【下】人們說(shuō)中國(guó)可以快速建設(shè)高速鐵路，而美國(guó)甚至還不能建設(shè)，是因?yàn)橹袊?guó)的勞動(dòng)力很便宜。請(qǐng)問(wèn)這是主要原因嗎？

People say China can build high-speed rail so fast and the USA can''t even build one because Chinese labor is cheap. Is that the major reason?

2019-11-05 大司空 21259 67 1 收藏糾錯(cuò)&舉報(bào)

譯文簡(jiǎn)介

quora網(wǎng)友：主要原因是美國(guó)的超級(jí)富豪做出了并不想擁有它的關(guān)鍵決策。他們執(zhí)著于使用化石燃料，以至于他們掩蓋了一個(gè)科學(xué)共識(shí)，即地球正面臨著全球變暖的災(zāi)難......

正文翻譯

原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.ltaaa.com 翻譯：大司空轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

龍騰有類(lèi)似文章，但本文都是最新回答，且保證為原創(chuàng)翻譯，請(qǐng)知悉！

評(píng)論翻譯

原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.ltaaa.com 翻譯：大司空轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

8.Harinder Jadwani
The main reason is the super rich in the US who make key decisions don’t want it. They are wedded to fossil fuel to the point that they have buried a virtual scientific consensus that the planet is facing catastrophe from global warming.

主要原因是美國(guó)的超級(jí)富豪做出了并不想擁有它的關(guān)鍵決策。他們執(zhí)著于使用化石燃料，以至于他們掩蓋了一個(gè)科學(xué)共識(shí)，即地球正面臨著全球變暖的災(zāi)難。

Not only that they proudly boast that the US is again the world’s largest oil and gas producer; a feat accomplished through fracking which has greatly increased the frequency and severity of earthquakes, creating a brand new problem - sinkholes - that one hardly heard about a couple of decades ago.

他們不僅自豪地吹噓美國(guó)再次成為全球最大的石油和天然氣生產(chǎn)國(guó)，而且通過(guò)水力壓裂技術(shù)實(shí)現(xiàn)了這一壯舉，但這些也大大增加了地震的頻率和嚴(yán)重程度，造成了一個(gè)幾十年前幾乎聞所未聞的全新問(wèn)題——天坑。

The last thing these people want is a different technology. In fact during the 1950s the US had an excellent rail network (not high speed because it didn’t exist then) but an open conspiracy of Big Oil and the automobile industry led to official policy changes with massive highways built at public expense (the ‘US army needs to be able to travel around the US quickly to protect against those awful Commies from the USSR who can’t wait to invade us’)…..

這些人最不想要的就是全新的技術(shù)。事實(shí)上，在20世紀(jì)50年代，美國(guó)擁有出色的鐵路網(wǎng)(不是高速鐵路，因?yàn)楫?dāng)時(shí)還不存在)，但石油巨頭和汽車(chē)工業(yè)的公開(kāi)陰謀導(dǎo)致了官方政策的改變，通過(guò)公共支出修建了大量高速公路(他們的說(shuō)法是“美國(guó)軍隊(duì)需要能夠迅速在美國(guó)各地行進(jìn)，以抵御那些迫不及待想侵略我們的可怕的蘇聯(lián)分子”)。

I just came back from China - not only do they have bullet trains (I took one from Shanghai to Beijing which went to 330 kms/hr or more) but they also have - in Shanghai - the world’s only ‘MagLev’ train from the city to its airport. That train has no tracks! It runs on magnetic levitation! And reached 430 kms/hour! That was developed in Germany by Siemens but local government considered it too expensive. The Chinese bought it and although right now it is only 30–40 kms - they have the vision to invest in such advanced and progressive projects. The US sadly does not.

我剛從中國(guó)回來(lái)，他們不僅有子彈頭列車(chē)(我從上海乘坐子彈頭列車(chē)到北京，時(shí)速可達(dá)330公里或以上)，而且在上海，他們還有世界上唯一的“磁懸浮”列車(chē)，是從上海到機(jī)場(chǎng)的。那列火車(chē)沒(méi)有軌道！它靠磁懸浮運(yùn)行！并達(dá)到430公里/小時(shí)的速度！這是西門(mén)子在德國(guó)開(kāi)發(fā)的，但當(dāng)?shù)卣J(rèn)為它太貴了，于是中國(guó)人買(mǎi)下了它。雖然現(xiàn)在只有30-40公里，但他們有眼光投資這些先進(jìn)的、進(jìn)步的項(xiàng)目。遺憾的是，美國(guó)沒(méi)有。

-------------------------------

9.Roger Williams，現(xiàn)居美國(guó)(1972年至今)

No. The big reason is that the Chinese government not only loves big, enormously expensive infrastructure projects, it loves to build them even when there’s no actual demand for some of it. What’s more, in a top heavy political system like China’s, there’s no messy state or local laws that get in the way of what Beijing wants in some other province.

不是。最主要的原因是，中國(guó)政府不僅熱愛(ài)龐大、耗資巨大的基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施項(xiàng)目，甚至在一些項(xiàng)目沒(méi)有實(shí)際需求的情況下，也熱衷于建設(shè)這些項(xiàng)目。更重要的是，在中國(guó)這樣一個(gè)頭重腳輕的政治體系中，沒(méi)有任何凌亂的州法或地方法律可以阻擋中央在其他省份想要實(shí)現(xiàn)的目標(biāo)。

There is nothing so complex about building high speed trains that somehow baffles Americans. Labor is expensive here, but the US government is perfectly capable of throwing astounding sums of money at projects if it really wants to, as well as any nation in the world.

建造高鐵并沒(méi)有什么復(fù)雜的技術(shù)，不至于讓美國(guó)人感到困惑。美國(guó)的勞動(dòng)力是昂貴的，但是如果它真的想建造高鐵的話，美國(guó)政府也完全有能力在項(xiàng)目上投入驚人的資金，就像世界上任何一個(gè)國(guó)家一樣。

The US doesn’t have high speed rail because there’s really only one, fairly small part of the country with enough passenger train traffic to justify the cost: a rail corridor of the northeast connecting Boston to Washington DC. The biggest obstacle has nothing to do with what a lot of the people here seem to think. There’s no conspiracy, the reasons are more practical: true high speed trains require true high speed rails to move them on. To build them in the northeast corridor, you would either have to replace the existing rails (not going to happen) or make an enormous number of eminent domain seizures in some very densely populated places to get the land to lay down rail. This was hard enough to do when the interstate highways were being built, to try and do this solely for the purpose of having an American shinkansen type train. It’s just not worth it in the big picture.

美國(guó)沒(méi)有高速鐵路，因?yàn)閷?shí)際上只有一個(gè)相當(dāng)小的地區(qū)有足夠的客流量來(lái)支付成本:那就是東北部連接波士頓和華盛頓特區(qū)的鐵路線。最大的障礙與這里許多人的想法無(wú)關(guān)。沒(méi)有什么陰謀，原因其實(shí)更實(shí)際:真正的高速列車(chē)需要真正的高速鐵路才能運(yùn)行。要在東北鐵路線運(yùn)行它們，你要么必須更換現(xiàn)有的鐵路(這是不可能的)，要么在一些人口稠密的地方征用大量土地來(lái)鋪設(shè)新鐵路。而這在州際高速公路建設(shè)的時(shí)候就已經(jīng)被證明是很難做到的了。僅僅為了擁有一輛美國(guó)新干線類(lèi)型的火車(chē)而去嘗試和做這件事。從大局來(lái)看，是不值得的。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

Even California doesn’t have a population density that can justify the economics of high speed rail. That didn’t stop them from spending a fortune on it anyway, but that’s another story.

