been screaming for this for years

[DiamondDave]

Well.. is every citizen going to be taxed equally for it?

No..


Once again another pet project on the backs of the few....

I think objections like this one are fairly short sighted. Getting the economy back on track with an eye toward the future by creating jobs in this area is a good thing. More jobs mean more revenue.

It will also help alleviate impossible traffic problems and stress on people attempting to get from one place to another and also on roads and bridges that are crumbling under the pressure.

Again... selective equality from a lefty...

You want civic or infrastructure improvement.. fine.. I am not against road systems and other necessary infrastructure... what I am against is unequal taxation to achieve things... supplying something on the backs of the few, so that others gain the benefit without putting a damn thing into it

You suggest an equal % tax on all citizens to build this... fine... you want some to pay for it and others not.. not fine.. I also want to know what bullshit programs you are willing to get rid of to fund such a thing, because more taxation (when many people are already paying more than 50% of their income in total taxation (fed, state, local, sales, entertainment, all kids of taxes) into this wasteful federal government) is not a good thing

 

[DiveCon]

if this was something that was financially viable, they wouldnt need a dime of tax payer money to get it started
the project would fund itself with private investment

 

[DiamondDave]

if this was something that was financially viable, they wouldnt need a dime of tax payer money to get it started
the project would fund itself with private investment

true 'nuff

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

if this was something that was financially viable, they wouldnt need a dime of tax payer money to get it started
the project would fund itself with private investment

Exactly.

And this isn't going to "create jobs," because the government can't create jobs. All they're going to do is take money from productive areas and put it into this unproductive area.

 

[editec]

It's a trade off, not an improvement really. Pollution isn't just exhaust fumes, there's oil used to lubricate, space for tracks, cleaning chemicals for the mechanical and magnetic components (magnetic components require a lot more maintenance unless you like having the train fly off the track at 500 mph), etc.. No better, no worse, just different types of pollution.

You're guessing.

Of course so am I.

That said, I suspect that jet travel pollutes a lot worse (per passenger mile, at least) than mag lev rail.

No, I'm not guessing. I am using logic and knowledge of mechanics and electronic technology which I happen to excel at. Programming is just part of what I know about when dealing with technology. You are just swallowing hype.

Yeah, do the math then and get to me.

Until then? You're guessing.

 

[editec]

if this was something that was financially viable, they wouldnt need a dime of tax payer money to get it started
the project would fund itself with private investment

That was NOT true for the transcontinental railroad.

That was NOT true for space exploration.

That is NOT true for many enormous projects which ultimately can serve the public interests.

Your understanding of the power of public and private interests to do grand projects that serve the private industries and the public good is fairly weak, and certainly NOT based on history.

 

[DiveCon]

if this was something that was financially viable, they wouldnt need a dime of tax payer money to get it started
the project would fund itself with private investment

That was NOT true for the transcontinental railroad.

That was NOT true for space exploration.

That is NOT true for many enormous projects which ultimately can serve the public interests.

Your understanding of the power of public and private interests to do grand projects that serve the private industries and the public good is fairly weak, and certainly NOT based on history.

please tell me when NASA starts a shuttle bus to the stars for public transport

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

if this was something that was financially viable, they wouldnt need a dime of tax payer money to get it started
the project would fund itself with private investment

That was NOT true for the transcontinental railroad.

That was NOT true for space exploration.

That is NOT true for many enormous projects which ultimately can serve the public interests.

Your understanding of the power of public and private interests to do grand projects that serve the private industries and the public good is fairly weak, and certainly NOT based on history.

The government subsidized transcontinental railroads were inefficient, politicized, and corrupt. James J. Hill's privately-financed Great Northern Railroad being the exception.

 

[WorldAHope]

Well.. is every citizen going to be taxed equally for it?

No..


Once again another pet project on the backs of the few....

Equal taxation, meaing, you and I pay the same in taxes, even tho I might earn and have far more assets than you?
Or is this a matter of usage ? As in,
"since I only drive on 3 roads in California, I will only pay a small portion of taxes".
"And I never ride a train, so I will not pay taxes for that".
"And I graduated from school and the kids are all grown, so I will not pay school taxes".
And, since I have never seen a terrorist or been attacked, and have never been to Iraq, I refuse to contribute any taxes to that effort"

The list goes on.

