Pop culture and technology development discussion thread

Funny you mention that, Henry Clay is the 6th President in my TL, from 1823-1829, and we do see a continuance of national internal improvements. The concept of the "national road" doesn't go away, and by 1910 there are 9 national roads, and once railroads take off, the Federal Bureau of Improvements (which manages said national road network, in addition to several canals) sets up the United States Railway Company and has railways built alongside the existing and new national roads, and also helps to subsidize some private efforts.

If I may make a suggestion: rather than having the United States Railway Company function as both builder and operator for the railroads, have it function more as a builder/maintainer/licensor and franchiser. For example, in OTL the state of Pennsylvania decided the state needed a railroad linking Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, so they got together private capital (with some state funds) to secure financing of the Pennsylvania Railroad, which expanded to serve New York, Washington, Buffalo, Detroit, Chicago, St. Louis and many smaller cities. In your TL, maybe the USRY acts as the conduit for financing and perhaps even builds the initial route, but then licenses or franchises (whatever approach you like) a privately-owned and -financed "Pennsylvania Railroad" to actually operate the route, while continuing to help fund capital improvements and maintenance. The railroad system ITTL would probably have fewer directly competing lines or speculative "railroads to nowhere" like the OTL New York Ontario & Western, possibly not be quite as profitable, but would have a little more long-term stability while avoiding predatory robber baron types (Jay Gould, for example, wouldn't get to "rape" the Erie Railroad and ruin its potential under this scenario).
 
If I may make a suggestion: rather than having the United States Railway Company function as both builder and operator for the railroads, have it function more as a builder/maintainer/licensor and franchiser. For example, in OTL the state of Pennsylvania decided the state needed a railroad linking Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, so they got together private capital (with some state funds) to secure financing of the Pennsylvania Railroad, which expanded to serve New York, Washington, Buffalo, Detroit, Chicago, St. Louis and many smaller cities. In your TL, maybe the USRY acts as the conduit for financing and perhaps even builds the initial route, but then licenses or franchises (whatever approach you like) a privately-owned and -financed "Pennsylvania Railroad" to actually operate the route, while continuing to help fund capital improvements and maintenance. The railroad system ITTL would probably have fewer directly competing lines or speculative "railroads to nowhere" like the OTL New York Ontario & Western, possibly not be quite as profitable, but would have a little more long-term stability while avoiding predatory robber baron types (Jay Gould, for example, wouldn't get to "rape" the Erie Railroad and ruin its potential under this scenario).

You know, I haven't really gone into the details of the railway system in my TL, other than the US Railway Company exists and builds rail. Your suggestion would fit in pretty seamlessly. The government would see to the construction and upkeep of primary and even some secondary lines, while private businesses would see to the actual means of conveyance on the rails.
And this would just be an adaptation of the model they would have in place for the national roads, where private individuals would just pay a toll to use the government-funded roadway.
 
Avoiding prohibition would set back the development of cocktails/beveratology by decades. I guess that'd count as a social technology impacted in atls.
 
There would be a lot of different brands on the market without Prohibition. And can't forget about state prohibition laws as well, which nearly wiped out the Tennessee whiskey industry.
 
There would be a lot of different brands on the market without Prohibition.
That is a serious understatement.:) It was easily 2000 different regional/local brands; at peak before Prohibition, it was over 4000 (over 4500? I can't recall).

And the cocktails issue also impacts the sales of soda, which was used as mixer, so Coke could take a hit, & Pepsi (which already went bankrupt:eek: before changing formula & selling bigger 12oz bottles at a 6oz price saved them) might be driven under for good. The likes of Sprite & 7-Up are going to be hurt, too.
 
That is a serious understatement.:) It was easily 2000 different regional/local brands; at peak before Prohibition, it was over 4000 (over 4500? I can't recall).

And the cocktails issue also impacts the sales of soda, which was used as mixer, so Coke could take a hit, & Pepsi (which already went bankrupt:eek: before changing formula & selling bigger 12oz bottles at a 6oz price saved them) might be driven under for good. The likes of Sprite & 7-Up are going to be hurt, too.

Totally forgot about that connection! That could really shake things up.
 
Wouldn't this just mean the US is more like say mexico and points south with more fruit-flavored sodas as the norm rather than having the big split being between two kinds of cola? Ok, one kind of cola, mountain dew, sprite and a bunch of fruit ones.
 
Wouldn't this just mean the US is more like say mexico and points south with more fruit-flavored sodas as the norm rather than having the big split being between two kinds of cola? Ok, one kind of cola, mountain dew, sprite and a bunch of fruit ones.
I'm thinking two things: a smaller soda market overall, & much less variety than we take for granted. It was Pepsico that took the leap of faith on varieties of sodas, gambling it wouldn't cannibalize sales, & it didn't. If Pepsico goes under, because of slower than OTL sales...
 
Top