甚至加州的人口密度也不足以讓高速鐵路產(chǎn)生經(jīng)濟(jì)效益。這并沒(méi)有阻止他們?cè)谶@上面花一大筆錢(qián)，但那是另外一回事了。

-------------------------------
10.Aaron Lowe
No, it’s not the main reason, and I’m sure others will answer this much better than me, but here’s my two cents that might corroborate other answers:

不，這不是主要原因，我相信其他人會(huì)比我更好地回答這個(gè)問(wèn)題，但是我的兩點(diǎn)意見(jiàn)可能會(huì)證實(shí)其他的答案:

For me, it’s not down to cheap labor. Sure cheap and available labor is very handy to have but it’s not the main reason imho.

在我看來(lái)，這不是因?yàn)榱畠r(jià)勞動(dòng)力。當(dāng)然，擁有廉價(jià)和可用的勞動(dòng)力是非常方便的，但這不是我認(rèn)為的主要原因。

In the West we have so many rules to manage how people do things. These rules can become such a combined obstacle that they prevent innovation. A lot of the time innovation in the West happens despite of bureaucracy, not because of it. When have you ever heard of the phrase, “invented by bureaucracy”, or “inspired by bureaucracy”?

在西方，我們有很多規(guī)則來(lái)管理人們做事的方式。這些規(guī)則可能會(huì)成為阻礙創(chuàng)新的共同障礙。很多時(shí)候，西方的創(chuàng)新是在官僚主義的影響下發(fā)生的，但卻不是因?yàn)楣倭胖髁x。你什么時(shí)候聽(tīng)說(shuō)過(guò)“由官僚機(jī)構(gòu)發(fā)明”或者“受官僚機(jī)構(gòu)啟發(fā)”這樣的說(shuō)法？

In China they have a more top-down approach. Once the government has decided on a project they make it happen. There are also less rules to overcome. This makes for harsher working conditions for Chinese Laborers but they get more done, not always successfully, but overall, much more than we manage in the West, and in a fraction of the time and cost.

在中國(guó)，他們采取的是自上而下的方式。一旦政府決定了一個(gè)項(xiàng)目，他們就會(huì)實(shí)施，不需要克服更多的規(guī)則。這使得中國(guó)工人的工作環(huán)境更加惡劣，也要做得更多。雖然并不總是成功的，但是總的來(lái)說(shuō)，比我們?cè)谖鞣焦芾淼哪Ｊ较乱嗟枚?，花費(fèi)的時(shí)間和成本也少得多。

This hit home to me once when there was some project in Europe where they were building a tunnel under the Alps, 57 kilometres long.They claimed it was the longest and deepest tunnel of it’s size in the whole wide world.

當(dāng)時(shí)在歐洲有一個(gè)項(xiàng)目，他們正在阿爾卑斯山下修建一條57公里長(zhǎng)的隧道。他們聲稱(chēng)這是世界上最長(zhǎng)、最深的隧道。

The West do this a lot. Claiming that theirs is the best in the world, where in truth, what they mean is, the best in the West. They often make the working assumption that the world is only made up of the West and nothing else outside it exists. The perfect Solipsists bubble.

西方國(guó)家經(jīng)常這樣做。聲稱(chēng)他們的產(chǎn)品是世界上最好的，事實(shí)上，他們的意思是在西方是最好的。他們經(jīng)常做出這樣的假設(shè):世界只是由西方組成的，除此之外沒(méi)有其他存在的東西。完美的唯我主義泡沫。

China dug a tunnel over 1000km long from a water reserve to Beijing. Big enough to also support two smaller service tunnels with rails. I’ve seen it and to my eye it looks as big (not length) as the Euro Tunnel from the UK to France. And that set of three tunnels only serves 1/3rd of Beijing’s current water needs, so they need to build another two. Very few people even know these exist because the Chinese government sees no need to boast about it. They just did it without anyone noticing.

中國(guó)挖掘了一條長(zhǎng)達(dá)1000多公里的從一個(gè)水源地到通往北京的隧道。非常大，還有兩條較小的帶鐵軌的服務(wù)型隧道。我見(jiàn)過(guò)它，在我看來(lái)，它看起來(lái)像從英國(guó)到法國(guó)的歐洲隧道一樣大(不是長(zhǎng)度)。而且這三條隧道只能滿足北京目前三分之一的用水需求，所以他們還需要再建兩條。很少有人知道它們的存在，因?yàn)橹袊?guó)認(rèn)為沒(méi)有必要吹噓它們。他們只是在沒(méi)有人注意的情況下做了這件事。

-------------------------------
11.Adam Perrone
The US can’t build a large network of high speed rail because most of our cities are too small and too far apart.

美國(guó)無(wú)法建設(shè)一個(gè)龐大的高鐵網(wǎng)絡(luò)，因?yàn)槲覀兊拇蠖鄶?shù)城市都太小，距離太遠(yuǎn)。

Beijing is a city of 21 million people. 60 miles away is Tianjin, a city of 15 million people. 230 miles south is Jinan, a city of 7 million people. 200 miles further south is Xushou, a cit of 8.5 million people. 130 further south is Bengbu, a city of 3 million people. Another 130 miles south in Nanjing, a city of 8 million. And then another 190 miles west in Shanghei, a city of 26 million.

北京是一個(gè)擁有2100萬(wàn)人口的城市。60英里外是天津，一個(gè)擁有1500萬(wàn)人口的城市。往南230英里是濟(jì)南，一個(gè)擁有700萬(wàn)人口的城市。再往南200英里是徐州，人口850萬(wàn)。再往南130英里就是蚌埠，一座擁有300萬(wàn)人口的城市。另一個(gè)130英里以南就是南京，一個(gè)800萬(wàn)人口的城市。再往西190英里就是上海，一個(gè)擁有2600萬(wàn)人口的城市。

So with a total track length of about 950 miles you can connect upwards of 90 million people.

因此，在總長(zhǎng)度約為950英里的軌道上，你可以連接超過(guò)9000萬(wàn)人。

Track length is expense: the longer the distance, the more expensive. Population is revenue. The more population, the more revenue.

軌道長(zhǎng)度和成本成正比:距離越長(zhǎng)，成本就越高。而人口就是收入。人口越多，收入就越多。

The problem with the US should be obvious: Boston to Washington DC is about 450 miles and along the route you’d be connecting only about 17 million people. China has 3 times the population per mile of track. That’s 3 times the revenue potential per mile of expense. And, Boston to Washington DC is one of the only places in the entire country that can possibly connect that many people in that short a distance.

