Cincinnati-Indianapolis-Chicago high speed rail (Columbus, Cleveland: cul-de-sac, unemployed, school)

[rrtechno]

Originally Posted by Wilson513

If one looks at the Budget for the DOT, one can easily see that the budget has a lot of everything else but not so much about road repair and maintenance. And, when the money is used on roads, it is squandered shamelessly (see the federal funding of the criminal project known as the BigDig).

If the highway gas tax was devoted solely to funding highways (duh), there would be no subsidies needed for interstate highway operations even with the reduced consumption from fuel efficient cars. But the gas tax funds pork barrel projects of every kind manner and type, including everything related to trains, airports, harbors, air quality, Indian Lands, escalators, and what not.

Find the highways repairs in this mess:

DOT Budget Highlights Fiscal Year 2015 | Department of Transportation

You are aware that this is from the Department of TRANSPORTATION, and not the Department of HIGHWAYS, aren't you?

And a little short history of the Federal excise tax on gasoline, why it was first imposed and what it has developed into over the years.

http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL30304.pdf

And for any who want to continue this discussion, using the gasoline tax as a supporting argument without reading the article, it needs to be pointed out that the initial purpose of the tax had NOTHING to do with funding highways (or transportation of any sort).

[Wilson513]

Originally Posted by rrtechno

You are aware that this is from the Department of TRANSPORTATION, and not the Department of HIGHWAYS, aren't you?

And a little short history of the Federal excise tax on gasoline, why it was first imposed and what it has developed into over the years.

http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL30304.pdf

And for any who want to continue this discussion, using the gasoline tax as a supporting argument without reading the article, it needs to be pointed out that the initial purpose of the tax had NOTHING to do with funding highways (or transportation of any sort).

Hahaha! you crack me up.

You do know that the Department of Highways does not exist, right? Well, there is a West Virginia Department of Highways. And, I think there used to be an Ohio Department of Highways.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by WILWRadio

Roads have been in place for hundreds of years. Existing rail lines that are still in use obviously are funded and maintained. New roads are built as required and the same goes for rail roads. Since cars are not going away anytime soon, it seems evident that if our society is going to continue to function we need roads.

Blame Washington, not the AMERICAN people for this debt fiasco. If we didn't have so much debt then many of us would be more inclined to want to see expansion of rail, provided that it is economically feasible. Building new rail lines for the sole purpose of moving only passengers, not freight is not economically viable in this day and age.

Why wasn't the subway in Cincy not built? Must be a damn good reason since the tunnels are still vacant for almost 100 years.

Why don't you move to an area that has passenger rail? That makes more sense than trying to move to a place that does not have it and may not have it at all. When I visited Norway, Sweden and Denmark we used busses and passenger rail during our six week stay. Works there but that does not mean it will work in every part of the USA.

You're avoiding the question. No one said anything about roads and cars going away. In fact, I think they can easily be part of a multi-modal transit system.

You're the one that made financial responsibility a platform of your argument. If there is no money to build a HSR system, how is there money for building more roads? The money would come from the same sources, so if it's not there, it wouldn't be there for anything.

And I gave you the results of the Columbus-Chicago rail studies which showed a high financial return and use, and you didn't address it. Since the Cincy line would run through larger places than the Columbus line would, specifically, why would it automatically fail financially?

Frankly, Cincinnati made a HUGE mistake in not completing its subway system. I imagine things would be different there over the years had it been.

I live in a city that has passenger rail and lots of it. In fact, it has the multi-modal system I mentioned above: bike share, light rail, subway, BRT, regular buses and a road network.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by Wilson513

If one looks at the Budget for the DOT, one can easily see that the budget has a lot of everything else but not so much about road repair and maintenance. And, when the money is used on roads, it is squandered shamelessly (see the federal funding of the criminal project known as the BigDig).

If the highway gas tax was devoted solely to funding highways (duh), there would be no subsidies needed for interstate highway operations even with the reduced consumption from fuel efficient cars. But the gas tax funds pork barrel projects of every kind manner and type, including everything related to trains, airports, harbors, air quality, Indian Lands, escalators, and what not.

Find the highways repairs in this mess:

DOT Budget Highlights Fiscal Year 2015 | Department of Transportation

The problem here, as I've already said, is that even with 100% of the gas tax going to roads, there would still be a pretty massive shortfall in the maintenance/construction budget.

