Digging deeper, the Acela train has a top speed of 150 mph and it takes 3.75 hours to make the 215 trek from NYC to Boston for an average speed of about 57 mph or 38.2% of the top speed.
The current world speed record for a commercial train on steel wheels is held by the French TGV at 574.8 km/h (357.2 mph) , achieved on 3 April 2007 on the new LGV Est.
Acela is high speed by American standard. For some reason the French are able to do much better. Have you ever been on a high speed train in Europe?
I donât think the FAQ was authored solely by her.
âA scale where air travel stops becoming necessaryâ doesnât sound like sheâs only interested in replacing a portion of all flights. She doesnât even say âdomestic air travelâ but Iâm giving her the benefit of the doubt that she doesnât mean taking high speed rail to Africa and Europe and Australia.
She also planned for this to be fully implemented by 2029 2030⌠including replacing every single internal combustion engine.
Thatâs not investing in technology so that in 10 years a workable replacement to every internal combustion engine exists as an alternative for people who are interested in buying new vehicles that year⌠thatâs seizing every vehicle (well, the 99.99% that have ICEâs) in the country.
(Edited to correct the year in which GND is to be fully implemented per the FAQ.)
Am I stupid to think sheâs a classic proof that you donât have to be smart nor have the legal background to become a politician. I guess this is democracy where as long as you get voted by the people, you can run the country.
I donât think I agree with this. I think right now there is very little consensus as to what our problems are. This creates not enough willpower to change them. Ask 20 people what their biggest problem in America is and you will get 14 or 15 different answers. To get action you need agreement on the problem. Sure we can all point things out but as soon as we do several start poking holes and many donât think itâs an issue. This is not enough willpower for change.
Thatâs by design. Democracy is working fine. Changes arenât being made because not enough people think the issues are that big of a deal. I have largely asserted thatâs because life is good in America. The average person complains a lot on the internet, but lives a very comfortable life in the real world that they do not want to radically change. Democracy has spoken, we are basically satisfied in this country.
AKA not doing anything right now is a feature not a bug.
Things people in this thread say or imply government should do:
Universal income
Guaranteed jobs
Create lots of public service jobs
Subsidize private sector jobs
Investment/funding for communities affected by climate change
Various economic engineering efforts to bolster green/clean energy industries
Upgrading every building in the country for energy efficiency
High speed rail
Whatâs terrible is not the apparent support for these ideas, but the fact that supporters wonât hold anyone accountable when many or all of these policies fail to achieve their stated goals. Instead, itâs likely more social and economic engineering ideas will be proposed. Repeat until nearly every aspect of oneâs life is heavily controlled by government without any real benefit (except the control).
Itâs quite shocking how illiberal many of you are.
Certainly not one that went 357 mph. By comparison a 777 goes 644 mph⌠and maintains a cruising speed of well over 500 mph essentially the entire duration of the flight.
From what I can tell the LGV Est has an average speed of 173.5 mph (per Wikipedia).
Thatâs a little slower than Japanâs bullet train that I used in my example.
Itâs been a while, but I watched a few videos of her questioning executives from large businesses. I think one was a bank that loaned money for an oil pipeline. It felt like her questioning was designed for âgotchasâ, rather than fact finding.
AOC: Since you abc, why donât you think you have any responsibility for paying for xyz?
Sheâs just not likeable at least by me. Whatever she says sounds like she rehearsed beforehand, and it seems like she just says things to sound smart. Whenever she argues, it sounds like her judgment is driven by emotions rather than practicality/logic which bothers me. Sheâs very good at pointing out problems but never follow up with solutions.
Just so I donât sound like a biased right wing person, I consider myself a moderate.
I want to like Nuclear Power but can you guarantee we wonât have a Chernobyl or Fuchasima event in the US? We almost did with Three Mile Island in my life time.
Also has you solved the problem of disposal of spent fuel rods yet?