美國(guó)的問(wèn)題是顯而易見(jiàn)的:從波士頓到華盛頓特區(qū)大約有450英里，沿著這條線路你只能連接大約1700萬(wàn)人。中國(guó)每英里鐵路的人口是美國(guó)的3倍。潛在收入也會(huì)是美國(guó)的3倍。而且，波士頓到華盛頓特區(qū)是美國(guó)唯一一個(gè)可以連接那么多人的線路。

So, essentially, our best opportunity of high speed rail is limited to one spot in the entire country that’s still only 1/3 rd as promising as just one route among many you could possibly create in China.

因此，從本質(zhì)上講，我們建設(shè)高鐵的最佳位置僅限于全國(guó)范圍內(nèi)的這一條線路，而這個(gè)線路的收入仍然只有中國(guó)許多可能建設(shè)的線路中的一條的1/3。

-------------------------------
12.Yao Zhan
No, it is because of a lack of government and public will power.

不，這是因?yàn)槊绹?guó)缺乏政府和公眾意愿的力量。

As an example, let me illustrate it with a story about American aircraft carriers.

，讓我用一個(gè)關(guān)于美國(guó)航空母艦的故事作為一個(gè)例子來(lái)說(shuō)明。

In 1925, America had just one aircraft carrier, the USS Langley. It was about 10,000 tons. It was a relatively small ship. The British Navy had aircraft carriers over twice the size at that time.

1925年，美國(guó)只有一艘航空母艦——蘭利號(hào)。大約有一萬(wàn)噸。這是一艘相對(duì)較小的船。當(dāng)時(shí)英國(guó)海軍擁有的航空母艦規(guī)模是現(xiàn)在的兩倍多。

Twenty years later, in 1945 America had built over 100 aircraft carriers (of various classes). (And of course 50,000 Sherman tanks and equipped armies to fight in both Europe and Asia.)

20年后的1945年，美國(guó)已經(jīng)建造了超過(guò)100艘(不同等級(jí)的)航空母艦。(當(dāng)然還有50000輛謝爾曼坦克和裝備齊全的軍隊(duì)在歐洲和亞洲作戰(zhàn)。)

Now as you know aircraft carriers don’t grow from trees nor can fleet carriers be built in the back shed using your grandfather’s tools.

現(xiàn)在你知道航空母艦不是從樹(shù)上長(zhǎng)出來(lái)的，也不能用你祖父的工具在后面的棚子里建造航空母艦。

Ask yourself. Where did it get the money from? How much planning went into that? How much cooperation did it take to achieve from Federal to State to local.

問(wèn)問(wèn)你自己。這些錢(qián)是從哪里來(lái)的？為此做了多少計(jì)劃?從聯(lián)邦到州到地方需要多少合作。

America has the means to build high speed rail. But it lacks the will and clarity of mind to do such big industrial projects which require massive government expenditure. All this effort takes a lot of good thinking. Such matters should not be left to a Reality TV star who was once a failed Casino owner who cheated his workers of their wages and called a decorated war veteran “a loser”.

美國(guó)有辦法建造高速鐵路。但它缺乏意愿和清晰的頭腦去做這些需要大量政府支出的大型工業(yè)項(xiàng)目。所有這些努力都需要深思熟慮。這樣的事情不應(yīng)該留給一個(gè)真人秀電視明星，他曾經(jīng)是一個(gè)失敗的賭場(chǎng)老板，他欺騙了他的工人的工資，并稱(chēng)一個(gè)獲得勛章的退伍軍人為“失敗者”。

-------------------------------
13.Vince Gregory
People seem to ignore the actual reason why China''''s high speed is more developed than the US:China has a blank canvas to work with. The US does not.

人們似乎忽視了中國(guó)高鐵比美國(guó)更發(fā)達(dá)的真正原因:那就是中國(guó)有一塊空白的畫(huà)布可以利用。而美國(guó)不行。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

The us already has a rail system that services both passenger and commercial rail of various types. The rail system in the US is already being used for multiple things. Everything from cars, oil/gas, to consumer goods are travel by rail. Any change has a cascading effect across the country and across industries.

美國(guó)已經(jīng)有了一個(gè)鐵路系統(tǒng)，為客運(yùn)和各種類(lèi)型的商業(yè)運(yùn)輸提供服務(wù)。美國(guó)的鐵路系統(tǒng)已經(jīng)被用于多種用途。從汽車(chē)、石油/天然氣到消費(fèi)品，一切都是通過(guò)鐵路運(yùn)輸。任何變化都會(huì)在全國(guó)各行各業(yè)產(chǎn)生連鎖反應(yīng)。

Unless you plan on kicking people out of their houses to widen the rail network and build a modern system next to the old, the current system will have to be torn up. This would cause disruption across the country.

除非你打算把人們趕出家門(mén)，擴(kuò)大鐵路網(wǎng)絡(luò)，在舊鐵路旁建設(shè)一個(gè)現(xiàn)代化的鐵路系統(tǒng)，否則現(xiàn)有的鐵路系統(tǒng)將不得不被拆除。這將在全國(guó)范圍內(nèi)造成混亂。

It can be done surely the US has the capability, but considering most americans have a car and most of those who don''''t live on the east coast where public transportation can get you pretty much anywhere you want, no companies want to spend money on an upgraded system.

美國(guó)當(dāng)然有能力做到這一點(diǎn)，但考慮到大多數(shù)美國(guó)人都有車(chē)，而且大多數(shù)人不住在東海岸，那里的公共交通基本上可以讓你去任何你想去的地方，沒(méi)有公司愿意花錢(qián)升級(jí)系統(tǒng)。

Personally,If they can manage 200+mph for the duration of the trip, high speed rail, although slower, who be a more comfortable and affordable experience.

就我個(gè)人而言，如果他們能夠在整個(gè)行程中保持200多英里/小時(shí)的時(shí)速，那么高速鐵路雖然速度較慢，但卻是一種更加舒適和負(fù)擔(dān)得起的體驗(yàn)。

When I was in Japan I absolutely loved the bullet trains. Even the coach class was leagues above the best seating on Amtrak. US rail could get million more people on trains if they only realized the potential.

當(dāng)我在日本的時(shí)候，我非常喜歡子彈頭列車(chē)。甚至連車(chē)廂都比美國(guó)鐵路公司最好的座位高出好幾個(gè)檔次。如果美國(guó)鐵路公司能夠認(rèn)識(shí)到這一潛力的話，他們可以讓更多的人乘坐火車(chē)。

-------------------------------
14.Alan Williams
One day the west (read USA) will stop and think about how China has made massive improvements in everything, end result, massive numbers of Chinese now have a quite good quality of life.

總有一天，西方(也就是美國(guó))會(huì)停下來(lái)思考中國(guó)是如何在所有的領(lǐng)域都取得巨大進(jìn)步的，大量的中國(guó)人現(xiàn)在擁有了相當(dāng)好的生活質(zhì)量。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

The Chinese were always good engineers and have become even better, they are also good at planning and organizing, and they have a long-term big picture approach to economics and infrastructure development.