Question is: are you going to be a contributing part of a healthy society,
or a grumpy useless hermit ?

 

[DiamondDave]

Well.. is every citizen going to be taxed equally for it?

No..


Once again another pet project on the backs of the few....

Equal taxation, meaing, you and I pay the same in taxes, even tho I might earn and have far more assets than you?
Or is this a matter of usage ? As in,
"since I only drive on 3 roads in California, I will only pay a small portion of taxes".
"And I never ride a train, so I will not pay taxes for that".
"And I graduated from school and the kids are all grown, so I will not pay school taxes".
And, since I have never seen a terrorist or been attacked, and have never been to Iraq, I refuse to contribute any taxes to that effort"

The list goes on.

Question is: are you going to be a contributing part of a healthy society,
or a grumpy useless hermit ?

Equal taxation as in for every dollar you earn, and every dollar I earn, the same % goes towards the operation of government

I contribute to society and I have actually served society... I have served dutifully in our military, with honor... I contribute to worthwhile causes of my choice.. I work in an industry that a vast majority of people use and rely on... I buy products (both needed and wanted) and put my efforts and earnings into the things that provide many people jobs.. I do things in my community and for those in my community

Have you?

 

[WorldAHope]

Well.. is every citizen going to be taxed equally for it?

No..


Once again another pet project on the backs of the few....

Equal taxation, meaing, you and I pay the same in taxes, even tho I might earn and have far more assets than you?
Or is this a matter of usage ? As in,
"since I only drive on 3 roads in California, I will only pay a small portion of taxes".
"And I never ride a train, so I will not pay taxes for that".
"And I graduated from school and the kids are all grown, so I will not pay school taxes".
And, since I have never seen a terrorist or been attacked, and have never been to Iraq, I refuse to contribute any taxes to that effort"

The list goes on.

Question is: are you going to be a contributing part of a healthy society,
or a grumpy useless hermit ?

Equal taxation as in for every dollar you earn, and every dollar I earn, the same % goes towards the operation of government

I contribute to society and I have actually served society... I have served dutifully in our military, with honor... I contribute to worthwhile causes of my choice.. I work in an industry that a vast majority of people use and rely on... I buy products (both needed and wanted) and put my efforts and earnings into the things that provide many people jobs.. I do things in my community and for those in my community

Have you?

I thank you for your service. I too served in the US military, proudly, as does my elder son.
And I own a couple businesses that employ more than 200 people. Several retail stores and a firm that specializes in real estate renovation and management.
I pay personal and corporate taxes and fees out the ass, and my accountant has assigned a fulltime accountant to handle my increasingly complex affairs. Taxes and fees and legal and clerical expenses are costs of doing business, like fuel and electricity and tools and materials.

We rely upon public services and agencies more than most people or companies.
We have more and more been acquiring foreclosed and vacant properties and renovating. That requires a lot of time talking turkey to local officials about tax credits, and grants and utilities and zoning and building codes and so on.

As you might know, the military is the ultimate socialist/communist enterprise. Soldiers are not asked to purchase their own food adn weapons and supplies, to provide their own transportation and clothing and lodging. They are totally subsidized by the State. Every action and expense of the military is paid by your taxes and mine.
Should we alter that ? Every man for himself, the devil takes the hindmost.

There are important structures that serve a necessary communal functions that individual citizens cannot afford, that require our common agreement to invest governemt funds.
Parks, utilities, municipal buildings, military and law emforcement, Highways, schools, irrigation, etc etc.
There are many boondoggle projetcs that are government failures, or plain stupid or rife with corruption. That is why citizens must be involved and have input over OUR taxpayer money.
But that does not mean we just say NO to all taxpayer funded projects.

