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 saw some of the original rail line on Oahu last weekend. It used to run from downtown all the way out to Waianae, Ka'ena point (sorry birds), and then to Haleiwa. I even saw an actual train running in Ko'olina, but I kinda doubt the tourists could take it all the way downtown these days. Such a shame it wasn't preserved.
I support rail in Honolulu 100%. The density makes it a no brainer. Just wish they could manage the project fiscally--it's no better in HI than in SF or Boston.
Have you heard of the Big Dig? A couple decades ago Boston planned to bury a few miles of their main highway underneath the city at a cost of $2 billion. Burying the highway that cut through downtown would connect city neighborhoods and reduce crime. When it was finally completed, the final cost ended up being $15 billion. The city is more beautiful today because of this project, but we should know by now that all infrastructure projects always have cost overruns especially in blue states.
I view the rail like Trump, it was voted on and won. So we should just make the most of it.
Every (almost) large project goes over budget and takes longer than they say.
__________________ ____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs / Pets / Current Events
OK. So you support rail. If you lived on Oahu, how much would you be willing to pay out of your own pocket for its construction (construction ONLY, not operating costs)? Assuming you took in no more and no less than the typical median income family on Oahu, what would you be willing to pay in AFTER TAX earnings?
A) $1,000
B) $2,000
C) $5,000
D) $7,500
E) $10,000
I ask because most people just love the concept of rail. But when they are asked to open their wallets, they sing another tune.
So as a 100% supporter, how much of your hard-earned after-tax earnings would you be willing to contribute to the construction of Oahu's rail system?
Let's see, the citizens voted for a 1/2 cent increase in sales tax (really .5 percent increase in excise tax, which compounds to more), so say your household spends $50,000 on taxable items living in Hawaii every year, you will pay $250 per year. That is very manageable for a middle income household. And the outcome is that the whole island gets a better quality of life, eventually. Unless the designers, contractors, and politicians screw it up. Or if the developers just build lots more and saturate it immediately, which is always a threat.
And yes, by mentioning Boston, I was referencing the Big Dig overruns. I believe SF has the same issue with their central subway in progress.
I highly doubt that cost overruns are exclusive or larger in blue states--plenty of cronyism and incompetence in red states (and I'm tempted to add "if not more"). I will consider that argument invalid until provided with some evidence, and the burden is on you.
Let's see, the citizens voted for a 1/2 cent increase in sales tax (really .5 percent increase in excise tax, which compounds to more), so say your household spends $50,000 on taxable items living in Hawaii every year, you will pay $250 per year. That is very manageable for a middle income household. And the outcome is that the whole island gets a better quality of life, eventually. Unless the designers, contractors, and politicians screw it up. Or if the developers just build lots more and saturate it immediately, which is always a threat.
And yes, by mentioning Boston, I was referencing the Big Dig overruns. I believe SF has the same issue with their central subway in progress.
I highly doubt that cost overruns are exclusive or larger in blue states--plenty of cronyism and incompetence in red states (and I'm tempted to add "if not more"). I will consider that argument invalid until provided with some evidence, and the burden is on you.
$250 year? It's far more than that. You fail to recognize how GET is a regressive tax that is (unbeknownst to the taxpayer) compounded several times before the end customer pays for goods and services. And even then, the tax can be reassessed and compounded over and over again (think of a used car that was sold several times by a dealership over its life). The sad truth is the average person doesn't realize how much they are really paying for rail because they have a distorted and myopic view on how the government takes their hard earned money. They can only "feel" it when they cut a check or see the amounts debited from their W-2s. We are indeed paying far, far more than the $250/year you assume we pay.
Figure $11B as a conservative estimate (we are already at $8.2B and we aren't even close to the urban core yet).
Feds are chipping in $1.5B. Leaving Oahu residents and visitors with a $9.5B tab.
Those costs are partially covered by tourists and non-residents. The claim is that it's anywhere between 17% and 30% depending on who is estimating and counting -
Let's say that number is 25% being funded by transients and non-residents. That takes the local Oahu resident tab to $7.125B
There are 310,000 households on Oahu making a median income of $73,581.
7,125,000,000 / 310,000 = $22,983 per household. Note that this figure is AFTER TAX. Therefore rail is really costing every single family on Oahu (as an average) $35,000 in earned gross income.
$35,000 in income paid to build Oahu's rail. Every. Single. Family. On. Oahu. Period.
And yes, that is not all coming out of a check that you write or the surcharge you pay when you buy a burger at Burger King. It comes out in the form of an increase in cost of all goods and services we receive on this tiny rock. If you are the median income earner, you are paying that whether you realize it or not. If you earn more than the median, you are paying much, much more.
What does $35,000 (taken from us sloooowly over a period of 20+ years) mean to the average person?
For the typical working class, median-income earning household, $35,000 is an insane amount of money. In fact, 56% of all Americans have less than $10,000 in savings at retirement. Let that fact swirl around your noggin for a bit.
The worst part about rail is that nobody is even going to ride it when it is complete. Driverless cars will increase the time people will be willing to sit in traffic. Every projection done by the city is out the window as people will tolerate much more time sitting in traffic as "drivers" are allowed to sleep, eat breakfast, play games or work on the way to work in the comfort of their private vehicles. What was once an intolerable 60 minute commute could be just fine at 90 minutes one-way if one could be as productive in their car as they could be sitting in the office.