中國(guó)人一直是優(yōu)秀的工程師，他們甚至在變得更加優(yōu)秀，他們也擅長(zhǎng)規(guī)劃和組織，他們對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)和基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施發(fā)展有著長(zhǎng)期的宏觀視角。

It made me laugh a few months ago a US lady asked a question ‘Can you buy canned foods in China?’ (she was afraid to eat any fresh food because she was convinced she would die), and she also asked ‘can you nowadays buy can openers in China?’ Such arrogance and ignorance.

幾個(gè)月前，一位美國(guó)女士問(wèn)了我一個(gè)問(wèn)題:你能在中國(guó)買(mǎi)到罐頭食品嗎(她不敢吃任何新鮮食物，因?yàn)樗_信自己吃了會(huì)死)，她還問(wèn)“現(xiàn)在你能在中國(guó)買(mǎi)開(kāi)罐器嗎?”多么的傲慢和無(wú)知。

-------------------------------

15.Adam Brower，投資顧問(wèn)

This question, which has been asked and answered innumerable times, is a useful springboard for deep and erudite analyses of the differences in labor and capital markets, and of the differences in the efficiency of implementation of policy between a command economy and a laissez-faire economy. As interesting as these comparisons between the United States and China may be, the answer to this question does not depend upon them.

這個(gè)問(wèn)題已經(jīng)被無(wú)數(shù)次提出和回答，這個(gè)問(wèn)題是一個(gè)有用的跳板，可以用來(lái)深入和全面地分析勞動(dòng)力市場(chǎng)和資本市場(chǎng)的差異，以及計(jì)劃經(jīng)濟(jì)和自由經(jīng)濟(jì)在政策執(zhí)行效率方面的差異。盡管美國(guó)和中國(guó)之間的這些比較可能很有趣，但這個(gè)問(wèn)題的答案并不取決于它們。

The answer instead lies in the vast disparity in population between the two polities, in the ratio of population to land area, and in the density of that population across available habitable land.

相反，答案在于兩個(gè)政權(quán)之間人口的巨大差異，人口與土地面積的比例，以及可居住土地上人口的密度。

The land area of China is 3.705 million mi2. The land area of the United States is 3.797 million mi2. The two are thus comparable in area, but not in population: China comprises 1.34 billion residents, while the United States comprises just 325 million.

中國(guó)國(guó)土面積為370.5萬(wàn)平方英里。美國(guó)的陸地面積是379.7萬(wàn)平方英里。因此，這兩個(gè)國(guó)家在面積上具有可比性，但在人口上沒(méi)有可比性:中國(guó)有13.4億人口，而美國(guó)只有3.25億人口。

This means that a high-speed rail network in China immediately benefits from the “network effect”. The number of riders available in a Chinese network is vastly greater than that in the United States. This lowers the cost per ride by an order of magnitude, as well as reducing empty trips, which incur a cost while returning no income. Add to this that there is already an efficient network of highways connecting American cities, and an efficient air travel network, and the incentive to create high speed rail is even further diminished.

這意味著中國(guó)的高鐵網(wǎng)絡(luò)可以立即受益于“網(wǎng)絡(luò)效應(yīng)”。中國(guó)網(wǎng)絡(luò)的乘客數(shù)量遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超過(guò)美國(guó)。這樣就將每次運(yùn)行的成本降低了一個(gè)數(shù)量級(jí)，同時(shí)也減少了空車(chē)次數(shù)，因?yàn)榭哲?chē)次數(shù)會(huì)增加成本，而且不會(huì)帶來(lái)任何收入。除此之外，連接美國(guó)各城市的高速公路網(wǎng)絡(luò)和高效的航空網(wǎng)絡(luò)已經(jīng)形成，建設(shè)高速鐵路的動(dòng)力進(jìn)一步減弱。

The other salient difference is the distrubution of the population. In China, many very large urban centers are concentrated in a relatively small land area. In the United States, although the population is increasingly concentrated in urban areas, those urban areas are separated by vast distances. This makes air travel more efficient than any form of rail.

另一個(gè)明顯的區(qū)別是人口的分布。在中國(guó)，許多非常大的城市中心集中在一個(gè)相對(duì)較小的土地面積。在美國(guó)，雖然人口越來(lái)越集中在城市地區(qū)，但這些城市地區(qū)相距甚遠(yuǎn)。這使得空中旅行比任何形式的鐵路都更有效率。

The answer, therefore, is not that the United States cannot build high-speed rail comparable to that in China: it is that there is no economic reason to do so.

因此，答案不是美國(guó)不能建設(shè)與中國(guó)相當(dāng)?shù)母哞F:而是沒(méi)有經(jīng)濟(jì)上的理由這樣做。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

-------------------------------
16.Morgan Folland
When it comes to making virtually everything, China has a significant advantage due to lower labor costs than the US and Europe.

在幾乎所有產(chǎn)品的生產(chǎn)方面，中國(guó)都具有顯著的優(yōu)勢(shì)，因?yàn)橹袊?guó)的勞動(dòng)力成本低于美國(guó)和歐洲。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

Is it only about labor? No. Cost of land acquisition is lower in China. Environmental review is easier to complete. People have much less power so a train between two major cities does not need to travel out of its way to some small town to get an elected official on board with the project.

僅僅是勞動(dòng)力成本嗎？不是。中國(guó)的土地征用成本較低。環(huán)境審查更容易完成。人們擁有的權(quán)力要小得多，所以?xún)蓚€(gè)主要城市之間的火車(chē)不需要特地去某個(gè)小鎮(zhèn)請(qǐng)求一個(gè)當(dāng)?shù)毓賳T的同意。

But labor is king.

但是勞動(dòng)力才是王道。

A report for the World Bank in 2014 estimated that the cost of high speed rail per kilometer was US$17–21 million in China. For Europe, the estimate was US$25–39 million per kilometer. What was the cost estimate for California? US$52 million per kilometer. This estimate excludes cost of land acquisition, rolling stock (the trains themselves), and interest incurred during construction. Building a rail line in the US is almost three times more expensive than in China. Again, this is ignoring the more difficult and expensive process to acquire land outside of China.

世界銀行2014年的一份報(bào)告估算，中國(guó)每公里高速鐵路的成本為1700萬(wàn)至2100萬(wàn)美元。對(duì)歐洲高鐵的成本的估算是每公里2500萬(wàn)至3900萬(wàn)美元。對(duì)加利福尼亞高鐵的成本的估算是多少？每公里5200萬(wàn)美元。這個(gè)估算不包括土地收購(gòu)成本，鐵路車(chē)輛(火車(chē)本身)，以及在建設(shè)過(guò)程中發(fā)生的利息。在美國(guó)修建鐵路的成本幾乎是中國(guó)的三倍。同樣，這也忽略了在中國(guó)以外獲得土地更加困難和昂貴的因素。

China’s top down approach saves money and labor. Where high speed rail in the US is a number of unrelated projects using different technologies, China’s project takes a top down approach. The entirety of high speed rail can thus be standardized.

中國(guó)的自上而下的方式節(jié)省了金錢(qián)和勞動(dòng)力。在美國(guó)，高鐵是一系列使用不同技術(shù)的互不相關(guān)的項(xiàng)目，而中國(guó)的項(xiàng)目則采取了自上而下的方式。因此，整個(gè)高速鐵路可以標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化建造。

This is not to say that other factors do not help China’s lower costs. It is much cheaper to take someone from their home in China and put them somewhere else. A person who holds out sale in the US or Europe must be properly compensated after a likely legal battle. China does not have that worry. However, these benefits are very small. Even with comparable costs in these areas, China would have significant advantage over US and Europe when it comes to major transportation projects.