Improving our national transportation is crucial. We need to examine how to IMPROVE our national transportation, which is more expensive and more dysfunctional than our northern neighbor, Canada, and Europe's. Those are to some degree, taxpayer subsideized infrstructures that improve the nation as a whole. Same as military and dams and parks and highways, and all other major investments.
If you have been to Europe and travelled the rails, you know the potential. The US is vast, would benefit from a better rail system.
But the trick is - and this is the gist of many posters comments - do it smartly, with eyes open and facts laid out, do NOT make an expensive useless boondoggle.
Back in the 1980s, Buffalo NY built a subway, because that was what the Federal government was handing out funds for. Above ground bus or rail would have been far less expensive, and more capable, but subway it was forced to be.
Buffalo lays on deep bedrock, so they had to blast and tunnel every inch of that one rail line through dolomite. It was the most expensive subway, per mile, in the world.
Today, that single rail line is a nice empty railway tunnel. Underused, costing the city and county millions each year to maintain. A poorly concieved boondoggle, deluxe.

We can improve transportation, to reduce the cost of moving people and goods, but we must do it smartly. THis will take time, and
we need to pay attention to how our taxes are being spent.
But spend, we should, when we can get a positive return to society as a whole.
If my taxes pay for water conservation and filtration in drought areas, it is needed, I don't complain.

 

[DiamondDave]

Ahhh.. the misconception of the military being socialist... I will have to tear this myth apart again later during a break, for about the 4000th time

 

[midcan5]

All the negative comments are amusing but wrong.

Cato is hardly a source for well reasoned fair minded analysis, any organization supported by corporations or ideology needs to viewed in that light.

How many have ridden the Metro in Washington? In Philly, we have the Frankford Elevated and the Broad street subway, both well used.

Go to Paris and ride their Metro, or Spain's metro or train service, Barcelona even has bikes for quick trips in busy areas. Paris is the best I have seen, but we are heading to England on our fortieth.

You ostriches lost the election, and continue to lose credibility as you stand still and the cobwebs grow and bind you tighter. Time to move into the future and alternative means of getting from here to there.

 

[midcan5]

Ahhh.. the misconception of the military being socialist... I will have to tear this myth apart again later during a break, for about the 4000th time

Dave, this is rhetorical use of language and as such it is certainly socialist in terms of a home a bed, a job, healthcare, pension, facilities for everything. One could live on base fort or depot and never leave. Been there, done that.

 

[Newby]

That is great news. Bicycle, subway, monorail, and your two feet, the greenest of all worlds. Some will complain but thankfully we left the cave long ago.

Funny that you talk about leaving the cave while talking about the 'greenest of all worlds'. Isn't that how you would have us all live in order to support your utopia? Like cave men?

 

[Newby]

That is great news. Bicycle, subway, monorail, and your two feet, the greenest of all worlds. Some will complain but thankfully we left the cave long ago.

Wait, you think monorail and subway are "green"? Too much koolaid ... they are supported by "green" scientists because the companies that build, operate, and maintain them funnel a bunch of "donations" to their research. Monorail is cost ineffective, complete waste of money, destructive to the ecosystem, and requires a LOT more space to build than they will tell you. For the subway, that's just too easy to find flaws with, just think about it a moment. The subway is still better than the monorails though, at least they don't drive the city into poverty.

Indeed, the complete text at site:

"High-Speed Rail: The Wrong Road for America" by Randal O'Toole (Cato Institute: Policy Analysis)

High-Speed Rail: The Wrong Road for America

by Randal O'Toole


In the face of high energy prices and concerns about global warming, environmentalists and planners offer high-speed rail as an environmentally friendly alternative to driving and air travel. California, Florida, the Midwest, and other parts of the country are actively considering specific high-speed rail plans.

Close scrutiny of these plans reveals that they do not live up to the hype. As attractive as 110-to 220-mile-per-hour trains might sound, even the most optimistic forecasts predict they will take few cars off the road. At best, they will replace for profit private commuter airlines with heavily subsidized public rail systems that are likely to require continued subsidies far into the future.

Nor are high-speed rail lines particularly environmentally friendly. Planners have predicted that a proposed line in Florida would use more energy and emit more of some pollutants than all of the cars it would take off the road. California planners forecast that high-speed rail would reduce pollutionand greenhouse gas emissions by amere 0.7 to 1.5 percent—but only if ridership reached the high end of projected levels. Lower ridership would nullify energy savings and pollution reductions.

