Why would the US fund nation wide high speed rail when we have airports?
Nationalwide rail would be an enormous expenditure for dedicated high speed passenger service and would basically duplicate transport achieved already by air, which is much faster, allows flexible frequency each way (don’t need double rail in the air) and is probably cheaper.
Rob
He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose.
As we speak they are working hard to develop green jet fuels. It will be expensive. Railroads are much more efficient and can be green. Plus many think we should be able to keep up with other developed nations on high speed trackage. And railroads go from city center. Many spend as much time going to and from the airport as they do flying.
Other “developed nations” only have short distances to travel, making rail more viable. NY to Miami or Houston makes sense in a plane, not rail… especially considering the buildout required.
But… if you think it’s great, that’s fine. Not going to happen. We’ll see rocket travel from LA to Sydney first.
Rob
He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose.
China has routes much longer than many American routes and they make it work.
Spain has a high speed rail line of 2,500 miles in a total population of 50 million. One article I read recently noted that the Madrid to Barcelona corridor has 5 private companies competing for service on the segment about 300 miles long, and that 4 out of 5 travelers opt for rail over air.
300 miles would be twice as long as Philadelphia to Washington, New York to Washington, and half again longer than New York to Boston or Las Vegas to LA, or Dallas to Houston. It’s about the same as Cleveland to Chicago or LA to San Francisco.
That tells me that there could be several corridors where it might be feasible, but stitching together a national network would be iffy. Then again I’m sure people said the same thing about the long distances between cities when the Interstate Highway System was proposed.
That’s true. China has much longer routes than most of Europe or Japan. I wouldn’t hold up China as an example of making financially sound infrastructure decisions however. 
Rob
He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose.
I suspect that when a decision is made about where to run the tracks, those who would like to object might not get to tie thing up in court as they would here.
I think you have to admire China for their investment in infrastructure. That makes it that much more difficult for companies to move their operations elsewhere.
No question they are very smart in their planning and take a long range view of things.
(Then of course there are all those tall unfinished apartment buildings. Not perfect. But still impressive in the effort.)