這并不是說(shuō)其他因素不能幫助中國(guó)來(lái)降低成本。讓一個(gè)人從他在中國(guó)的家里遷移到別的地方也要便宜得多。在美國(guó)或歐洲拒絕出售房產(chǎn)和地產(chǎn)的人，在可能發(fā)生的法律糾紛之后，必須得到適當(dāng)?shù)难a(bǔ)償。而在中國(guó)沒(méi)有這種擔(dān)憂。然而這些優(yōu)勢(shì)所起到的作用是非常小的。即使在這些領(lǐng)域的成本差不多，中國(guó)在大型交通項(xiàng)目上也會(huì)比美國(guó)和歐洲有明顯的優(yōu)勢(shì)。

-------------------------------
17.Robin Matthews
low labour costs are one reason. When the UK was a developing country in the 1800s we built a lot of railways. We had the capital and we had cheap labour - a bit like china today. China also doesn’t worry too much about health & safety - which adds significant costs to projects - in china worker’s work long shifts - workers will work through the night if necessary - and if a worker gets injured then he can be compensated cheaply and it’s unlikely to hit the newspapers. In the US none of that would be true.

低廉的勞動(dòng)力成本是其中一個(gè)原因。19世紀(jì)英國(guó)還是個(gè)發(fā)展中國(guó)家的時(shí)候，我們也修建了很多鐵路。我們當(dāng)時(shí)有資本，也有廉價(jià)勞動(dòng)力，有點(diǎn)像今天的中國(guó)。中國(guó)也不用太擔(dān)心健康和安全問(wèn)題，這些會(huì)給項(xiàng)目增加巨大的成本。中國(guó)工人會(huì)長(zhǎng)時(shí)間倒班工作，如果必要的話，甚至可以通宵工作。如果工人受傷了，他只可以得到廉價(jià)的補(bǔ)償，而且不太可能上報(bào)紙。在美國(guó)，這些都無(wú)法實(shí)現(xiàn)。

The Chinese are not concerned about IP rights - with the result that their trains are built locally with IP substantially stolen from the Japanese - again that represents a huge saving - though of course it’s a one off “win” as western and Japanese companies now think very carefully about the IP placed into China.

中國(guó)人并不擔(dān)心知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)問(wèn)題，他們的火車(chē)是在本地制造的，但其知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)基本上是從日本人那里X來(lái)的，這也是一個(gè)巨大的節(jié)約，盡管是一次性的“勝利”，因?yàn)槲鞣胶腿毡竟粳F(xiàn)在已經(jīng)對(duì)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)問(wèn)題非常小心。

China like many East Asian countries likes infrastructure projects - the share of national income going into projects is relatively high in china and so building railways which don’t necessarily make commercial sense is the kind of thing they do. Chinese citizens have relatively less disposable income than you would expect partly because a sizeable chunk of national income goes into “building china”. Chinese citizens don’t get a vote and are not well informed about how their countries income is spent.

中國(guó)像許多東亞國(guó)家一樣喜歡修建基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施項(xiàng)目。在中國(guó)，投入項(xiàng)目的國(guó)民收入占國(guó)民總收入的比例相對(duì)較高，因此修建不一定具有商業(yè)意義的鐵路就是他們所做的事情。中國(guó)公民的可支配收入相對(duì)較少，這在一定程度上是因?yàn)橄喈?dāng)大一部分國(guó)民收入被用于“建設(shè)中國(guó)”。中國(guó)公民沒(méi)有投票權(quán)，也不知道他們國(guó)家的收入是怎么花的。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

-------------------------------
18.Alex Kim
Not exactly. I’m sure there are other people here who have laid out the reasons I’m about to explain, but here it goes.

不完全是。我相信這里還有其他人已經(jīng)列出了我將要解釋的原因，但是現(xiàn)在我要說(shuō)的是：

China has one distinct advantage when it comes to constructing railways: government authority. Technically, no Chinese citizen owns real estate in China, since the country, being com...st, sees land as belonging to the people (i.e. the state) and not to individual landowners. Thus, the government owns the titles to the land, which it then leases to individual citizens for a certain number of decades. This also means that, though the government couldn’t necessarily just come in and take swaths of land, it faces far less red tape than a country with private ownership laws such as the United States.

在鐵路建設(shè)方面，中國(guó)有一個(gè)明顯的優(yōu)勢(shì):那就是政府權(quán)威。從技術(shù)上講，沒(méi)有中國(guó)公民在中國(guó)擁有房地產(chǎn)，因?yàn)橹袊?guó)是一個(gè)共產(chǎn)主義國(guó)家，認(rèn)為土地屬于人民(即國(guó)家)，而不是個(gè)人土地所有者。因此，政府擁有土地所有權(quán)，然后將土地租賃給個(gè)人公民，租期為幾十年。這也意味著，盡管政府不一定會(huì)隨便直接拿走大片土地，但它需要的程序肯定遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)少于像美國(guó)這樣有私有制法律的國(guó)家。

The United States federal government and state governments can forcibly take land from individual landowners (i.e. “eminent domain”), but with several caveats. One, the government has to pay the landowner a reasonable sum for the land. Two, it has to prove in court that its reasons for taking the land are in the public interests (e.g. a new highway to ease traffic). And three, it has to provide any residents of the land/buildings taken with alternative residences and adequate time to move. This whole process is not unique to the U.S., of course. China also has corresponding legal procedures, but eminent domain laws are much stricter and stiffer in the U.S. This makes massive infrastructure projects such as railways quite a legal headache, despite having good engineering and the economic rationale behind it.

美國(guó)聯(lián)邦政府和州政府可以強(qiáng)行從個(gè)別土地所有者手中征用土地(即“征用權(quán)”)，但有幾點(diǎn)需要注意。第一，政府必須為土地所有者支付一筆合理的數(shù)額。第二，須向法庭證明其征用土地的理由符合公眾利益(例如興建新公路以疏導(dǎo)交通)。第三，它必須為所占用土地/建筑物的居民提供替代住所和足夠的搬遷時(shí)間。當(dāng)然，這整個(gè)過(guò)程并不是美國(guó)獨(dú)有的。中國(guó)也有相應(yīng)的法律程序，但是征用權(quán)法律在美國(guó)要嚴(yán)格得多。這使得像鐵路這樣的大型基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施項(xiàng)目在法律上相當(dāng)頭疼，這些項(xiàng)目有良好的工程設(shè)計(jì)和背后的經(jīng)濟(jì)原理。

That said, China’s emphasis on railways does not stem solely on advantages. If anything, China’s railway boom was a solution to a problem: strictly regulated airspace. The Chinese government restricts private airlines to specific routes and times in its airspace, which contributes to the country’s relatively high rate of flight delays and low supply of flights for willing fliers. Thus, the country had no choice but to invest in high-speed passenger trains to connect faraway cities across its vast land. After all, China is the third-largest country in terms of land area, so it needs its trains to be as fast as possible.

