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.
Some of the new conservatives have offered to return the money allocated to their states for this boondoggle back to the government to pay off the federal debt. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has flatly told these upstanding people looking out for our best interest that this money cannot be returned to pay off the federal debt. If states do not want their high speed boondoggle money, the money will go back into the boondoggle pot, to be dispersed to other states for their high speed boondoggles.
I am frankly sick of this spending! When will it end?
True conservatives are the only hope for this country. Why do we need rail when our roads work just fine?
Why do we need rail when our roads work just fine?
From an engineer's point of view; it's MUCH cheaper and more efficient to move people and cargo via rail.
It's that whole investing in infrastructure thing. I've been to several countries which do not or cannot afford construction, upgrade, or upkeep of their road, rail, power, and water networks. Believe me, you don't want to live in a place like that.
Some of the new conservatives have offered to return the money allocated to their states for this boondoggle back to the government to pay off the federal debt. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has flatly told these upstanding people looking out for our best interest that this money cannot be returned to pay off the federal debt. If states do not want their high speed boondoggle money, the money will go back into the boondoggle pot, to be dispersed to other states for their high speed boondoggles.
I am frankly sick of this spending! When will it end?
True conservatives are the only hope for this country. Why do we need rail when our roads work just fine?
The problem is public funded HSR, not HSR, itself.
If you strip away all the subsidies for pavement-petroleum-automobiles, and examine the raw costs, rail is far superior.
I'd prefer that instead of government funding (with all the political baggage), the government grants a zero tax liability to any company (and its employees) that is 100% involved in building, operating and maintaining electric traction rail - in all forms.
Rail is far better but the way they went about this is idiotic.
Instead of a national plan they doled out bits and pieces here and there and pet projects were earmarked.
A high speed train from some California city to Las Vegas ?
How's about the length of California to make traveling the state faster ?
Wouldn't that help business ? They have high speed trains on the east coast that are heavily used.
No..instead they dream of a high speed junket train for quickie gambling trips.
Last edited by HappyTexan; 11-19-2010 at 11:55 PM..
Rail is far better but they way they went about this is idiotic.
Instead of a national plan they doled out bits and pieces here and there and pet projects were earmarked.
A high speed train from some California city to Las Vegas ?
How's about the length of California to make traveling the state faster ?
Wouldn't that help business ? They have high speed trains on the east coast that are heavily used.
No..instead they dream of a high speed junket train for quickie gambling trips.
From an engineer's point of view; it's MUCH cheaper and more efficient to move people and cargo via rail.
It's that whole investing in infrastructure thing. I've been to several countries which do not or cannot afford construction, upgrade, or upkeep of their road, rail, power, and water networks. Believe me, you don't want to live in a place like that.
The HSR in Wisconsin is a commuter train, from what I understand it's not being created for cargo/industrial purposes, but I could be wrong.
I strongly agree with the OP. I don't want this thing. It's ridiculous that we cannot just say no to the money. And to know that the HSR will be subsidized for all eternity is even more worrisome. I read somewhere that WI will only have to come up with $700k/year for operation costs. Private industry would not have done the Milwaukee to Madison rail, in my opinion, b/c there isn't really a demand for it.
I understand that this rail is supposed to be a link in a larger chain, but I believe it should be done by a private company, not subsidized by the gov't, which apparently has bottomless pockets. Well, those pockets end in China, but you get my drift.
The problem is they divvied the money up into too many small bits including several routes which have no hope of being built or being profitable even if built. A much better approach would have been to fund a few high priority projects which we know are viable so at least some of them actually get built.
The problem is they divvied the money up into too many small bits including several routes which have no hope of being built or being profitable even if built. A much better approach would have been to fund a few high priority projects which we know are viable so at least some of them actually get built.
You've proven my point that government funding is a recipe for disaster.
A private sector enterprise would never waste time and resources doing it that way.
Frankly, I wouldn't expect much progress. They're still dithering over the streetcar tracks in DC, despite having taken delivery of the trains.
[head smack x 1999999]
Details emerge for D.C. streetcars, set to begin in 2012 After more than 14 years of planning, false starts and questions over the feasibility of embarking on a $1.5 billion plan to bring back streetcars to the District, the first trolleys will run in the spring of 2012, officials said last week.
... Three streetcars, assembled in the Czech Republic, have been delivered and are being stored at Metro's Greenbelt rail yard.
D.C. streetcars roll in Czech Republic - wtop.com April 24, 2008
It's like something out of a Franz Kafka novel -- a city buys streetcars for $10 million, but has no tracks to run them.The cars were purchased more than three years ago, yet they have not yet found their way to the city that paid for them.
This is what we can expect from "government help".
As a proponent of electric rail, I am categorically opposed to any public funding, or government intrusion of any kind. Because at this rate of progress, we won't see HSR until the 22nd century.
From an engineer's point of view; it's MUCH cheaper and more efficient to move people and cargo via rail.
It's that whole investing in infrastructure thing. I've been to several countries which do not or cannot afford construction, upgrade, or upkeep of their road, rail, power, and water networks. Believe me, you don't want to live in a place like that.
Putting in rail is more costly than just building roads.
I wish we could put our focus toward filling in potholes and laying down nice pavement.
Oh, I don't know. The highway system does show that if it is made a priority the government can build a pretty good system. It certainly works well in other countries as well. The main problem, as I see it, is that Obama loves to talk about high speed rail but isn't serious about funding it or actually getting it built and instead just mainly funded a bunch of studies.
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.
When will it end?