These assessments are confirmed by the actual experience of high-speed rail lines in Japan and Europe. Since Japan introduced high-speed bullet trains, passenger rail has lost more than half its market share to the automobile. Since Italy, France, and other European countries opened their high-speed rail lines, rail's market share in Europe has dwindled from 8.2 to 5.8 percent of travel. If high-speed rail doesn't work in Japan and Europe, how can it work in the United States?

As megaprojects—the California high-speed rail is projected to cost $33 to $37 billion—high-speed rail plans pose serious risks for taxpayers. Costs of recent rail projects in Denver and Seattle are running 60 to 100 percent above projections. Once construction begins, politicians will feel obligated to throw good taxpayers' money after bad. Once projects are completed , most plans call for them to be turned over to private companies that will keep any operational profits,while taxpayers will remain vulnerable if the trains lose money.

In short, high-speed rail proposals are high cost, high-risk megaprojects that promise little or no congestion relief, energy savings, or other environmental benefits. Taxpayers and politicians should be wary of any transportation projects that cannot be paid for out of user fees.

They don't care about facts Annie, if the media tells them it's a 'green' initiative then they're all for it. I still love your avatar.

 

[cunclusion]

Basically this does make alot of sense, but like others say with planning and effiecient implementation it could help alleviate traffic issues and when the cost of energy goes back up which we all know it will this will be a good, cheap and green alternative for travelers.

 

[Jon]

This is something I could get on board with. I would much rather have seen all the stimulus money go to projects like this.

But this is not something we can build in a matter of years. For one, we can't afford it. Two, we have to make sure it will be efficient in our society. But it's something that certainly can begin implementation within this administration.

 

[WorldAHope]

All the negative comments are amusing but wrong.

Cato is hardly a source for well reasoned fair minded analysis, any organization supported by corporations or ideology needs to viewed in that light.

How many have ridden the Metro in Washington? In Philly, we have the Frankford Elevated and the Broad street subway, both well used.

Go to Paris and ride their Metro, or Spain's metro or train service, Barcelona even has bikes for quick trips in busy areas. Paris is the best I have seen, but we are heading to England on our fortieth.

You ostriches lost the election, and continue to lose credibility as you stand still and the cobwebs grow and bind you tighter. Time to move into the future and alternative means of getting from here to there.

Every transportation infrastructure requires government investment. User fees cover all costs of NONE of the any nation's rail systems. Highways are far more inefficient and costly to taxpayers, yet we hear little discussion or complaint about that whopper budgetary burden.

If anyone has flown lately, you've found yourself asking, "why do I torture myself like this ?
wish there was a different to get there way without having to drive...or take a bus..."

High speed rail is just one improvement we need to look at. It is not mandatory, nor is it a panacea.
Some areas would benefit better from improved Intracity and intercity light rails, trolley systems, relatively less expensive and lower speed - as many towns and citiies once had, before cars became so prevalent.
CATO is not the only opinion, but that was a well reasoned essay. Should governments commit to
annual maintenance of systems ? Bus ridership is significantly up in every city over the last year.
Every city that has a municpal bus system is paying the difference between fare/ad reveneue and expenses.
Should these increasingly BUSY bus systems be shut down, or raise their fares so they cover all expenses - well past the affordability point ?
CATO's argument is purely theoretical - meaning it is counter to prevailing practise by virtually all municipal and national rail systems.

NO BOONDOGGLES !!!

 

[DiveCon]

This is something I could get on board with. I would much rather have seen all the stimulus money go to projects like this.

But this is not something we can build in a matter of years. For one, we can't afford it. Two, we have to make sure it will be efficient in our society. But it's something that certainly can begin implementation within this administration.

you mean as opposed to studying why pigs smell for BILLIONS


i cant argue on that point, for sure, something like this would be far more worthy
what i oppose is the WAY they do it
if a national high speed passenger rail service is something deserving of federal tax payer monies, put it in its OWN bill and have a YES/NO vote on it in congress
with nothing else attached to it
then have those congress people support it to their constituents
dont just stick it into a massive misnamed bill and sneak it through