盡管如此，中國(guó)對(duì)鐵路的重視并不僅僅源于其優(yōu)勢(shì)。如果說(shuō)有什么區(qū)別的話，那就是中國(guó)鐵路的繁榮發(fā)展解決了一個(gè)問(wèn)題:嚴(yán)格管制的空域。中國(guó)限制民營(yíng)航空公司在其領(lǐng)空的具體航線和時(shí)間，這導(dǎo)致了中國(guó)航班的延誤率相對(duì)較高，愿意乘坐飛機(jī)的人也相對(duì)較少。因此，中國(guó)別無(wú)選擇，只能投資建設(shè)高速客運(yùn)列車(chē)，穿越廣闊的土地，連接遙遠(yuǎn)的城市。畢竟，中國(guó)是土地面積第三大的國(guó)家，所以它需要火車(chē)盡可能快。

Meanwhile, the U.S.’s airspace is relatively open to airlines. This means domestic flights are relatively cheaper, relatively abundant, and relatively common. This is key because conventional flying is much faster than any high-speed bullet train and just about as comfortable and convenient. So, flying beat rail as the preferred mode of transportation across long-distances. Because of this, there’s simply little demand, desire, or need to build a vast network of fast passenger trains.

與此同時(shí)，美國(guó)的領(lǐng)空對(duì)航空公司相對(duì)開(kāi)放。這意味著國(guó)內(nèi)航班相對(duì)便宜，班次也相對(duì)充足。最關(guān)鍵的是，常規(guī)的飛行也要比任何高速子彈頭列車(chē)都要快得多，而且?guī)缀跻粯邮孢m和方便。因此，飛機(jī)取代了鐵路成為首選的長(zhǎng)途運(yùn)輸方式。正因?yàn)槿绱?，建設(shè)一個(gè)龐大的快速客運(yùn)網(wǎng)絡(luò)的愿望和需求都變得微乎其微。

Now, contrary to common belief among non-Americans, the U.S. is not completely devoid of railroads. There are plenty railroads criss-crossing the nation. The only difference is that these railroads are used almost exclusively to transport cargo. Flying itty-bitty humans is not hard, considering you can fit hundreds of humans on a single plane, but when it comes to cargo, especially cargo such as oil, coal, or lumber, planes just don’t cut it. So, the railroads are mostly reserved to transport cargo, keeping passenger trains off to avoid causing unnecessary traffic.

與非美國(guó)人的普遍看法相反，美國(guó)并非完全沒(méi)有鐵路。這個(gè)國(guó)家有許多縱橫交錯(cuò)的鐵路。唯一的區(qū)別是，這些鐵路幾乎完全用于運(yùn)輸貨物。你可以在一架飛機(jī)上搭載數(shù)百名乘客，但當(dāng)涉及到貨物，尤其是像石油、煤炭或木材這樣的貨物時(shí)，飛機(jī)就不行了。因此，鐵路大部分是用來(lái)運(yùn)輸貨物的，這樣就可以避免客運(yùn)列車(chē)進(jìn)站，以免造成不必要的交通堵塞。

So, China’s success in rail is great, and bullet trains are sexy. But one shouldn’t assume that China’s impressive progress in rail development and construction and the U.S.’s lack thereof is solely because of China’s superiority.

因此中國(guó)在鐵路方面的成就是偉大的，而且子彈頭列車(chē)也很漂亮。但是我們不應(yīng)該認(rèn)為中國(guó)在鐵路發(fā)展和建設(shè)方面取得了令人矚目的進(jìn)步，美國(guó)在這方面的不足僅僅是因?yàn)橹袊?guó)有在這方面的優(yōu)勢(shì)罷了。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

-------------------------------

19.Roberto Santocho，高級(jí)計(jì)算機(jī)安全顧問(wèn)(1995年至今)

Its not a labor cost issue

這不是勞動(dòng)力成本的問(wèn)題
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

The US has a very well developed rail system that dates back to the 19th Century

美國(guó)有一個(gè)非常發(fā)達(dá)的鐵路系統(tǒng)，可以追溯到19世紀(jì)

The US has been contemplating the installation of a high speed rail but one of the biggest problems, that I know of personally, is that we don''''t was a high speed train zooming past our back yards. All the good pathways in the US are highly developed so you would have to run the tracks though a neighborhood or right behind it and we don''''t like that. In China the government does whatever it feels like it and the people simple are pushed out of the way, it’s a huge difference in mindset.

美國(guó)一直在考慮建設(shè)高速鐵路，但據(jù)我個(gè)人所知，最大的問(wèn)題之一是，我們不能讓一列高速列車(chē)從我們的后院疾馳而過(guò)。在美國(guó)，所有的道路都很好，而且高度發(fā)達(dá)，所以如果你要建高鐵，你就必須讓鐵軌穿過(guò)一個(gè)社區(qū)或者就建在它的后面，我們不喜歡這樣。而中國(guó)...思維方式上的巨大差異。

In my area there was nowhere to put the high speed tracks so the high speed trains had to run on the old tracks for traditional trains. This is true for so many miles of track that we essentially would not receive any benefit from having a high speed rail so most people n my area voted against it

在我所在的地區(qū)，沒(méi)有地方可以鋪設(shè)高速鐵軌，所以高速列車(chē)不得不在舊鐵軌上運(yùn)行，以滿足傳統(tǒng)列車(chē)的需要。說(shuō)真的，要鋪設(shè)這么多英里的鐵軌，而且我們基本上不會(huì)從高速鐵路中得到任何好處，所以我所在地區(qū)的大多數(shù)人都投了反對(duì)票

The US has a massive, well developed and well maintained InterState highway system that the trucking industry has taken advantage of to push the use of trucks for transportation instead of using freight trains, so the average person just don''''t have the rail system on their mind

美國(guó)有一個(gè)龐大的、發(fā)達(dá)的、維護(hù)良好的州際公路系統(tǒng)，卡車(chē)運(yùn)輸業(yè)已經(jīng)利用這個(gè)優(yōu)勢(shì)來(lái)推動(dòng)使用卡車(chē)運(yùn)輸，而不是貨運(yùn)列車(chē)，所以普通人根本沒(méi)有考慮這個(gè)鐵路系統(tǒng)。

-------------------------------
20.Armand Welsh
Cost and speed are not related. Labor costs are less in china, but that has. no impact on how fast something can be built. Can you make toast faster if you are being paid $100 vs $1?

成本和速度沒(méi)有關(guān)系。在中國(guó)，勞動(dòng)力成本較低，但是這種情況對(duì)建造速度沒(méi)有影響。如果你的工資是100美元而不是1美元，你能把面包更快的烤好嗎？

In my opinion, the reason comes down to greed, and humanity. In California, we have tried a few time to fund a train, but none of the initiatives have done a single thing toward actually building. They all have to do with gimmicks to get the state to pay for feasibility studies in the mega millions to billions — resulting in little actual measurable results — that are essentially throw away efforts. They are just gimicks. There is no real interest to actually build the train, just in collecting as much money as possible for the least amount of real work.

