Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
It seems that conservatives are content to have the US trailing other countries.
Of course they would.
They are reactionary oafs dedicated to turning this nation into a third world backwater with big guns and god.
and liberals want to drive us into a debt so deep that the country implodes and joins the eu in buffoonery.
Trains? seriously? You think trains are the end all be all?
Do any of you "people" know that we will soon have a private company offering trips through space to any part of the world?
and you want a new train?
Amtrak is doing so well these days...government subsided even.
ooooReally?
Close to 600 billion a year..not to mention what goes into the covert world and think tanks.
Yet that big shiny expensive military failed to stop a bunch of guys with box cutters from hijacking 4 commercial airliners (That has to be a record) and slamming them into the WTC and pentagon.
Not to mention the clusterfuck of a reaction it caused by YOU guys..that was WAY over a few TRILLION dollars.
and what happened b/c we wasted that Trillion?
c'mon, you can do it.
Afghanistan got to have a US plant that's only a little less corrupt then Al Capone?
Or Iraq got to have a US plant that's only a little less brutal then the guy before him?
Money well spent..by gumption!
Of course they would.
They are reactionary oafs dedicated to turning this nation into a third world backwater with big guns and god.
and liberals want to drive us into a debt so deep that the country implodes and joins the eu in buffoonery.
Trains? seriously? You think trains are the end all be all?
Do any of you "people" know that we will soon have a private company offering trips through space to any part of the world?
and you want a new train?
That should be online any day now..
Back your antigravity boots.
Amtrak is doing so well these days...government subsided even.
Amtrak went out and bought trains that could do over 100 mph and put them on a rail system that at most point can't handle trains traveling over 30 mph.
Do the math.
hmmThe money would be far better spend building an interstate system of bike and pedestrian paths.
We could link every major city to every other major city in the USA for what they're going to spend building one bullet train serving one region.
Not that I do not support hi tech rail, it's just that the pediestian/bike paths would serve far more people in the long run. Plus the upkeep of this system would be peanuts compared to maintaining the roads.
And now is the time to do this sort of project, too
We could easily put a couple million unemployed to work building this system in a kind of WPA project, plus the cost of borrowing money is quite low, now.
Its a win/win both for the people AND the workers.
Additionally, as that system got going, there'd be opportunity for businesses to grow near that system to serve the traveling public.
Just imagine being able to travel from say Maine to Florida or LA to Boston by bike or foot KNOWING that you'll not have to worry about being killed by a drunk driver as you tried to share the road with motorists.
It would be a tiny investment compared to much of the what we spend money on now, folks.
The money would be far better spend building an interstate system of bike and pedestrian paths.
We could link every major city to every other major city in the USA for what they're going to spend building one bullet train serving one region.
Not that I do not support hi tech rail, it's just that the pediestian/bike paths would serve far more people in the long run. Plus the upkeep of this system would be peanuts compared to maintaining the roads.
And now is the time to do this sort of project, too
We could easily put a couple million unemployed to work building this system in a kind of WPA project, plus the cost of borrowing money is quite low, now.
Its a win/win both for the people AND the workers.
Additionally, as that system got going, there'd be opportunity for businesses to grow near that system to serve the traveling public.
Just imagine being able to travel from say Maine to Florida or LA to Boston by bike or foot KNOWING that you'll not have to worry about being killed by a drunk driver as you tried to share the road with motorists.
It would be a tiny investment compared to much of the what we spend money on now, folks.
Amtrak is doing so well these days...government subsided even.
Amtrak went out and bought trains that could do over 100 mph and put them on a rail system that at most point can't handle trains traveling over 30 mph.
Do the math.
They blew through my little town doing 60.
where you getting this info?
and liberals want to drive us into a debt so deep that the country implodes and joins the eu in buffoonery.
Trains? seriously? You think trains are the end all be all?
Do any of you "people" know that we will soon have a private company offering trips through space to any part of the world?
and you want a new train?
That should be online any day now..
Back your antigravity boots.
commercial space flight - Yahoo! Search Results
107,000,000 results
Unlike the bullet train, thats the future
cars were only for the wealthy
That should be online any day now..
Back your antigravity boots.
commercial space flight - Yahoo! Search Results
107,000,000 results
Unlike the bullet train, thats the future
Much as I'd like to see this happen..unless government starts doing things to build the infrastructure for space travel..or makes it commercially viable..
Private space use will be little more then deploying satellites and maybe "boutique" 30 second 100,000 dollar trips for the very wealthy.
cars were only for the wealthycommercial space flight - Yahoo! Search Results
107,000,000 results
Unlike the bullet train, thats the future
Much as I'd like to see this happen..unless government starts doing things to build the infrastructure for space travel..or makes it commercially viable..
Private space use will be little more then deploying satellites and maybe "boutique" 30 second 100,000 dollar trips for the very wealthy.
computers were only for companies and the very rich
cells phones, damn you had to be banking cash to have a car phone
flat sceens
and so on
All new things start with the wealthy then get cheaper and cheaper
all w/o the government fucking it up.
