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.
I like the idea of trains and good public transit, but if it has to be subsidized to stay running (which it certainly would have been), then it would have been pointless to build it. If it could make enough money from ridership or even charitable gifts, then do what you want I guess.
I'd like to know what the limit is for some people on wasteful spending.
I like the idea of trains and good public transit, but if it has to be subsidized to stay running (which it certainly would have been), then it would have been pointless to build it. If it could make enough money from ridership or even charitable gifts, then do what you want I guess.
I'd like to know what the limit is for some people on wasteful spending.
You do realize freeways, highways and the interstates are also subsidized in order to stay running, don't you? No one is giving the DOT gifts for them to stay afloat. Government services are not there to turn a profit.
You do realize freeways, highways and the interstates are also subsidized in order to stay running, don't you? No one is giving the DOT gifts for them to stay afloat. Government services are not there to turn a profit.
Yes, but I don't see anyone charging me unbelievable rates to drive down the road apart from the taxes they would still be stealing from my pocket- train or not. And what happens when I get to the far end - take the bus to get to my final destination? Maybe a taxi? People who want high-speed rail just haven't thought it out completely or don't really care.
What would make more sense would be high speed limited access lanes added to 94 allowing for 75 or 80 mph travel between Milwaukee and Madison, Madison and Minneapolis. Quite honestly, I still don't understand the 65 mpg highways here. There isn't one interstate that couldn't be 70 or 75 between metro areas here in WI.
Government services are not there to turn a profit.
So if you truly believe that then, if the City of Milwaukee takes in total taxes 20 billion would you agree that it is not probably the smartest idea to spend 20 billion. Is it that far out there to suggest maybe a government body to say only spend 19 Billion is outrageous? so if Milwaukee only spent 18 billion is a crazy or stupid idea, do we have to spend all the money we bring it? Maybe the country and local municipalities learn to spend 95% of what they bring in we probably could with stand when tax collections drop or when a recession comes or if we need ER bridge repair we can do so without borrowing money. The problem is we have too many politicians and voters that have the same view that you have. Liberals are always asking for tax increases, well I have news for you liberals out there, there is nothing stopping you from writing out a check right now for a $1,000 dollars to your cities or schools treasury fund. You don't have to wait for a tax increase, if you think the government needs more of your money go right ahead and just give them extra. If your property taxes are $7,000 a year there is nothing stopping you from paying $10,000 after all we aren't paying enough for horrible roads, bridges, failing schools(MPS) and understaffed fire and police rolls.
Anyone who truly believes that this was a good policy position is simply not aware of the facts.
Scott Walker campaigned heavily on the "no train" platform because he realized it would allow him to capitalize on both the anti-Obama and anti-Madison sentiment in many parts of the state. When he was elected he had no choice but to turn down the money. Now that money has been allocated to other states and Wisconsin gets nothing. The LA Times wrote an editorial which ended with the line "thanks a billion cheeseheads." Thanks A Billion Cheeseheads | A windfall for California - Los Angeles Times
The reason that the money was turned down, according to the governor, because it would be too expensive for Wisconsin to maintain. The cost was initially quoted at 7.5 million per year, but in reality was only $750,000 per year. To put that number in perspective, the total transportation budget for the state of Wisconsin is 6.5 billion. That is 0.01 percent of the transportation budget. Literally rounding error.
Turning down the money did not mean it would not get spent. It was simply funneled to other states. What it did insure was that hundreds of jobs that Wisconsinites could have filled are gone and that Talgo, the train making company, will no longer have a presence in Wisconsin, taking even more jobs with them.
It also means Wisconsin is on the hook at least $100 million to maintain already existing rail lines. Included in this in $84 million dollars for the Hiawatha line, which is heavily used. This money would have been covered by the federal money that Walker turned down. So in order to score political points, the citizens of Wisconsin now have to pay for the equivalent of 100 years of running the train and we don't have the jobs to boot.
In fact, Walker went back to the transportation department and asked for $150 million for rail improvements. Again, improvements that would have been covered under the money he rejected. Not surprisingly, he was turned down. He said it was "consistent with his previous position."
