"The conventional wisdom is that never-ending cost overruns and never-ending management woes killed the original vision for California’s bullet train project." I would say that never-ending foot dragging by California Republicans did the trick more than anything. "But perhaps humanity’s never-ending quest for newer and better and more varied methods of transportation is equally responsible." I know you finally addressed it in your close, but an East/West automobile road is neither a "newer and better" nor a "more varied" method of transportation than North/South high-speed rail here in California. Other countries are able to accomplish feats such as high-speed rail because they all pull on the same end of the rope. Here in America (including California), any idea thought of as progressive is immediately fought by the Grand Old Party. You'll find evidence of this with the ACA. It's hard enough getting healthcare to a wider group of people, but it's darn near impossible when half of your elected officials are actively working against it. What would really be more beneficial to us here in the Central Valley though, would be to extend the existing slow-speed rail line up and over the Grapevine. It's ridiculous that you have to take Amtrak to Bakersfield, get on a bus, take said bus over the Grapevine, and then get back on a train to get to your SoCal destination. We finished the Transcontinental Railroad in 1869 over much rougher terrain than the Grapevine. This should be the first order of any transit infrastructure planning.