That does tend to be the level of arguments against HS2. I spend a bit of time on Twitter defending HS2, against some who just cannot see that if you put that much extra capacity within the overall network, a good part of the network will become a lot easier to operate, less congested, & with much better availability of seating etc.A recent piece on HS2:
There's a lot to go through, however the main thing that struck me was that the biggest complaint was a UK based train was delayed (I'd suggest that there's a good chance that if you did it that the UK train could be on time and several of the others could be delayed) not the fact that on one train the heating is a coal fired brazier.
Also they cite that the reason for HS2 is because the 8:10 or of Paddington isn't quick enough, errrr.... Paddington?!? Why would you be using HS2 if you were departing from Paddington?
If this is the quality that those opposed to HS2 can produce then it looks like that it's fairly safe from any serious review.
The main arguments against HS2 seem to be;
- It costs too much
- It won’t do anything for “my” journey
- Better spent on improving the existing network
- Environmental issues