It should surprise nobody that an authoritarian, centrally planned, and massively resource-rich country can perform infrastructure miracles. You don't have to stoop to conspiracy theories to understand this.
Some of the infrastructure has lead to extra economic benefit beyond just the infrastructure stimulus. But other infrastructure might not - and i would call them economic waste (but not political waste).
Have a look at the train projects described here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITvXlax4ZXk
The building of those rail networks is meant to achieve a political purpose, rather than an actual productivity increase. Perhaps their leadership thought it was worth the spend, but this sort of spending would unlikely work in the US imho.
Same goals, same trade offs, same sometimes major wins, sometimes pointless spending.
Chinese new year, more people travel in China than the whole of the USA, homecoming notwithstanding. It's mass transposition, there and back again.
They need trains. I've used them shanghai to Beijing, great service. I wish I'd been able to use the maglev in shanghai
You can make more economical runs per month with trucks than with trains, meaning you get to have less stock on hand as a buffer on both ends.
This has many knock-on efficiencies - fewer resources tied up in goods, lower insurance expense, lower warehousing cost, and above all: a more flexible and responsive supply chain.
building out passenger rail frees up capacity for freight on old rail :)
this is actually a big reason HS2 in bongland is (was) getting built
Only if the high-speed rail gets used by passengers. If it's unaffordable, people won't use it.
> The building of those rail networks is meant to achieve a political
> purpose, rather than an actual productivity increase. Perhaps their leadership thought
> it was worth the spend, but this sort of spending would unlikely work in the US imho.