Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jazz - you nailed that spot on. Take it from someone who spent a lot of time very close to it, you very well summed up the situation. One thing I might add is the difficulty passenger rail has competing with cheap gas and low air fares. This country's transportation policy is not very rail friendly. However, if your predictions of $7-$10 a gallon gas come to pass, that could change.
What other company do you know maintains almost all of its corporate management and IT department in Washington DC, one of the most expensive labor markets in the country?
A megalopolis may yet appear along the Front Range, but with $10 gas and water costing many times what it now does, that megalopolis will most likely be vertical, meaning it will require rail lines and do away with more sprawl and bluegrass lawns. Then again, electric cars will make $10 gas a non-issue, but it will take time to get there, and does not stop sprawl. Decisions, decisions.
Good luck starting your electric car on a cold Colorado morning.
My question is where the state or the private sector is going to find $21 billion(probably double the cost when it done) to barf up to pay for all this?? Everyone seems to love the fantasy of rocket trains going to world class cities like Pueblo and not the reality of paying for it.
Incredible. $5 million dollars for "studies" and not a single rail laid. This is why these sort of infrastructure projects never get done and why folks oppose them and the taxes necessary to pay for them. I'd love to see more light rail, but the cynic in me is screaming, "The Next Big Dig".
How about something completely different? How about the government builds or upgrades existing rail infrastructure and controls traffic, but turns the trains over to private enterprise. Charge them to use the rails. I'd ride "Virgin Rails". I'll bet a lot of folks would. And the food would probably be better .
First, you imply that you want to begin laying rail without bothering to study routes and infrastructure issues.
Second, why not turn the trains over to private enterprise? How about because mismanagement by private enterprise is what doomed a once flourishing transportation system to nearly disappear completely.
You really should post about things that you actually know something about. When it comes to rail transportation, I have been studying it for about 40 years now....
With all due respect, you have some knowledge about the subject and you make some very good points. But you also have an anti-government-bias that negates any sense that your views might be balanced.
Not everything in America should be based on whether or not it makes a profit. There are other issues of importance, not the least of which includes environmental concerns.
I am from the Washington, D.C. area for most of my adult life. I've taken the Acela trains from D.C. to New York City a number of times, and friends who go to NYC more than I did, often use it. You avoid a long drive, tons of tolls in the NYC area, or you avoid a more expensive flight from DC to NYC...and for less money and end up in city-center.
I'm not convinced that a high speed rail system is needed along the front range, but I am open-minded about it. Many people didn't support building the subway system in D.C. Now people can't imagine how we lived without it. I have a friend who is rabidly against building interstate highways...yet drives on them virtually everyday.
Thailand is about to expand its national rail system. Bangkok has a subway system and a Skytrain system. But, of course, they're only the third world...but they can afford to improve their country.
The problem with many posts about this topic -- either in favor of, or opposed, that there is too much knee-jerk reaction based on where people see themselves politically, rather than serious consideration based on the merits of a particular project.
Again, I'm not convinced about HSR in Colorado -- in fact, I'm into driving -- but it's a topic that ought to be seriously considered.
Sorry, but HSR between D.C. (the nation's capital) and NYC (largest city and huge international business center) is NOT the same as Pueblo to Denver. Sure, it makes sense when numerous major metro business centers (Boston, NYC, D.C.) with a combined total of 15 million+ people are connected by HSR, but the economics fail miserably on scale considerations alone when connecting cowtown to the Colorado state capital.
Those things in America that aren't based on making a profit (or even paying their own way) cost all of us, and it's fair to assess if they serve a public interest that justifies their cost. It's arguable that there's nothing in Pueblo worth the cost of a four-lane road, much less a massively expensive HSR system. Only a handful of people would benefit materially from a 1-hour HSR versus 3-hour standard pax rail trip from Pubblo to Denver...certainly not worth many tens of $millions in taxpayer subsidies. If you're one of the 13 people that legitimately needs to get there that fast, charter a plane.
Last edited by Mike from back east; 06-06-2010 at 10:30 AM..
Sorry, but HSR between D.C. (the nation's capital) and NYC (largest city and huge international business center) is NOT the same as Pueblo to Denver. Sure, it makes sense when numerous major metro business centers (Boston, NYC, D.C.) with a combined total of 15 million+ people are connected by HSR, but the economics fail miserably on scale considerations alone when connecting cowtown to the Colorado state capital.
Those things in America that aren't based on making a profit (or even paying their own way) cost all of us, and it's fair to assess if they serve a public interest that justifies their cost. It's arguable that there's nothing in Pueblo worth the cost of a four-lane road, much less a massively expensive HSR system. Only a handful of people would benefit materially from a 1-hour HSR versus 3-hour standard pax rail trip from Pubblo to Denver...certainly not worth many tens of $millions in taxpayer subsidies. If you're one of the 13 people that legitimately needs to get there that fast, charter a plane.
I said -- and underlined -- that I was unconvinced that HSR was appropriate for the front range. Just that I was open-minded about it.
