Maybe also having the largest population in the world had something to do with it. They have way more people to do the work. They also have way more money than Japan to do the work.
And that’s not even considering how they have a lot more land to work with. Easier to put high speed rail through some farmland than to redevelop several urban blocks to create rail infrastructure.
They also have a very good motivation to build the infrastructure, this is a general phenomenon i tend to refer to as the “big city effect”.
When you have that many people and that much population density it becomes incredibly difficult for governments to sit on their hands, because it’s obvious to everyone that new infrastructure is needed.
Which makes the US look so much worse. By all means the big cities in america should be decent places to live purely by dint of population, but the government has spent decades trying as hard as it can to make things as shitty as possible.
Australia is roughly what i’d expect america to look like without an active conspiracy to make it shitty: Largely empty, the cities are far apart and very suburban, but the cities have local downtowns spread throughout and it’s all connected with trains or at least buses.
Well, the perk of being an authoritarian regime is that you don’t really have to put the high speed rail on farmland. Urban blocks are fine too if it’s a better path.
Don’t know if you read my comment very well. Regardless of the state’s authority it’s still way easier to develop land that’s not densely populated versus that which is.
Maybe also having the largest population in the world had something to do with it. They have way more people to do the work. They also have way more money than Japan to do the work.
And that’s not even considering how they have a lot more land to work with. Easier to put high speed rail through some farmland than to redevelop several urban blocks to create rail infrastructure.
They also have a very good motivation to build the infrastructure, this is a general phenomenon i tend to refer to as the “big city effect”.
When you have that many people and that much population density it becomes incredibly difficult for governments to sit on their hands, because it’s obvious to everyone that new infrastructure is needed.
Which makes the US look so much worse. By all means the big cities in america should be decent places to live purely by dint of population, but the government has spent decades trying as hard as it can to make things as shitty as possible.
Australia is roughly what i’d expect america to look like without an active conspiracy to make it shitty: Largely empty, the cities are far apart and very suburban, but the cities have local downtowns spread throughout and it’s all connected with trains or at least buses.
Well, the perk of being an authoritarian regime is that you don’t really have to put the high speed rail on farmland. Urban blocks are fine too if it’s a better path.
Don’t know if you read my comment very well. Regardless of the state’s authority it’s still way easier to develop land that’s not densely populated versus that which is.
Japan is significantly more densely populated
Yes of course, but the easiest might not be the best.
You’re not making sense. Easier just explains why they built more. China has several large cities separated by large swaths of rural land.
Japan is a significantly smaller island that is densely populated.
Mile to mile it is simply more laborious for Japan to construct rail
Where’s that picture of the one house in the middle of a highway because the owner wouldn’t sell/move?