Bullet train? Yes or no? (Los Angeles, San Diego: live in, airports, homeless)

[davidt1]

Originally Posted by expatCA

And all of CA will pay for something that helps how many in reality?

Where I am there is something called the blue rail light that runs through some part of the city. Every time I see one passing through, I count about 5 passengers in a train that looks like it can accommodate 200 people. Yeah all taxpayers pay for those five people to ride that train. I am not sure if these 5 passengers even voted on this thing. Now taxpayers are on the hook forever. One has to wonder: how does something like this got on the ballot and passed? To find the answer, you have to look at who ultimately benefits. The people who built it, run it, police it, etc. are the real beneficiary of these taxpayer funded projects.

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by ysr_racer

I'm hearing numbers like 70 or 80 billion. Does California need a bullet train?

We've already got Amtrak, MetroLink, and Southwest Airlines. There isn't anyplace I can't get to in California in an hour or so.

What's an 80 billion dollar train going to get us

I knew it would be a boondoggle, which is why I voted against it in the first place. I'm truly not happy to be proven correct.

The bullet train is a poster child for why America's infrastructure s*cks. Corruption and ineptitude are the primary problem, not lack of funds.

[eureka1]

Yes yes yes

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by davidt1

Where I am there is something called the blue rail light that runs through some part of the city. Every time I see one passing through, I count about 5 passengers in a train that looks like it can accommodate 200 people. Yeah all taxpayers pay for those five people to ride that train. I am not sure if these 5 passengers even voted on this thing. Now taxpayers are on the hook forever. One has to wonder: how does something like this got on the ballot and passed? To find the answer, you have to look at who ultimately benefits. The people who built it, run it, police it, etc. are the real beneficiary of these taxpayer funded projects.

Sad but true.

[ysr_racer]

Originally Posted by eureka1

Yes yes yes

Care to tell us why?

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by 2nd trick op

Speaking as a person with some familiarity with the rail industry (transportation major and former railroad (Amtrak) employee), it doesn't suprise me in the least that good intentions and unrealistic promises are coming back to haunt us.

The system sold to politicians and a naive public was modeled upon economic conditions in Europe, public...

Interesting information; thanks for posting it.

[2nd trick op]

Originally Posted by davidt1

Where I am there is something called the blue rail light that runs through some part of the city. Every time I see one passing through, I count about 5 passengers in a train that looks like it can accommodate 200 people. Yeah all taxpayers pay for those five people to ride that train. I am not sure if these 5 passengers even voted on this thing. Now taxpayers are on the hook forever. One has to wonder: how does something like this got on the ballot and passed? To find the answer, you have to look at who ultimately benefits. The people who built it, run it, police it, etc. are the real beneficiary of these taxpayer funded projects.

Originally Posted by ysr_racer

Care to tell us why?

This happens because of what people familiar with urban transportation call the "peak/off-peak" pattern. People who commute to work tend to travel (and return) at the same time, and only on business days. Offering employees more flexibility in scheduling would be a help here, but I wouldn't expect it in the "culture of micromanagement" of the present day.

But so long as the equipment is there, its cheaper to use it -- even if it's only partially full.

[marcopolo666]

Before contributing to this new thread about the bullet train, please read all of the posts on all of these earlier threads, so that we can avoid dredging up the tired old topics that have been posted over and over and over and over and ...

//www.city-data.com/forum/calif...alifornia.html

//www.city-data.com/forum/calif...in-valley.html

//www.city-data.com/forum/san-f...n-central.html

//www.city-data.com/forum/calif...nces-amid.html

//www.city-data.com/forum/los-a...-multiple.html

//www.city-data.com/forum/calif...good-idea.html

[NoMoreSnowForMe]

I don't see how it can succeed, when nobody really understands the point or who would really benefit from it.

For me, in my life, as someone who lives in the SF Bay Area, and might visit a friend in San Diego once a year, that is the only time I'd use it.

So, for me, what would be cheaper? Flying or taking this train?

I don't know anyone who really understands the need for it. So, I see it as doomed to fail, based solely on that.

There isn't some huge need for northern or southern Californians to travel to either end on a regular basis - that can't be met now - for pretty cheap - by simply flying, for example.

[SportyandMisty]

Originally Posted by ElDiabloJoe

Alll that money would be much (MUCH!) better spent making the I-5 freeway three lanes in each direction from the Grapevine to the San Jose / Stockton split up above Santa Nella.

MUCH better spent.

Make it 5 lanes, where one is a dedicated high speed lane (minimum of 90 MPH).