在我看來(lái)，原因可以歸結(jié)為貪婪和人性。在加利福尼亞，我們已經(jīng)嘗試了一段時(shí)間來(lái)資助建設(shè)一條高鐵，但沒(méi)有一項(xiàng)舉措對(duì)實(shí)際建設(shè)起到任何作用。他們耍了一些小花招，目的是讓讓政府為數(shù)百萬(wàn)至數(shù)十億美元的可行性研究買(mǎi)單，但沒(méi)有得到任何可實(shí)施性的研究結(jié)果，這些努力基本上是白費(fèi)力氣。它們只是噱頭。這些人實(shí)際上并沒(méi)有真正的興趣去建造高鐵，他們只是為了盡可能少的實(shí)際工作而斂盡可能多的錢(qián)。

The other issue, is that even if we did actually build a train system, we have to be concerned about human rights. We cannot force people to work in the “train building” industry, and we cannot force production rates to increase by throwing more workers at the problem. Each involved, will only do what they must, which circles back to the first point.. greed.

另一個(gè)問(wèn)題是，即使我們真的建造了一個(gè)鐵路系統(tǒng)，我們也必須關(guān)注人權(quán)。我們不能強(qiáng)迫人們?cè)凇盎疖?chē)制造”行業(yè)工作，也不能通過(guò)增加工人來(lái)強(qiáng)行提高生產(chǎn)率。每個(gè)參與者，只會(huì)做他們必須做的事情，回到第一點(diǎn)：人性的貪婪。

-------------------------------

21.Sukhvarsh Jerath，北達(dá)科他大學(xué)土木工程學(xué)院名譽(yù)教授(1985-2019)

The discussion has gone off track. U.S. is the most suitable country to build high speed rail. it is a vast country so the distances are long, plus it is high tech country with lot of knowledge in the field. Then why U.S. is not in the high speed rail business? It is the same reason as is for not having good public transportation. U.S. has some form of democracy but really speaking the control of decision making in the Government is in the hands of corporations. I have heard this a lot that auto companies did not allow our country to develop rail transportation. I have a feeling, now the airplane companies may be influencing not to have high speed rail. Unfortunately, airplane is not suitable as a mass transit. It is politics than any other reason.

一些討論偏離了正軌。美國(guó)是最適合建設(shè)高速鐵路的國(guó)家。這是一個(gè)幅員遼闊的國(guó)家，人們之間的距離很遠(yuǎn)，再加上它是一個(gè)高科技國(guó)家，在這個(gè)領(lǐng)域有很多知識(shí)。那么，為什么美國(guó)不建設(shè)高鐵呢？這和沒(méi)有良好的公共交通是一樣的道理。美國(guó)有某種形式的民主，但實(shí)際上，政府決策的控制權(quán)掌握在企業(yè)手中。我聽(tīng)說(shuō)很多汽車(chē)公司不允許我們國(guó)家發(fā)展鐵路運(yùn)輸。我有一種感覺(jué)，現(xiàn)在飛機(jī)制造公司可能也在對(duì)高鐵建設(shè)進(jìn)行阻撓。遺憾的是，飛機(jī)不適合作為公共交通工具。所以不建設(shè)高鐵是因?yàn)檎?，而不是其他的任何原因?/b>

-------------------------------

22.Ron Ih，網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全業(yè)務(wù)發(fā)展處處長(zhǎng)(2016年至今)

I havent gone through all the responses, but the political system is also a big factor.

我還沒(méi)有看過(guò)所有的答案，但政治體制也是一個(gè)重要因素。

*Anytime* a major construction project happens in the the US, there are environmental studies, lawsuits, counter-suits, etc. It can take a decade and tens of millions of dollars just to get through all the legal red tape.

*任何時(shí)候*美國(guó)要開(kāi)展重大建設(shè)項(xiàng)目，都會(huì)有環(huán)境研究、訴訟、反訴訟等步驟。僅僅是要完成所有的法律手續(xù)，就可能需要花費(fèi)十年時(shí)間和數(shù)千萬(wàn)美元。

China is not a democracy. If the central government wants to build a rail line and your house is in the way. You''''re outa there. You have no say. “We built you a new house several miles away. You have two months to leave. Good day.”

中國(guó)不是一個(gè)oo國(guó)家。如果政府想要修建一條鐵路，而你的房子擋在中間。你要搬走。你沒(méi)有發(fā)言權(quán)?！拔覀?cè)趲子⒗锿饨o你建了一座新房子。你還有兩個(gè)月的時(shí)間搬家。再見(jiàn)?！?/b>

It''''s far easier to build things when you don’t have to worry about asking people for permission.

當(dāng)你不必?fù)?dān)心征求別人的許可時(shí)，建造東西就會(huì)容易得多。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

-------------------------------
23.Ashley Riggs
The thing is the US government doesn’t build railroads. It’s the railroad companies who do that. Railroad companies aren’t building high speed rail in the US because it’s not profitable.

問(wèn)題是美國(guó)政府沒(méi)有修建鐵路。但這是鐵路公司的事情。鐵路公司沒(méi)有在美國(guó)建設(shè)高速鐵路，因?yàn)樗荒苡?/b>

Speed. Flying across the US is much faster than high speed rail.

論速度，坐飛機(jī)比坐高鐵要快得多。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

Flexibility. It’s a lot easier and cheaper adding or reducing flights than adding or reducing the number of high speed rail going to a city. Demand changes. A good example is Detroit. When the automotive business closed up shop, travel there dropped, so the airlines reduced their flights to the city.

論靈活性，增加或減少航班比增加或減少去某個(gè)城市的高速鐵路數(shù)量要容易得多，也便宜得多。航班的班次會(huì)隨著需求而變化。底特律就是一個(gè)很好的例子。在那里的汽車(chē)公司倒閉后，去那里旅行的人也就減少了，因此航空公司減少了飛往那里的航班。

Quantity. You can have a lot more flight to the same city and move a lot more people than one high speed rail. Flights also don’t use up land like rails

論數(shù)量，你可以有更多的航班飛往同一個(gè)城市，可以比一條高速鐵路運(yùn)送更多的人。航班也不會(huì)像鐵路那樣占用土地。

Americans are obsessed with their cars. It’s not just Californians. It’s the entire nation. If given a choice between driving 2 hours or taking high speed rail and getting to their destination in 30 minutes, most people will drive. Their thinking is they’ll have freedom to drive around when they get to their destination, and it will be cheaper than renting a car.

美國(guó)人癡迷于他們的汽車(chē)。不僅僅是加利福尼亞人，而是整個(gè)國(guó)家。如果讓他們?cè)陂_(kāi)2小時(shí)的車(chē)或乘坐30分鐘高鐵到達(dá)目的地之間做出選擇，大多數(shù)人會(huì)選擇開(kāi)車(chē)。他們的想法是，當(dāng)他們到達(dá)目的地時(shí)，他們可以自由駕駛，而且比租車(chē)便宜。

Roads. There’s a lot of roads in the US and a lot of highways to the point where it’s almost insanity. If you have a car, you can drive on the interstate at 70 mph and go anywhere you want. That’s something China doesn’t have and why they need high speed rail.