Turning down the money ended up costing our state millions of dollars and hundreds of jobs. He has now said that he isn't anti train. So basically he cost us all of the above so he could say he killed the train to Madison, the second largest city and state capital, as well as the home to the state's flagship university. It was short-sighted, and it was spiteful. It was poor pubic policy, and not the behavior I expect to see out of elected officials.
Yes, but I don't see anyone charging me unbelievable rates to drive down the road apart from the taxes they would still be stealing from my pocket- train or not. And what happens when I get to the far end - take the bus to get to my final destination? Maybe a taxi? People who want high-speed rail just haven't thought it out completely or don't really care.What would make more sense would be high speed limited access lanes added to 94 allowing for 75 or 80 mph travel between Milwaukee and Madison, Madison and Minneapolis. Quite honestly, I still don't understand the 65 mpg highways here. There isn't one interstate that couldn't be 70 or 75 between metro areas here in WI.
Yes, that is the solution, just build more roads, so that then they can get congested too.
Roads are highly subsidized. They are not there to make a profit. Insisting that a train has to pay for itself seems ridiculous when you consider that our highway system is just an endless black hole of money, for which we spend, but only barely keep up with our needs.
The problem that many people are not realizing is that you should build infrastructure before you need it anticipating future growth and population shifts. If you just build when you need it, by the time you are finished building, what you have built is already out of date. The fact that everyone drives now does not mean that everyone will drive in the future.
The other thing that people don't seem to realize is that the Milwaukee-Madison train was supposed to be part of an interconnected system that linked the entire Midwest eventually through high speed rail. You should not be comparing this to driving, you should be comparing this to air travel. No one complains about having to take a taxi from the airport when they reach a city. This would be the same principle. It is also cheap when compared to air travel.
Also, if you find it too expensive or not as convenient to take the train, then don't use it. I certainly do not insist that every road in Wisconsin be one on which I have to personally travel, but I do like having that option, and letting others make choices as to what form of transportation they use. Given the minuscule cost when compared to road maintenance, I am shocked so many people are so against it.
So if you truly believe that then, if the City of Milwaukee takes in total taxes 20 billion would you agree that it is not probably the smartest idea to spend 20 billion. Is it that far out there to suggest maybe a government body to say only spend 19 Billion is outrageous? so if Milwaukee only spent 18 billion is a crazy or stupid idea, do we have to spend all the money we bring it? Maybe the country and local municipalities learn to spend 95% of what they bring in we probably could with stand when tax collections drop or when a recession comes or if we need ER bridge repair we can do so without borrowing money. The problem is we have too many politicians and voters that have the same view that you have. Liberals are always asking for tax increases, well I have news for you liberals out there, there is nothing stopping you from writing out a check right now for a $1,000 dollars to your cities or schools treasury fund. You don't have to wait for a tax increase, if you think the government needs more of your money go right ahead and just give them extra. If your property taxes are $7,000 a year there is nothing stopping you from paying $10,000 after all we aren't paying enough for horrible roads, bridges, failing schools(MPS) and understaffed fire and police rolls.
I think what he was saying is that roads are heavily subsidized by taxpayers. The government does all sorts of things that do not "pay for themselves" such as national defense, highways, public health, etc. In fact the purpose of government is to do things that do not turn a profit. If there was a profit to be made, then private industry would do it. Government steps in to provide necessary services that would not be profitable to the private sector. Having a reliable transportation network is in the interest of the United States, therefore we must pay to maintain one.
This is completely different than the argument you put forth about the government spending everything it takes in. While I believe that deficits are harmful to the economy, running up huge government surplus is just as bad. It introduces horrible inefficiencies into an economy.
The argument that someone can voluntarily pay more tax is patently ridiculous. One person's $3000 does nothing. It's when everyone's money is pooled together things can get done. That is how policy and government works. If one person could build a bridge, or fund a fire department, they likely would do it, but you hardly want to rely on charity to fund essential functions. That's why we must be taxed in order to provide them. In addition, even people who would like taxes increased don't want to be paying more than their fair share. That's the point of living in a great country. It takes shared sacrifice to get there.
