Obama plans high-speed money shredder, made in China.

[PeshakJang]

Obama announces plans to spend over $60 billion on high-speed rail, with the contract going to his new Job Czar Overlord Prefect, the chairman of GE.

This comes on the heels of announcements that Obama wants to "open up" markets in China, by giving them our technology, letting them build stuff for us, and then buying it from them.

Looking back in time, this looks like it's been a long time in the making. Suggests that GE has always been working hard to ship jobs overseas, to increase capacity, and get ready for no-bid contracts to come in.

If it weren't for the insatiable, irrational, flat out idiotic desire by Democrats to build high-speed rail lines to be subsidized perpetually by taxpayers, this might not have worked. Unfortunately, Obama likes to bring bad ideas to light.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...-years-to-build-high-speed-rail-networks.html

“There are key places where we cannot afford to sacrifice as a nation -- one of which is infrastructure,” Biden said in a speech today at 30th Street Station in Philadelphia. Obama submits his fiscal 2012 budget to Congress on Feb. 14.

...

Biden’s remarks, released in advance by the White House, didn’t spell out how the six-year program would be financed, or what other federal programs may be reduced to offset costs.

From 2009:

http://gigaom.com/cleantech/ge-fires-up-rail-deals-in-china-eyes-u-s-high-speed-rail-projects/

General Electric started churning out plans earlier this year for cleaner heavy-haul locomotive technology, announcing its intention in May to produce batteries for hybrid trains in upstate New York and unveiling a new, more fuel-efficient locomotive model. This morning, the conglomerate has announced a set of agreements with various companies and the government of China that will help GE ramp up its locomotive business in the country — and potentially lead to a larger role for both GE and China on the road to a high-speed rail buildout in the United States.

GE has announced two deals related to rail this morning, including an agreement with China’s Ministry of Railways to advance partnerships that would allow the company to pursue high-speed rail projects in the U.S. with manufacturing provided by a Chinese partner (GE doesn’t currently manufacture locomotives for these types of projects). And it’s formed a joint venture with CSR Qishuyan to develop, build and service GE’s most fuel-efficient line of diesel locomotive engines, the Evolution Series, in China and eventually other countries as well.

 

[matt0611]

What is the lefts obsession with trains? I'll never understand it.

If you want to modernize our transportation why don't we build more interstates and airports that can take more volume.

 

[trenchfoot]

From a National Defense/logistics point of view, it makes sense. There's no better way to move large troop units and it's equipment as quiclky and as efficiently.

Also, it's just about the most feasible way, economically/environmentally speaking, to get the population from A to B, provided the population deems this mode of transportation desirable.

IDK how AMTRAK is doing, but what the administration is proposing is a huge step up technology-wise.

edit - I wonder how the airline industry is looking at this.

 

[ichy]

If they actually succeeded in significantly improving the Northeast Corridor this would be money decently spent (certainly better than pissing it away on pointless wars, bloated "Homeland Security" nonsense or the various retarded handouts that were part of the stimulus.) I have a bad feeling that they'll end up parceling out a billion here and a billion there though, with nobody getting enough to do any serious work.

Also, why is it that the people who gripe about money spent on rail never complain about the billions that'll have to be spent on NYC area airports alone if we want to increase their capacity? The US is not Europe, and in most of the country European style rail networks don't make sense, but the area between DC and Boston is one part of the country where we know there's a market for high speed rail. Acela is already making an operating profit and their service is a joke.

 

[PeshakJang]

If they actually succeeded in significantly improving the Northeast Corridor this would be money decently spent

..

but the area between DC and Boston is one part of the country where we know there's a market for high speed rail. Acela is already making an operating profit and their service is a joke.

Most people would agree with that... but that's never what is proposed. They want a nation-wide, far-reaching rail line... and claim that it will create trillions of jobs and propel us into the 28th century... *somehow*

The NE corridor is about the only place that this could reasonably make money... simply due to the population density and the high frequency of commuting. Everywhere else, it will quickly hemorrhage money and become another burden to be pushed aside and subsidized for the rest of history.

 

[evident]

What is the lefts obsession with trains? I'll never understand it.

If you want to modernize our transportation why don't we build more interstates and airports that can take more volume.

If you've ever been to japan, you can literally go from one side of tokyo to the next (which is about 4 times the size of NYC) in less than an hour. or how about tokyo to kyoto in about 2 hours.



trains are great, they should have their place alongside cars and airplanes, but it's a shame that the right demonizes them simply because they perceive the left as obsessed with them.

 

[Steeplerot]

What is the lefts obsession with trains? I'll never understand it.