論道路，美國(guó)有很多公路，很多高速公路，到了幾乎瘋狂的地步。如果你有車(chē)，你可以在州際公路上以每小時(shí)70英里的速度行駛，去任何你想去的地方。這是中國(guó)沒(méi)有的東西，也是他們需要高鐵的原因。

Air travel is very reliable compared to China. The US invested a lot in air traffic control because airline companies wants reliability and capacity so they can make more money.

與中國(guó)相比，航空旅行是非?？煽康?。美國(guó)在空中交通管制方面投入了大量資金，因?yàn)楹娇展拘枰煽啃院瓦\(yùn)載力，這樣他們才能賺更多的錢(qián)。

Short distance travel is covered by cars. Medium distance travel is covered by cars, regular railroad and planes. Long distance travel is covered by planes. There’s not much room for high speed rail in the US.

短途旅行由汽車(chē)代步。中長(zhǎng)途旅行包括乘坐汽車(chē)、普通鐵路和飛機(jī)。長(zhǎng)途旅行由飛機(jī)承擔(dān)。在美國(guó)，高速鐵路沒(méi)有多少發(fā)展空間。

-------------------------------
24.Bill Miller
No, it''''s because high speed rail is a low priority with the people. Industry knows it and sees low profits or losses in most areas. Politicians know except for small sections of areas it would be political suicide to force the enormous taxes to pay for it on their constituents.

不，這是因?yàn)楦哞F在人們心目中的地位不高。工業(yè)界人士知道這一點(diǎn)，在大多數(shù)地區(qū)建設(shè)高鐵只有很低的利潤(rùn)，甚至虧損。政治家們知道，除了一小部分地區(qū)，強(qiáng)迫他們的選民繳納巨額稅款無(wú)異于斷送自己的政治生涯。

It''''s not because of big oil or the other stupid Green reasons mentioned in other answers. The reason is simply it doesn''''t have the support of the people and the people do not want to pay the enormous taxes.

這不是因?yàn)槭突蛟谄渌鸢钢刑岬降挠薮赖木G色環(huán)保。原因很簡(jiǎn)單，它沒(méi)有得到人民的支持，人民不想交巨額的稅。

-------------------------------
25.Leslie Smith
Not at all. The fact is the USA decided many years ago that transport was better handled by air and the all-conquering automobile. Turns out that although that was seen as the best way forward, bearing in mind rail technology at the time, it may not have been the best idea long term. While rail was seen as convenient and cost effective for transporting large and heavy loads across country passenger rail transport was virtually ignored other than in a few local areas. The last decade or so has seen a major investment in high speed rail lixs in many countries which traditionally had poor rail networks but which now connect the centres of their major cities with excellent 200+mph train services. Maybe the USA should follow in this direction and I believe there are several schemes currently underway, most of which seem to be hitting problems during construction. If the USA is to have a high speed rail network it will no doubt take a major change in thinking at Government level. However, as usual, there seem to be a number of lobby groups who are not keen to see this happen.

完全不是。事實(shí)上，美國(guó)早在許多年前就認(rèn)定，空運(yùn)和征服一切的汽車(chē)運(yùn)輸效果更好。事實(shí)證明，考慮到當(dāng)時(shí)的鐵路技術(shù)，這在當(dāng)時(shí)被認(rèn)為是最好的前進(jìn)方式，但從長(zhǎng)遠(yuǎn)來(lái)看，這可能不是最好的方式。鐵路被認(rèn)為是跨國(guó)運(yùn)輸大型和重型貨物的方便和具有成本效益的交通工具，但除了在少數(shù)地區(qū)以外，鐵路客運(yùn)幾乎沒(méi)有受到重視。在過(guò)去的十年左右的時(shí)間里，許多國(guó)家對(duì)高速鐵路進(jìn)行了大量的投資，這些國(guó)家的傳統(tǒng)鐵路網(wǎng)絡(luò)很差，但是現(xiàn)在它們用時(shí)速超過(guò)200英里的優(yōu)質(zhì)列車(chē)將主要城市的中心連接起來(lái)。也許美國(guó)也應(yīng)該沿著這個(gè)方向前進(jìn)，我相信目前有幾個(gè)方案正在進(jìn)行中，但其中大部分似乎在建設(shè)過(guò)程中遇到了問(wèn)題。如果美國(guó)要擁有一個(gè)高速鐵路網(wǎng)，那么毫無(wú)疑問(wèn)，政府的思維將發(fā)生重大變化。然而，像往常一樣，似乎有一些游說(shuō)團(tuán)體不希望看到這種情況發(fā)生。

-------------------------------
26.Ming Tsui
No. Because America is a nation where people are used to being scammed. People know they can charge prices once and then charge prices much higher to complete any type of projects.

不是。因?yàn)槊绹?guó)是一個(gè)人們習(xí)慣于被欺騙的國(guó)家。人們知道，他們可以一次次收取更高的費(fèi)用以完成任何類(lèi)型的項(xiàng)目。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

Second thing is people are more relax and take their time to work while in China workers have a very high work ethic. We are used to be lazy and relax when doing anything except doing work at home. This is due to our Democratic government policies creating a very lazy social structure for the whole nation.

其次，人們更加不愿意花時(shí)間在工作上。而在中國(guó)，工人們有著非常高的職業(yè)道德。我們習(xí)慣了懶惰，除了在家里工作，什么事情都不做。這是因?yàn)槲覀兠裰髡恼邽檎麄€(gè)國(guó)家創(chuàng)造了一個(gè)非常懶惰的社會(huì)結(jié)構(gòu)。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

This is a reason for decline of a great nation. We will put blame on everybody else instead of ourselves.

這是一個(gè)偉大國(guó)家衰落的原因。我們會(huì)把責(zé)任推到別人身上，而不是自己身上。

-------------------------------
27.Bob MacKenzie
No I would say the main reason is because the people need it for a more comfortable life style and China is so big they need to be able to get around fast.

不，我認(rèn)為主要原因是因?yàn)槿藗冃枰鼇?lái)過(guò)上更舒適的生活，而中國(guó)太大了，他們需要能夠快速的到處走動(dòng)。

The other main reason is that China does not waste tax payers money on endless wars that serves the benefit of only one percent of the population while the rest of the population is expected to pay for it and live with old worn out infrastructure.

另一個(gè)主要原因是，中國(guó)不會(huì)把納稅人的錢(qián)浪費(fèi)在沒(méi)完沒(méi)了的戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)上，這些戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)只造福于1%的人口，而其余的人口卻要為戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)買(mǎi)單，并住在破舊的基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施里。

人們 中國(guó) 高速鐵路 美國(guó) 勞動(dòng)力

很贊 ( 1 )

收藏

【下】人們說(shuō)中國(guó)可以快速建設(shè)高速鐵路，而美國(guó)甚至還不能建設(shè)，是因?yàn)橹袊?guó)的勞動(dòng)力很便宜。請(qǐng)問(wèn)這是主要原因嗎？

【下】人們說(shuō)中國(guó)可以快速建設(shè)高速鐵路，而美國(guó)甚至還不能建設(shè)，是因?yàn)橹袊?guó)的勞動(dòng)力很便宜。請(qǐng)問(wèn)這是主要原因嗎？