I think what he was saying is that roads are heavily subsidized by taxpayers. The government does all sorts of things that do not "pay for themselves" such as national defense, highways, public health, etc. In fact the purpose of government is to do things that do not turn a profit. If there was a profit to be made, then private industry would do it. Government steps in to provide necessary services that would not be profitable to the private sector. Having a reliable transportation network is in the interest of the United States, therefore we must pay to maintain one.
This is completely different than the argument you put forth about the government spending everything it takes in. While I believe that deficits are harmful to the economy, running up huge government surplus is just as bad. It introduces horrible inefficiencies into an economy.
The argument that someone can voluntarily pay more tax is patently ridiculous. One person's $3000 does nothing. It's when everyone's money is pooled together things can get done. That is how policy and government works. If one person could build a bridge, or fund a fire department, they likely would do it, but you hardly want to rely on charity to fund essential functions. That's why we must be taxed in order to provide them. In addition, even people who would like taxes increased don't want to be paying more than their fair share. That's the point of living in a great country. It takes shared sacrifice to get there.
I think everyone knows this deep down, but it's also an inconvenient truth for some. As long as projects and spending that they personally approve of get red lighted, they are all for big government and "over"spending. When an idea they oppose comes up, they grab on to the purse straps and raise heck. Remember GWB's wild spending spree? It was never an issue. The war in Iraq's (wrong country) cost was never an issue. Only when the self-serving, conservative agenda is on the table to get the axe are people up in arms and stirring up phony outrage. Wisconsin is broke...yes...yet we can some how afford corporate welfare and tax breaks. Some people love the "truth" but hate the facts.
I think we all know that endless expansion and construction of roadways is not a viable long term solution, but some people have their heads in the sand. It's a shame how people wear ignorance like a badge and try to distort the facts just to push an agenda. All people said was that we could have a rail system as an alternative way to spur growth, reduce congestion and stimulate new transportation and people have made it seem like we are trying to commit treason against the state.
For what it's worth, some of us non-liberals thought W. was half-democrat. We were not supportive of his democratic spend-thrift ways. Some of us are also not thrilled with our involvement with other country's business. I realize Barack W. Obama has reversed all of that.
Some of us love the idea of trains, but since Big Government is enormous enough as it is, making poor folks like me poorer with outrageous taxes just so teachers can have Taj Mahals to teach in and get glorious pensions (something I'll never have), I just don't see where there's room for such things.
*side note: Wisconsin schools are good because people here value education and are involved in it. The amount of money thrown at schools is only an indicator of how much you value education. If money had anything to do with quality education, every inner-city school in America would be shining examples of how education should be.
You guys make nice arguments for it, but what are you willing to give up to pay for the train? The feds would have helped some, but at some point they would have finally realized that they're dead broke. Those nifty cost overrun estimates are ALWAYS underestimated, so $750k would inevitably grown to many times that. We could raise taxes even more in this insanely taxed state. We could do away with corporate welfare and watch companies move to states that will continue to participate in it. We could ignore the roads in the heavily-populated southeastern part of the state even more. Who needs teeth anyway.
So what are you willing to give up for the train?
Again, I like the idea of trains. I like the idea of compact walkable cities. Public transport does not bother me if it's being used.
I don't like the fact that we've built our lives around cars, but it would be extremely difficult to undo the last 60 years of development. Not to mention 75% of the people would be against it to the point of starting a war.
I also don't like that our government wants to do everything for us. It's not sustainable, to use a liberal buzzword. I'd rather they not provide all the fru-fru stuff for us and focus primarily on infrastructure (even trains if they'll be used), defense, enforcing basic laws, etc. and let us take care of ourselves, our family, our neighbors, and fellow citizens in general on a more personal level. But to some that makes me a racist bigot hypocrite hate-monger yadda yadda yadda blah blah blah...................
I think they should at least Electrify the Hiawatha line and grade separate it and make it up to 140mph.
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.
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.