If you want to modernize our transportation why don't we build more interstates and airports that can take more volume.

Because these modes of transport are inefficient fuel wise and a total fail for sustainability long term. question is: why are republicans so dead set on living in a third world country is what I would like to know.

 

[Fear No Evil]

If you've ever been to japan, you can literally go from one side of tokyo to the next (which is about 4 times the size of NYC) in less than an hour. or how about tokyo to kyoto in about 2 hours.



trains are great, they should have their place alongside cars and airplanes, but it's a shame that the right demonizes them simply because they perceive the left as obsessed with them.

We demonize them because 99.44% of the time they hemorage cash. There are few places in the U.S. (If any) that match the population density of Japan. As others have stated the NE corridor is probably the ONLY place that comes close and makes SOME financial sense.

But Obama wants to build trains in Wisconsin and Florida. THAT'S the problem.

 

[Steeplerot]

They want a nation-wide, far-reaching rail line...

Exactly, this is not the type of job you can half-ass by thinking small or local. Which is why private industry fails to provide what is needed by society in this case.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Because these modes of transport are inefficient fuel wise and a total fail for sustainability long term. question is: why are republicans so dead set on living in a third world country is what I would like to know.

Because it doesn't make sense to run a train from Orlando to Tampa for the 18 people a day that will take it, then have to rent a car to get where they are going.

 

[ichy]

If you've ever been to japan, you can literally go from one side of tokyo to the next (which is about 4 times the size of NYC) in less than an hour. or how about tokyo to kyoto in about 2 hours.



trains are great, they should have their place alongside cars and airplanes, but it's a shame that the right demonizes them simply because they perceive the left as obsessed with them.

The population density of the US is not the same as Japan's.

Look, I'm basically pro-train but too many rail advocates in the US are shooting themselves in the foot with silly pie in the sky fantasies of trains running from LA to Chicago or nonsense like that. Right now we should be concentrating on DC-NY-Boston. Roads and airports in that area are packed, and Acela has already demonstrated that you can run a profitable high-speed rail service in the Northeast Corridor. Improve what works, do not squander money on rail fanboy fantasy schemes.

 

[Steeplerot]

High speed rail here in California is projected to use 1/10 the fuel of a plane from SF to LA per person, get you there just as fast, for less $ and without getting your junk touched by some government neanderthal. Hmm, why would we want trains?

 

[Steeplerot]

All the naysayers will be bitching in 20 years how the trains not good enough while they use it daily. All the while deriding folks for not spending enough nowadays when building it. Ignore the naysayers, ca you imagine if FDR listened to these idiots in the 1930s? Our country would probably still have areas without electricity or bridges! (these same folks used the SAME arguments back then and once again they were wrong)

I like the idea of instead of "Cash for clunkers" scrap a good chunk of the outdated technology automobiles in the USA and use it for modern infrastructure. Save the museum piece internal combustion autos that are historic, melt the rest down. Keep some delivery type vans around for local delivery's and businesses couriers. Make internal combustion autos super expensive to buy fuel for and get Americans out of these bad unsustainable habits. Suburbs/urban sprawl and other urban planning blight on our future shall crumble soon after the roads become unused. (saving us countless other fuels and trouble by having folks walk to work and shops or hop a local high speed train)

Old internal combustion technology we are stuck on is unhealthy for foreign policy, our sustainability, our peoples health, and our national security.

Time to turn the page and catch up to the rest of the first world. soon.

 

[PeshakJang]

If you've ever been to japan, you can literally go from one side of tokyo to the next (which is about 4 times the size of NYC) in less than an hour. or how about tokyo to kyoto in about 2 hours.

And for high-density areas like that, they can be cost-effective. Japan is one of the most population-dense nations on Earth, especially the greater Tokyo area.

trains are great, they should have their place alongside cars and airplanes, but it's a shame that the right demonizes them simply because they perceive the left as obsessed with them.

They do have their place. Long-haul transportation of goods and materials. This is cost effective because it is efficient, and people will pay for it.

The left IS obsessed with it. The left cannot explain what economic benefit it will produce, or how it will pay for itself, without doing a bunch of hand waving and making speeches about progress and innovation. Like I said, the argument is LITERALLY that it would propel us into the future, SOMEHOW, and would spur innovation and production... SOMEHOW. The left's reasons for wanting to implement it are honestly, grounded in fantasy. They think it would be awesome to be like Europe, so we should definitely do it no matter the cost.

The right "demonizes" it for the very real reason, that historically, it has failed, and economically, WE CAN'T AFFORD IT, and everybody here in reality world can see that it would cost a tremendous amount of money to build, and then a continuous stream of subsidization to maintain.

