CADsortaGUY
Lifer
rudder
Lifer
- Nov 9, 2000
- 19,441
- 86
- 91
Glad you are so happy. I will donate some $$$ after you write the first of many billion dollar checks.
Why does the government think it needs to get in the high speed rail business? If it was not going to be a money losing proposition like amtrak... private investors would be all over this.
air travel is also heavily subsidized by the government, and amtrak was run into the ground and then kept there.
I would love to be able to hop on a train and be in Minneapolis or Chicago a few hours later.
InflatableBuddha
Diamond Member
- Jul 5, 2007
- 7,416
- 1
- 0
Absolutely false. There are excellent road systems throughout Europe, especially Western Europe. I presume you've heard of the autobahns?
However, these countries have their road systems in addition to excellent rail systems, which North America does not.
True. But this is more an argument as to why light rail and rapid transit within cities works so well in Europe. It would be more difficult to introduce in North American cities, which were built around private automobile usage, but I feel intra-city light rail would also be a worthwhile investment. However, that deserves its own thread.
Yes, the US did choose to spend infrastructure funds on road systems, at the expense of other options. It's now being shown to be a poor long term decision as roadways are less time and energy efficient than rail, and they drastically increase vehicle use. The latter is the reason why the US is among the world leaders in per-capita oil usage - not a sustainable long-term pattern.
If anything, now is the perfect time to invest in rail and mass transit infrastructure. Infrastructure spending creates jobs and growth (remember the New Deal?), and in this case, it is also a chance to build more environmentally sustainable alternatives.
Think about all of the auto workers who have lost their jobs recently - new, domestic mass transit-related infrastructure work could potentially fill the void. Instead of bailing out the dinosaurs, we should be taking alternative steps forward.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Yes - so build your own
Oh and regional traffic would be the only "traffic" affected by this by the looks of it.private enterprise does not have the ability to generate the amount of capital necessary to get a program like this off the ground.
Meh I voted against Prop 1A in November in CA, but I guess it passed. People were fooled with the idea that this was a bond, thus no new taxes, but bond payments come out of the general fund as we all know and it's as good as sticking a $XXX million section on transportation in our budget for the next 10 years. Well, guess what CA? We're out of money and we have to pay more taxes, and we're voting on more taxation this coming May. YAY!
It's a romantic idea though. I'd love to see HSR, but seriously..... we don't have money. Nor is it our priority.
Good luck though. Remember that Bay Bridge that was supposed to be completed last century? And the Benicia Bridge that ran 400% overbudget? LOL I'd love to see this get built. Has anyone done studies to show how much reducing congestion would help the economy? We waste millions of man hours waiting on roads in traffic. If we simply widened every road (I know congestion will still exist because more people will hit up the roads with more lanes), but at least capacity increases, and overall waiting times should be reduced because fewer people clog up detours and it all balances itself out after you add new arteries.
It's a romantic idea though. I'd love to see HSR, but seriously..... we don't have money. Nor is it our priority.
Good luck though. Remember that Bay Bridge that was supposed to be completed last century? And the Benicia Bridge that ran 400% overbudget? LOL I'd love to see this get built. Has anyone done studies to show how much reducing congestion would help the economy? We waste millions of man hours waiting on roads in traffic. If we simply widened every road (I know congestion will still exist because more people will hit up the roads with more lanes), but at least capacity increases, and overall waiting times should be reduced because fewer people clog up detours and it all balances itself out after you add new arteries.
InflatableBuddha
Diamond Member
- Jul 5, 2007
- 7,416
- 1
- 0
Not in the long term it isn't. Air travel prices are dependent upon highly volatile fuel prices, similar to vehicles.
We need to stop thinking about short-term cost savings, and more about long-term economic and ecological sustainability.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
From where? I can be in Chicago in 5 and Minneapolis in 3. A train isn't going to beat that when you take into account that I have to deal with their schedule - not my own. Hell, I can hop in my car on a whim and be there in a few hours.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Individualist and now used to the freedom of movement using our individual transportation vessel.
InflatableBuddha
Diamond Member
- Jul 5, 2007
- 7,416
- 1
- 0
K1052
Elite Member
- Aug 21, 2003
- 53,836
- 48,569
- 136
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
From where? I can be in Chicago in 5 and Minneapolis in 3. A train isn't going to beat that when you take into account that I have to deal with their schedule - not my own. Hell, I can hop in my car on a whim and be there in a few hours.
5 hours assumes absolutely zero traffic in the metro Chicago area going through the Hillside strangler....lolz
- Aug 23, 2003
- 25,375
- 142
- 116
So some voters think high-speed rail is worth spending money on right now.
Some voters think it isn't.
Just like some voters think we should be spending $300 million for a single fighter plane.
And others think we shouldn't.
Some think $8 billion to start a high-speed rail project is a sink hole.
Others think the $500 billion yearly defense budget is a sink hole.
It's a difference of opinion.
Don't defense projects run over budget?
Didn't the Iraq war run a *little* over Rummy's $50 billion estimated budget?
Doesn't road construction run over budget?
If you hate high speed rail, and hate this program, I hope you'll be allocating some time to knocking on doors and getting the word out for the 2012 election. Otherwise you'll have a lot more complaining to do when Obama is in office until 2016.
Some voters think it isn't.
Just like some voters think we should be spending $300 million for a single fighter plane.
And others think we shouldn't.
Some think $8 billion to start a high-speed rail project is a sink hole.
Others think the $500 billion yearly defense budget is a sink hole.
It's a difference of opinion.
Don't defense projects run over budget?
Didn't the Iraq war run a *little* over Rummy's $50 billion estimated budget?
Doesn't road construction run over budget?
If you hate high speed rail, and hate this program, I hope you'll be allocating some time to knocking on doors and getting the word out for the 2012 election. Otherwise you'll have a lot more complaining to do when Obama is in office until 2016.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter