In article ,
"J. Clarke" wrote:

For openers, my 'idealistic' view is set in the future when there are no
airlines to compete with, when fossil-fuel is priced through the roof
or simply not available; planes don't compete. I also didn't confine my
suggestion for a railroad to a single line.You, however, did.

Well, that gets you from New York to Los Angeles or wherever, but how do you
get from Miami to Seattle? It's not as simple as building a railroad--if
it were then the railroads would still be a high profit operation. For
long haul passenger service, over that distance, your train is going to
have to be going 400 or so MPH to compete with the airlines and then you're
still going to have to run it cheaper, which may be difficult considering
all the infrastructure you have to maintain.

For freight, who cares how
fast it goes?
When stuff absolutely, positively has the get there....whenever.
They will still want lettuce in New York City.

That alone will be a huge step in the right direction.
BTW.. build in some accountability in that new system, i.e. Do Not
privatize it.

Huh? You're trusting the _government_?
Maybe the likes of Bechtel and Haliburton will be a better idea?
oops...they ARE the government....now.

There will have been some changes in the government by then.
There will have been a revolution. The mobs get really ****y when they
can't drive their SUV's

Staff the whole damn thing with military vets.

Which does what? The guys who retire from NR already go into reactor
operation and who else do you have that is going to be any more capable
than your average civilian?
I was just looking for a job for the warriors who won't be needed in
times of world piece. Can't fight really big wars without fuel.
Besides, there will be virtually zero terrorists as there will be fewer
people ****ed at having been invaded for their resources... because
they'll be all out of resources.

I would hope that all those children who are now being left behind would
have been trained properly by the new government.

[snip]

So your plumber or carpenter or whatever is going to have to make ten trips
in his Honda instead of one in the truck he uses now? How does that
benefit anybody? Or do you not consider ownership by a tradesman to be
"privately owned"?

You just added some variables again. I would allow for trades to operate
larger vehicles, of course. Your interpretation of my suggestion is
silly. Perhaps some guidelines would exist for trade vehicles to be more
efficient, hybrids of some sort.

Sorry, you're coming across as an idealist who hasn't really given his ideas
much thought.

I'm only seeing the big picture. Others are better suited to nit-pick
the whole process to crawl. Let's form a study group and discuss what
colour to paint the railroad ties, eh?

You really shouldn't take me, or yourself so seriously.