What I would like to see is include the ticket price, and then include how many years before the project is paid for. Obviously, also include the savings incurred by less maintenance on roads etc. because of the traffic moved to high speed rail.

We can do this for bridges, why not for high speed rail?

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 hour ago

We can do this for bridges, why not for high speed rail?

Because we periodically elect PCs, who will sell this off on 100 year leases.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 hours ago

Not just less maintenance on roads and bridges, but also reduced need for building new and expanded roads and bridges.

[–] Mpatch@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Don't get ahead of your self. This project will never pay for its self. If people used mass transit via would have alot more service. Porter airlines wouldn't be pushing for turbo jets to go further destinations. You got be realistic about these things.

This project is 1, a wicked subsidy that's gona create a healthy amount of jobs, good skilled jobs. I can expand on that further. 2 a way to put Canada 🇨🇦 on the map of not being bass akward USA light.

[–] CanIFishHere@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 hours ago

I think a couple of things can be true at the same time. Long term, high speed rail is a good thing. Also true is this project will definitely be vastly over budget. I would just like to see some concrete data to let us know the planners have actually looked at the factors.