I think itâs great to have big ideas. I think itâs foolish to think every one of your big ideas can and will get implemented exactly like you want, with no changes, immediately after you propose them.
Thatâs where AOC is. If she doesnât get her grand idea, sheâs gets screw you all, Iâm not helping you out or sheâs I helped you all out on _____, now itâs your turn to repay the favor, do exactly what I want or you wonât really be doing me a favor. It ignores the reality that people are resistant to change and tend to move slowly when change happens, absent a massive immediate, imminently life-threatening shock that forces action. No, climate change isnât it - hundreds of thousands of people arenât literally dropping dead on the sidewalk daily because of it.
Are there any moderates mentoring her, talking to her, trying to help smooth ideas into a workable package that could get widespread support and at least start walking ideas toward reality? I donât know. I am going to guess âhahahahahahahahahahahahaha, no.â And I think thatâs the missing piece for her. I donât know if she could ever be an effective leader in the party, but I think her approach to getting action done is made difficult by both her approach and her being a POC (which has its own issues right off the bat).
It does to me. I suspect it does to most people? But it wouldnât to someone who is expecting her to say something extreme (fox) or who has a habit of taking words literally (you).
She also planned for this to be fully implemented by 2029⌠including replacing every single internal combustion engine.
Thatâs not investing in technology so that in 10 years a workable replacement to every internal combustion engine exists as an alternative for people who are interested in buying new vehicles that year⌠thatâs seizing every vehicle (well, the 99.99% that have ICEâs) in the country.
This is a bigger catch, but Iâd say her words are vague there too. The phrase (ââŚwith a goal toâŚâ) suggests to me that she probably doesnât mean in the immediate future. So I would rather ask for clarity.
âŚIn both cases, I admit I might be giving her too much benefit of the doubt, and I wouldnât know it if I was.
We are probably in the wrong thread for this. But I completely disagree. I think Congress was intended to pass laws that most of the country prefers, and it has not in decades and is getting worse still.
Lots of things were never intended, the most obvious example being the filibuster, which has caused many laws to fail that have wide support among Americans. In lieu of Congress, the US is ruled by Executive Orders and Supreme Court Decisions. Which is bonkers.
We also regularly accept really, really stupid failures of Democracy, like âshutting down the governmentâ, or how all of our popularly elected leaders are incredibly unpopular.
I think we tend to ignore the cost of economic losses from the climate events we are seeing and look only at things like houses dropping into the Atlantic which only impacts a few rich people with weekend homes in the Hamptons or vacation homes on the outer banks of NC. Hurricanes, wildfires, strong norâeasters, droughts - things we were told more than 20 years ago would happen with climate change seem to be costing us somewhere around 100-300B each year right now.
I am not sure how far that amount of money takes us under various green initiatives, and it doesnât solve the issue of China or India making its own decisions that arenât helpful towards the goal, but we are already paying something to deal with climate change, and that will go up the further we kick the can down the road.
Look, I was asked why I donât like her policies and I answered.
That said, there are many who are talking about her running for POTUS and I fully expect her to try at some point. I expect her campaign will play out similar to Bernie Sanders, but I think she will try.
No one can guarantee anything. But a lot of lessons were learned in Three Mile Island and Fukushima (donât build a nuclear power plant near a fault line on the coast for example).
Itâs as solved as the problem of what to do with spent EV & hybrid car batteries.
Planes get you from airport to airport quickly. People generally want to go from city center to city center. Paris to Lyon is further than NYC to Charlotte. The train in France would take about 2 hours. How long would it take you to go from Manhatten to Laguardia to Charlotte airport to city center?
I agree with this, but I also agree with NormalDan in that we arenât getting completely screwed. In spite of paying some costs of climate change already, life is pretty good, other than Covid.
Comparing the waste disposal problem of EV batteries to the waste disposal Of spent nuclear fuel rods is like comparing the damage nuclear bomb drop to the damage cause by an oil spill.