And someone else already explained that the gas tax was never meant just for roads in the first place.

[Wilson513]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

The problem here, as I've already said, is that even with 100% of the gas tax going to roads, there would still be a pretty massive shortfall in the maintenance/construction budget.

And someone else already explained that the gas tax was never meant just for roads in the first place.

I don't think so. I am open to review citations on this, but I think that the problem is the other diversions of the gas tax money.

[RustBeltOptimist]

Originally Posted by WILWRadio

I always make things up. Do you honestly think the volume of traffic between Cincy and Chicago is going to rival that of a Chicago to Detroit line?

Look, you are good at espousing your opinion on this subject but you offer little in the way of tangible facts to support your beliefs. Again, the mere fact that we have more debt than assets in this country is sufficient reason to believe these rail lines will not get built. Can you comprehend that? The MONEY is not THERE for expensive projects like this.

Start with this. I don't see IN or OH on the list but I do see IL and MI.

New FHWA Report Reveals States with the Busiest Highways | Department of Transportation

Look again, Ohio is number 4 on that list, ahead of both IL and MI. If you look at the numbers, you'll also see that both Indiana and Ohio have a much higher proportion of rural (mostly city to city traffic on the interstates) than urban traffic (mostly traffic kept within a city) than either IL or MI, meaning that they'll likely see greater benefit from more transit modes being offered. One of the big reasons why that proportion is higher is the relative shortage of trains and other modes compare to the CHI-DET corridor. People are being forced to use highways rather than other preferred modes which are unavailable to them.

[rrtechno]

How about something like this to address the issue of getting around at your destination.

Thanks to the mention of intermodal (used extensively for freight) mentioned above to remind me of this.

Chunnel - trains, tickets, fares, booking for Channel Tunnel trains

This option is found in many areas of the world including areas of the US.

Ship Your Car by Train - Auto Train Takes You & Your Vehicles | Amtrak

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by Wilson513

I don't think so. I am open to review citations on this, but I think that the problem is the other diversions of the gas tax money.

Did you even read the link about the history of the gas tax? Its original purpose was to fill budget shortfalls... and not even budget shortfalls dealing with road construction. It wasn't until much later that money was siphoned off for transportation projects, mostly road maintenance and construction, when it became clear that states and localities could not afford to pay for it.

[WILWRadio]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

You're avoiding the question. No one said anything about roads and cars going away. In fact, I think they can easily be part of a multi-modal transit system.

You're the one that made financial responsibility a platform of your argument. If there is no money to build a HSR system, how is there money for building more roads? The money would come from the same sources, so if it's not there, it wouldn't be there for anything.

And I gave you the results of the Columbus-Chicago rail studies which showed a high financial return and use, and you didn't address it. Since the Cincy line would run through larger places than the Columbus line would, specifically, why would it automatically fail financially?

Frankly, Cincinnati made a HUGE mistake in not completing its subway system. I imagine things would be different there over the years had it been.

I live in a city that has passenger rail and lots of it. In fact, it has the multi-modal system I mentioned above: bike share, light rail, subway, BRT, regular buses and a road network.

Not evading anything. A big difference between having to spend money to maintain existing infrastructure vs. building new. Roads are the lifeblood of the economy and our society as a whole. Stop spending the money to maintain them and we will very quickly become a Third World nation.

Why are you trying to push rail in this country when you don't even live here?

[WILWRadio]

Originally Posted by RustBeltOptimist

Look again, Ohio is number 4 on that list, ahead of both IL and MI. If you look at the numbers, you'll also see that both Indiana and Ohio have a much higher proportion of rural (mostly city to city traffic on the interstates) than urban traffic (mostly traffic kept within a city) than either IL or MI, meaning that they'll likely see greater benefit from more transit modes being offered. One of the big reasons why that proportion is higher is the relative shortage of trains and other modes compare to the CHI-DET corridor. People are being forced to use highways rather than other preferred modes which are unavailable to them.

Read the list with tired eyes. Even so, the traffic in southern Ohio is not as much of an issue as it is in the northern part of the state.

People being forced to use highways? Not really. How many people would give up their cars if they build high speed rail or even a decent local metro rail system? They have it in Cleveland and the last time I checked people still drive. And they do have HSR in the Boston to Washington DC corridor and there are still a lot of people that prefer to use cars.

While the car is not your preferred method of travel, the vast majority of Americans still prefer to use a car.