El buen economista que es Edward Glaeser nos explica porqué es una mala idea. En pocas líneas, las iniciativas de transporte masivo tienen que concentrarse donde los problemas de transporte masivo están - donde hay congestión - y no donde hay transporte alternativo eficiente.
Más aún, Glaeser argumenta que:
"The national high-speed rail agenda is being pushed with claims that these trains will jump-start economic growth. No serious evidence supports such claims. When new transportation does affect local economies, it generally does so by moving activity from one place to another, not by creating nationwide benefits."Y concluye:
"The problem is that while common sense requires transportation modes and spending to be targeted to the local environment, politics demands that federal programs spend everywhere. A serious high-speed rail project would forget about Texas and focus on saving hours in the Northeast Corridor. A rational transportation program would target money to the areas that have the most congestion. A smart transportation policy would recognize the wisdom of using our existing infrastructure more efficiently, with the help of congestion pricing, rather than building more roads. Unfortunately, wisdom seems to take wing whenever politicians start envisioning the shining splendor of fast trains."Se pidió que se le prohiba la salida a Jaime del país. No hay mejor servicio anti-imperialista que dejar que siga asesorando a Obama.