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.
High speed rail costs about 3x regular rail.
Not only will it be expensive, but really, really expensive.
And then wait until each town along the way wants that rail to stop there slowing it down.
Ideally it would be express service only to major cities, downtown to downtown, and from downtown you'd take regular Amtrak commuter service out to the suburbs or to minor cities. Also the original alignment, which voters approved, went up the I5 freeway corridor as that would be a straight line for servicing the large coastal cities which will make up virtually all of the passenger traffic for the system. Sadly, Republicans, who opposed the train in public but demanded pork for their districts in private, have demanded the train go hundreds of miles to the east and zig-zag all around the map just to pick up each worthless legislator's district thus slowing down the whole network and worsening service for the money making SD-LA-SF route.
The system will sink or swim based upon the high traffic SD-LA-SF route but swinging up the central valley pretty much insures the system will be slow, long, and not worth the effort. The French national railway service (who already operates the TGV in France) said we should restore the original alignment up the I5 and forget about the crappy towns in red districts because they won't generate enough traffic to justify the costs. The French are right but, sadly, the alignment won't be changed because hypocritical politicians who oppose it in public are privately saying send it to my district or I'll vote against it.
And when did Halliburton get its one and only 'no -bid' contract..1997 under CLINTON, and Halliburton (its subsidery KBR) has had the military contracts since LBJ
Blackwater's first contract 1999....under Clinton, Shocker, shocker!
texas also PRODUCES 40% of the ENERGY that California USES...yet
cali is the second biggest carbon emiter.....behind...texas
90% of water consumed in Cali...comes from arizonia
You've repeatedly used this nonsense before and you've repeatedly been corrected. That you continue to use it, knowing full well that it is incorrect, tells me that you are deliberately lying. Once again here is the map of states from smallest percentage on welfare to highest percentage of population on welfare. You'll notice California has one of the smaller percentages of population on welfare.
Good to see Cali moving forward with high speed rail, I can't wait for it to be running all the way up and down the West Coast.
It will not run the whole coast. It will stop in LA.
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.