Amtrak is doing so well these days...government subsided even.
Amtrak went out and bought trains that could do over 100 mph and put them on a rail system that at most point can't handle trains traveling over 30 mph.
Do the math.
Amtrak is doing so well these days...government subsided even.
Amtrak went out and bought trains that could do over 100 mph and put them on a rail system that at most point can't handle trains traveling over 30 mph.
Do the math.
Then maybe we should update the current rail system instead of building an entirely new one that few or no one will use!
It would still create jobs and cost a hell of a lot less!
America has been, and will be always attached to their automobile. Bullet trains may initially be a fad, but the cost of this gamble is simply too high. We have an Airline Industry that generally allows for cheap flights that would satisfy the needs of most anyone who need to connect to nearby locations quickly. And for the ones that the Airline cannot satisfy their numbers probably don't warrant the extremely reckless spending involved to make Bullet Trains viable. Comparing America to Europe, and professing we are behind, is a weak argument at best. We are NOT Europe, and we do just fine. I do agree with previous posters in that the Country would be better served by spending much less, and improving upon what we already have in place.
America has been, and will be always attached to their automobile. Bullet trains may initially be a fad, but the cost of this gamble is simply too high. We have an Airline Industry that generally allows for cheap flights that would satisfy the needs of most anyone who need to connect to nearby locations quickly. And for the ones that the Airline cannot satisfy their numbers probably don't warrant the extremely reckless spending involved to make Bullet Trains viable. Comparing America to Europe, and professing we are behind, is a weak argument at best. We are NOT Europe, and we do just fine. I do agree with previous posters in that the Country would be better served by spending much less, and improving upon what we already have in place.
The airline industry is much more subsidized by the government then rail. And it's basically reached criticial mass. There are already to many planes for airports which either means that more airports must be created (on the public dime) or that other ways of transportation be explored. Most of the rest of the world uses high speed rail.
...Despite the subsidies, Amtrak does not provide low-cost transportation. Longtime critic Randal O'Toole of the Cato Institute recently planned a trip from Washington to New York. Noting that fares on Amtrak's high-speed Acela start at $139 one-way, he decided to take a private bus service. The roundtrip fare: $21.50. Nor does Amtrak do much to relieve congestion, cut oil use, reduce pollution or eliminate greenhouse gases. Its traffic volumes are simply too small to matter.
In 2010, Amtrak carried 29.1 million passengers for the entire year. That's about about 4 percent of annual air travel (2010 estimate: 725 million passengers). It's also roughly a quarter of daily automobile commuters (124 million in 2008). Measured by passenger-miles traveled, Amtrak represents one-tenth of 1 percent of the national total.
Rail buffs argue that subsidies for passenger service simply offset the huge government support of highways and airways. The subsidies "level the playing field." Wrong. In 2004, the Transportation Department evaluated federal transportation subsidies from 1990 to 2002. It found passenger rail service had the highest subsidy ($186.35 per thousand passenger-miles) followed by mass transit ($118.26 per thousand miles). By contrast, drivers received no net subsidy; their fuel taxes more than covered federal spending. Subsidies for airline passengers were about $5 per thousand miles traveled. (All figures are in inflation-adjusted year 2000 dollars.)
High-speed rail would transform Amtrak's small drain into a much larger drain. Once built, high-speed-rail systems would face a dilemma. To recoup initial capital costs - construction and train purchases - ticket prices would have to be set so high that few people would choose rail. But lower prices, even with favorable passenger loads, might not cover costs. Government would be stuck with huge subsidies. Even without recovering capital costs, high-speed-rail systems would probably run in the red. Most mass-transit systems, despite high ridership, routinely have deficits...
Governing ought to be about making wise choices. What's disheartening about the Obama administration's embrace of high-speed rail is that it ignores history, evidence and logic. The case against it is overwhelming. The case in favor rests on fashionable platitudes. High-speed rail is not an "investment in the future"; it's mostly a waste of money. Good government can't solve all our problems, but it can at least not make them worse.
I don't know the particular details of this specific project. It may or may not be badly thought out and put together and should be judged on its merits.
That being said, I believe it is a mistake for the US not to develop its high-speed rail infrastructure more. This actually would be a good long-term investment, provided of course that the individual projects make economic sense.
cars were only for the wealthy
Much as I'd like to see this happen..unless government starts doing things to build the infrastructure for space travel..or makes it commercially viable..
Private space use will be little more then deploying satellites and maybe "boutique" 30 second 100,000 dollar trips for the very wealthy.
computers were only for companies and the very rich
cells phones, damn you had to be banking cash to have a car phone
flat sceens
and so on
All new things start with the wealthy then get cheaper and cheaper
all w/o the government fucking it up.
Oh gosh, really?
Really? History that much of an abstact concept for you?
Cars didn't really come into their own..until government built interstate roads.
Computers didn't get all that popular until government improved the telecommunications backbone and developed the coding that now makes up UNIX and the communication protocols you call the internet.
Most tech, we see out there nowadays..was developed in government labs.
Gosh.
