68 billion dollar high speed rail from LA to San Fran...

[Think4Yourself]

BTW this is a truly excellent article which I hope everyone for and against take the time to read: High-speed rail officials rebuffed proposal from French railway - latimes.com

The French National Railway Company actually wanted to invest in California's HSR, they conducted a study and determined that following the I5 corridor would be the best route as it would 1) minimize the amount of expensive tracks needed 2) would be in a straight line thus allowing the trains to reach and maintain their max speed for most of the journey 3) serviced only the high passenger traffic routes which were likely to get butts in seats without wasting money building tracks to worthless destinations (I'm thinking of you Barstow, Bakersfield, etc...) where there would be no demand.

The French proposal got reject largely, almost exclusively really, because Republican state reps whined that their districts wouldn't get pork out of the deal. We have to actually build transport systems based upon market demand so that it takes people who are willing to pay where they want to go; that means the big coastal cities where all the businessmen and tourists go not to places like Barstow, Bakersfield, or Fresno. Sorry, but that's just economic reality.

[krudmonk]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

In other words, you incapable of independent thought and go along with whatever your party says because you think it makes you cool or something. lol

FYI, Im a democrat too but I dont let them dictate my beliefs to me. Just something to consider.

Uh, if you didn't notice, your hometown is galvanized against Obama's visit because of his stance on marijuana. I don't know of many Dems who speak on the issue, nor do I identify as beng of their party.

Also, you shouldn't claim to be an independent thinker because you shun your political party to instead side with your church on the issue of gay marriage.

[ZhugeLiang]

Originally Posted by Think4Yourself

They weren't in ruins by any stretch but they had become fat and complacent on just a couple of high margin businesses.

The problem is it now only takes ~ 6 months before you brand new high margin toy attracts copy cats and it becomes just another low margin business. That means you must CONSTANTLY be coming out with new and better products on the cutting edge or you'll end up with quickly shrinking margins as the low cost copy cat companies eat up market share. Neither Whitman or Fiorina (both ran for office as Republicans in this state) did that and that WAS their personal failures as CEOs.

Before we get even more off topic, I'm not saying Whitman was going to knock things out of the park,and I'm well aware of Fiorina's legendary awful merger decision. Who knows what will happen in the next decade, but she seems to have put a band-aid on things for now. It is true what you speak of in regards to CEO culture nowadays with the hit it quick for short term gain at the expense of long term financial planning and growth. But Whitman should be credited with the decision to reverse Leo Apoteker's disastrous move to end HP's run in the PC business. Yes, I know they were trying to go the way of IBM, they just attempted to do so in the clumsiest manner possible.

Personally, I think HP is on its way to the ash heap of tech history but we'll just have to wait and see.

Originally Posted by Think4Yourself

BTW this is a truly excellent article which I hope everyone for and against take the time to read: High-speed rail officials rebuffed proposal from French railway - latimes.com

The French National Railway Company actually wanted to invest in California's HSR, they conducted a study and determined that following the I5 corridor would be the best route as it would 1) minimize the amount of expensive tracks needed 2) would be in a straight line thus allowing the trains to reach and maintain their max speed for most of the journey 3) serviced only the high passenger traffic routes which were likely to get butts in seats without wasting money building tracks to worthless destinations (I'm thinking of you Barstow, Bakersfield, etc...) where there would be no demand.

The French proposal got reject largely, almost exclusively really, because Republican state reps whined that their districts wouldn't get pork out of the deal.

Actually, if you took the time to read your own article, it specifically refers to the decision to leave out Fresno as the deal killer. I don't get where you're coming up with this "not enough pork for Republicans" stuff, but a lot of your post here is specious at best. The French advisors didn't like the plan because they ran right into the political realities of America, which rail supporters will never bring up. In France and Japan, they don't have things like the EPA and the issue of eminent domain, we do. That is precisely why the HSR examples in those countries do not and cannot scale here in America, it's just a different landscape.

What I also get from the article is yet another damning indictment that this project was only conceptual when it was put on the ballot with no actual planning yet performed. But that was kind of the point all along, sucker voters on a concept, get them to commit, and then hoping no one would care about the ever rising price tag while blabbing about jobs. Is it really any wonder why Proposition 1A would fail if the people got the chance to vote on it again? With schools closing down, I'm sure the true cost of HSR is really starting to hit home for many people. By the way, has it already been mentioned that HSR won't even be high speed without widespread track replacement? Think the original bond will cover that? LMAO.

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by krudmonk

Also, you shouldn't claim to be an independent thinker because you shun your political party to instead side with your church on the issue of gay marriage.

Yet, I could read off a laundry list of issues where I stand at odds with the popular opinion of people in my church.


I wonder, can Democrats do any wrong in your eyes?

[darkeconomist]

Originally Posted by Think4Yourself

The current retarded route map:


The much straighter and faster I5 route which we were originally sold (in yellow):

Given that express trains would pass by several of the central valley stops, I don't see the 99 route being a large problem.

As for the routing out to the high desert, I'm under the impression it was for geographic reasons. The cost of tunneling between the LA basin and the central valley was too high. And, no, doubt, some politicians wanted some pork.

[JGC97]

Originally Posted by darkeconomist

Given that express trains would pass by several of the central valley stops, I don't see the 99 route being a large problem.

It won't be the most scenic route, that's for sure! The word boring comes to mind.

[Kobe25]

California still leading the world in technology in the 21st century cali is most def the future of america everything starts in cali first

[krudmonk]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

Yet, I could read off a laundry list of issues where I stand at odds with the popular opinion of people in my church.


I wonder, can Democrats do any wrong in your eyes?

Are you paying attention? Not only did I say that I do not identify as a Dem, but the current crackdown on pot clubs is embarrassingly draconian and archaic.

[FresnoFacts]

Originally Posted by Think4Yourself

Unless the route gets changed back to the I5 corridor I would like to see this project killed.

The current retarded route map:


The much straighter and faster I5 route which we were originally sold (in yellow):

An I-5 route was not what voters were "sold" in the November 2008 election when Prop 1A was approved.

A route following the 99 corridor, passing thru Palmdale, and running from LA to San Diego via Riverside was what the media described before the 2008 election.

There was no route change after the 2008 election to garner GOP politician votes.

An example of the route description voters were told, from the SF Chronicle on September 11, 2008 (months before the election):

The 800-mile system would resemble the letter "Y," with a long tail, placed in the center of the state. The initial line would start in San Francisco, head down the Peninsula along the Caltrain right-of-way with stops in Millbrae, Palo Alto, San Jose and Gilroy. It would zip across the Pacheco Pass to the San Joaquin Valley, stopping in Fresno and Bakersfield, with a possible station in Visalia. It then would bypass the Grapevine, heading instead to Palmdale with stops in Sylmar and Burbank before reaching Los Angeles and, possibly, Anaheim and Norwalk. Extensions are planned to Irvine, to San Diego through Riverside County and to Sacramento.
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/H...678.php#page-2

[Kobe25]

Well at least its a great step torwards the future but Cali will always be a car capital
The streetcar is coming back to downtown Los Angeles in 2 years so I see the future of transportation a major construction job in the 21st century"as China plans to use bullet trains,Cali could do the same and maybe even become it's own union and break off from the rest of America