳选择，可能还会延伸到波士顿。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
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.
美国是一个广阔的国家，从东西海岸之间的时差有4小时。它不像日本或中国那么紧凑。美国的航空连接非常好，票价便宜，也不需要像高速列车那样的大量基础设施。所以美国人对航空连接感到满意。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
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.
美国是一个广阔的国家，从东西海岸之间的时差有4小时。它不像日本或中国那么紧凑。美国的航空连接非常好，票价便宜，也不需要像高速列车那样的大量基础设施。所以美国人对航空连接感到满意。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
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。美国人口超过3亿，无法像日本那样在空旷的地方铺设高速铁路轨道。美国北部有一些空旷地区，比如俄勒冈、蒙大拿、怀俄明和明尼苏达州。而在日本，人口密集的城市和开阔的空间使得子弹头列车可以在主要城市之间通行。加拿大的面积比美国大，但人口只有美国的十分之一。我们甚至没有这种类型的列车，可能永远也不会有。
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。美国人口超过3亿，无法像日本那样在空旷的地方铺设高速铁路轨道。美国北部有一些空旷地区，比如俄勒冈、蒙大拿、怀俄明和明尼苏达州。而在日本，人口密集的城市和开阔的空间使得子弹头列车可以在主要城市之间通行。加拿大的面积比美国大，但人口只有美国的十分之一。我们甚至没有这种类型的列车，可能永远也不会有。
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.
我们的军事工业系统限制了我们国内基础设施的进步能力。我们的军队分布在世界各地。我们在其他国家的战争上花费了数万亿美元。我们的民选官员依赖武器制造商的支持来连任。如果我们能把数十亿资金从支持非法移民和制造炸弹导弹上转移到建设铁路系统上，我们就能建立一个轻松赶上日本的铁路系统。
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.
我们的军事工业系统限制了我们国内基础设施的进步能力。我们的军队分布在世界各地。我们在其他国家的战争上花费了数万亿美元。我们的民选官员依赖武器制造商的支持来连任。如果我们能把数十亿资金从支持非法移民和制造炸弹导弹上转移到建设铁路系统上，我们就能建立一个轻松赶上日本的铁路系统。
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.
我认为这不可能实现。
原因很简单。大多数美国人不需要这种交通方式。坐一次或两次可能方便且很酷，但不像中国，美国没有数千万甚至上亿的工人需要跨越几千公里到另一个城市工作。在美国，金融家的时间和黄金一样宝贵，他们选择坐飞机。普通人从事本地服务行业，出行一般靠汽车和地铁。没有足够的乘客，庞大的高速铁路网络是无法维持的。
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.
我认为这不可能实现。
原因很简单。大多数美国人不需要这种交通方式。坐一次或两次可能方便且很酷，但不像中国，美国没有数千万甚至上亿的工人需要跨越几千公里到另一个城市工作。在美国，金融家的时间和黄金一样宝贵，他们选择坐飞机。普通人从事本地服务行业，出行一般靠汽车和地铁。没有足够的乘客，庞大的高速铁路网络是无法维持的。
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.
“你认为美国是否会拥有像欧洲、中国和日本那样规模的高速客运铁路网络？”
在拥有汽车、飞机和停车位的地方，客运火车已经过时。
这些地区之所以使用火车，是因为它们缺乏汽车。美国不缺汽车，所以在这里火车已经过时。
“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.
“你认为美国是否会拥有像欧洲、中国和日本那样规模的高速客运铁路网络？”
在拥有汽车、飞机和停车位的地方，客运火车已经过时。
这些地区之所以使用火车，是因为它们缺乏汽车。美国不缺汽车，所以在这里火车已经过时。
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.
当自动驾驶汽车能够自己找到停车位时，地铁和通勤列车的使用将大幅下降。
当无人机的大小达到公交车水平时，通勤列车和机场附近的停车场将逐渐消失。
不，高速列车有特定的要求，而这些要求在美国并不适用。
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.
当自动驾驶汽车能够自己找到停车位时，地铁和通勤列车的使用将大幅下降。
当无人机的大小达到公交车水平时，通勤列车和机场附近的停车场将逐渐消失。
不，高速列车有特定的要求，而这些要求在美国并不适用。
很赞 4
收藏