I've been on these forums (and Honolulu Advertiser) for 10 years touting how driverless cars will make rail transit obsolete for everyone except those that cannot even afford a budget-priced car. Only the poorest of the poor will ride rail and rail fares will not support even a tiny fraction of its operating cost. Everyone on the forums said that was ridiculous and that we are at least 50 years out from driverless cars. People simply can't wrap their heads around how technology advances exponentially... not linearly. The average person simply does not understand technology. Tesla's Model 3 will cost $35K and will be available in 1 year; it will be 100% driverless (LEVEL 5 AUTONOMY). Driverless technology only adds $6,000 to the price of a car today and that will drop to $3,000 in 3 years. Basically, for the option of leather, your car can drive you everywhere without lifting a foot or finger. Think about that and how this will impact the way people commute.
The result (in 10 years) will be massive gridlock on the roads with drive times approaching 2 hours one way from West Oahu. The government will force massive toll road and GPS-tracked mileage fees on those drivers of convenient, inexpensive and widely enjoyed driverless cars. People out west will have to pay massive fees just to enjoy the convenience driverless cars offers society. In short, the government will force people to ride rail by making it extremely cost-prohibitive to drive.. including middle class citizens.
Those that (overwhelmingly) supported rail in West Oahu have shot themselves in the foot. The future is extremely depressing and bleak for anyone that lives out on that side of the island.
Well, that's kinda a bleak outlook, don'tcha think? I kinda like to think that new tech will make things nicer somehow.
It will take a few decades before driverless cars become the norm, so there will be time to adjust. Maybe by that time, holographic offices will become normal so folks won't even have to go to work anymore. Or robotic hotel workers, burger flippers, valets, etc., then nobody is going to work anymore so no more traffic.
Well, that's kinda a bleak outlook, don'tcha think? I kinda like to think that new tech will make things nicer somehow.
It will take a few decades before driverless cars become the norm, so there will be time to adjust.
Bleak outlook? I'm actually an optimist. The more driverless cars there are on the road, the safer our roads are... especially for those that are most vulnerable - pedestrians and cyclists. Safety is by far the biggest argument to making cars driverless... and this is exactly why the government supports driverless car technology adoption on a rapid scale.
After you watch this video, let me know if you still think it will be decades before driverless cars will be the norm.
And yes, that technology is in every single Tesla sold TODAY.
I would say that inside of 5 years (before rail is even built), virtually every single car sold will have some form of driver autonomy; i.e. they will drive themselves in MOST (but not all) situations. Virtually every auto manufacturer out there agrees with my statement.
Driverless cars will change the way people commute and will, at the very least, make mass transit far less desirable. We won't need driverless cars to be the majority of cars on the road before the impact will be felt.
But we will see if it take "a few decades" before anything significant happens. I just don't think there is a single person on the planet (that understands technology) that would agree with you.
Quite frankly - all cars sold could be driverless today.
By now, they are safer than human drivers.
But, they still aren't 100% perfect (nor are humans). And driverless accident gets way to much press. All the major manufacturers have the technology and means to build these cars - but Tesla has been most aggressive.
The few mistakes they make and regulations will hold it up. But certainly not decades.
Quite frankly - all cars sold could be driverless today.
By now, they are safer than human drivers.
But, they still aren't 100% perfect (nor are humans). And driverless accident gets way to much press. All the major manufacturers have the technology and means to build these cars - but Tesla has been most aggressive.
The few mistakes they make and regulations will hold it up. But certainly not decades.
It's coming. Fast.
Regulations cannot hold up the adoption of self-driving technology. The current technology is equivalent to super advanced cruise control. As long as a human can take full control of the vehicle at any time, the government can do nothing to stop its advancement. Regulations can, however, slow down implementation of truly driverless cars (i.e. cars with NO humans inside them). California is the only state that currently has legislation in place to allow cars without steering wheels, brake/accelerator pedals and humans attending them but they are only allowed in certain areas at certain speeds.
In the next few years, people will have more buying options for cars that will allow them to work, watch movies/tv, play games, etc as they commute to and from work. They will become increasingly more affordable and ubiquitous over time. People aren't willing to accept the reality that as humans remove the need to operate and navigate a vehicle to complete their commute, people will be more and more willing to sit in traffic for longer periods of time. Assuming the government cooperates, within 3 years you'll be able to send your car back to park at home after it drops you off... then call it to return to pick you up from work and take you home. Imagine what this will do to traffic congestion. You will also be able to send your car out to work for you (Uber, Lyft, Tesla's sharing network, etc) and make you money while you work at your regular 9 to 5. It's inevitable that mass transit and public transportation (trains, buses, etc) will be less favorable over time. Public transportation's slide starts now.
Humans want more convenience as we evolve; this is the natural order of things. Walking to a bus stop, riding a bus, waiting for the train, riding the train, waiting for the bus, riding the bus, walking to work... and then repeating that on the way back home without the ability to carry much more than a laptop, a phone and some paperwork is NOT humans evolving. Jumping in your self-driving car and watching a movie in complete peace and quiet all the way to work IS the future.
The fact that we are spending $10+ BILLION on 19th century transportation when we are at the cusp of seeing demand for public transportation decline is insane beyond comprehension. There is an article in today's Star Advertiser that Trump may yank the federal funds from us. I sure hope that comes to fruition.
Waah waaah waaaah! So much hot air. pj737, pay your taxes like everybody else, vote on election day, and if you don't like the outcome, vote with your feet. Or exercise your rights to free speech and civil disobedience to start a #norail camp like the native Americans in North Dakota and see if anyone joins you.
The worst part about rail is that nobody is even going to ride it when it is complete. Driverless cars will increase the time people will be willing to sit in traffic..
I would take rail over sitting in freeway traffic any time, driving or not.
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.
The city is more beautiful today because of this project, but we should know by now that all infrastructure projects always have cost overruns especially in blue states.