And yes, Pueblo to Denver and beyond to the north is not comparable to the NE corridor. But then again, nothing is comparable to anything else if you want be strict about things being identical. Nevertheless comparisons can be made...both in favor of and against. I share with you my doubts about the COS to Pueblo route, but I can imagine the COS to Denver to...well, not quite sure where to end north of Denver...Fort Collins?
Mass transit along some of the front range is a valid topic to be discussed. Its pros and cons a valid part of the discussion. Coming across as either a conservative or a liberal doesn't add to the merits of a point of view. Facts and examples and logic, do.
To reemphasize what I said previously, I'm not convinced a rail system along the Front Range is a sustainable idea. But in addition to whether or not it can sustain itself, questions to be asked include job creation, reduction in highway transportation needs, and more.
Last edited by Mike from back east; 06-06-2010 at 10:29 AM..
With all due respect, you have some knowledge about the subject and you make some very good points. But you also have an anti-government-bias that negates any sense that your views might be balanced.
Not everything in America should be based on whether or not it makes a profit. There are other issues of importance, not the least of which includes environmental concerns.
I am from the Washington, D.C. area for most of my adult life. I've taken the Acela trains from D.C. to New York City a number of times, and friends who go to NYC more than I did, often use it. You avoid a long drive, tons of tolls in the NYC area, or you avoid a more expensive flight from DC to NYC...and for less money and end up in city-center.
I'm not convinced that a high speed rail system is needed along the front range, but I am open-minded about it. Many people didn't support building the subway system in D.C. Now people can't imagine how we lived without it. I have a friend who is rabidly against building interstate highways...yet drives on them virtually everyday.
Thailand is about to expand its national rail system. Bangkok has a subway system and a Skytrain system. But, of course, they're only the third world...but they can afford to improve their country.
The problem with many posts about this topic -- either in favor of, or opposed, that there is too much knee-jerk reaction based on where people see themselves politically, rather than serious consideration based on the merits of a particular project.
Again, I'm not convinced about HSR in Colorado -- in fact, I'm into driving -- but it's a topic that ought to be seriously considered.
You misinterpret my statement. I have repeatedly posted that there is NO passenger transit system on the planet that can be truly "profitable." Every one of them receives some form of subsidy--direct or indirect. That said, when the decision-making process about those systems becomes totally political and bureaucratic--controlled by the special interests that benefit from perpetuating them--then you have the mess that is our current transportation system. To be fair, for all of Amtrak's failings, their missteps pale to insignificance compared to the monster that the highway lobby and bureaucracy has foisted upon us. That is the kind of long-term disaster that can destroy countries.
I firmly do believe that unholy alliances between big government and big business inherently become evil. I also believe that was the feeling of this country's founding fathers, a feeling which those who hope to perpretrate either big government or big business wish that we would forget.
You misinterpret my statement. I have repeatedly posted that there is NO passenger transit system on the planet that can be truly "profitable." Every one of them receives some form of subsidy--direct or indirect. That said, when the decision-making process about those systems becomes totally political and bureaucratic--controlled by the special interests that benefit from perpetuating them--then you have the mess that is our current transportation system. To be fair, for all of Amtrak's failings, their missteps pale to insignificance compared to the monster that the highway lobby and bureaucracy has foisted upon us. That is the kind of long-term disaster that can destroy countries.
I firmly do believe that unholy alliances between big government and big business inherently become evil. I also believe that was the feeling of this country's founding fathers, a feeling which those who hope to perpretrate either big government or big business wish that we would forget.
I don't know what all the hostility to roads is all about.
Rails are used to control people and direct where they go. With the plethora of roads we have it enables me to go anywhere, anytime not beholden to schedules or any other control.
The car is the ultimate expression of freedom.
If you have ever seen Top Gear UK anytime they have a race across continents or countries with the car vs. public transport, the car always wins.
I know you are fearful of running out of oil. Personally I don't see as a problem. If it goes away there are other alternatives that work, ethanol, natural gas, biofuels. They are already in use in other countries about the world with no problems.
That kind of freedom may become a luxury in the future. As living standards decline in this country (due to declining salaries, higher cost of resources, etc.) to reach a world equilibrium, more people will be forced into denser living conditions and will not be able to afford or keep a personal vehicle. They will need to rely on public transportation just as so much of the rest of the world does. We need to prepare for it now.
I have to chuckle at that one. Many, if not most Americans are in complete direct financial servitude to their automobile(s). I have to say that it is a lot of the reason we are in such deep debt and financial problems. Then, when you add all of the direct and indirect costs of the road system, environmental damage and/or mitigation our auto/petroleum dependent lifestyle demands, defense costs to protect our foreign sources of oil, and all of the complete inefficiency and waste in the living arrangement that auto-dependent suburbia engenders--well, you have a yoke of financial liability placed on the back of every American that is almost beyond calculation. I hardly call that "freedom." In fact, I think that yoke of liability has the potential to literally destroy this country economically, and maybe socially if we don't change course soon.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.