We have a $1.5 TRILLION dollar deficit THIS YEAR. THIS YEAR. How can Obama call for a spending freeze on discretionary projects,then call for $60 BILLION (would certainly cost at least 2-3x that) to implement their wet dream?

 

[CPA]

From a National Defense/logistics point of view, it makes sense. There's no better way to move large troop units and it's equipment as quiclky and as efficiently.

Also, it's just about the most feasible way, economically/environmentally speaking, to get the population from A to B, provided the population deems this mode of transportation desirable.

IDK how AMTRAK is doing, but what the administration is proposing is a huge step up technology-wise.

edit - I wonder how the airline industry is looking at this.

I can tell you how AMTRAK is doing = it's losing money, as it always has.

The US is not Europe, people, high speed trains will do nothing in providing economic or environmental benefits.

 

[PeshakJang]

All the naysayers in here are fools if you look at the data and how the rest of the world benefits from modern infrastructure.

Please show us the data, comrade.

Ignore the idiots and just build it already, they will be bitching in 20 years how it's not good enough anyhow while they use it.

Ah the chant of the left...

Money doesn't matter! Money Doesn't matter! Money doesn't matter!

 

[evident]

We demonize them because 99.44% of the time they hemorage cash. There are few places in the U.S. (If any) that match the population density of Japan. As others have stated the NE corridor is probably the ONLY place that comes close and makes SOME financial sense.

But Obama wants to build trains in Wisconsin and Florida. THAT'S the problem.

fair enough. being from the NE, i'm biased and personally would love a boston ny philly dc train and think it would be utilized greatly here. wisconsin to florida, not so much.

 

[Murloc]

with all the money you waste everyday on wars and military spending it's not like it's gonna hurt your wallet.

Even if it's not europe, it's not like using a high speed train instead of a car or airplane will hurt for medium distances.

Airlines still have their role, they just get replaced by trains only for distances where the friggin' 2 hours you have to wait to get on the plane added to the flight time take more time than the trip by train.

 

[PeshakJang]

Exactly, this is not the type of job you can half-ass by thinking small or local. Which is why private industry fails to provide what is needed by society in this case.

...

High speed rail here in California is projected to use 1/10 the fuel of a plane from SF to LA per person, get you there just as fast, for less $ and without getting your junk touched by some government neanderthal. Hmm, why would we want trains?

In one breath you say how you can't implement it on a small or local scale, then you say how efficient and cost-effective it would be on a small, local scale.

Magic train logic I guess.

 

[PeshakJang]

with all the money you waste everyday on wars and military spending it's not like it's gonna hurt your wallet.

Even if it's not europe, it's not like using a high speed train instead of a car or airplane will hurt for medium distances.

Airlines still have their role, they just get replaced by trains only for distances where the friggin' 2 hours you have to wait to get on the plane added to the flight time take more time than the trip by train.

If it's a 2-hour trip, why would I drive to the train station, wait for the train, the a 2-hour train ride, then get to my destination and have to worry about how to get around... when I can get in my car RIGHT NOW and drive there in 2 hours, and have my car when I am there?

2 hour train ride would cost what.. $50-70? 2 hour car ride is maybe $15-20 in gas?

Please tell me how this makes economic sense in an area with less population density than the NE corridor?

 

[Steeplerot]

Magic train logic I guess.

It's actually quite simple logic. A half assed rail network will fail as people will not adapt their lifestyles to something working half the time or not at all in their area. Getting people OUT of the suburbs and the unsustainable urban sprawl habits created by the auto industries in the 1950s era is the long term goal. This is not optional if we wish to prosper "down the road".

 

[classy]

I have really grown disappointed in Obama. The suggestion is so stupid at this point and time, its hard to even want to discuss it. Anymore I just shake my head in amazement as to he proposes.

 

[Steeplerot]

Please show us the data, comrade.

Enjoy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jviyBx5MMqQ

 

[PeshakJang]

It's actually quite simple logic. A half assed rail network will fail as people will not adapt their lifestyles to something working half the time or not at all in their area. Getting people OUT of the suburbs and the unsustainable urban sprawl habits created by the auto industries in the 1950s era is the long term goal. This is not optional if we wish to prosper "down the road".

So now your logic is that it's social engineering...

You want trains because you think people shouldn't be living anywhere but the cities.

Yep, quite simple logic indeed. Change our entire culture and socioeconomic distribution because you don't like cars. Got it.

 

[PeshakJang]

Enjoy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jviyBx5MMqQ

lololololol