Millions out of work - a crumbling infrastructure - I have an idea!

[rdean]

Republicans have spent trillions on Iraq and Afghanistan. During the presidential debate, Romney said we should invest in economies and schools and infrastructure overseas.

What will it take to get conservatives to want to invest in this country?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Republicans have spent trillions on Iraq and Afghanistan. During the presidential debate, Romney said we should invest in economies and schools and infrastructure overseas.

What will it take to get conservatives to want to invest in this country?

I love it when idiots talk about crumbling infrastructure like it actually means something. Tell me something, do you have any idea why the Secretary of Transportation wants federal transportation funds, which should be used to maintain that infrastructure, to be diverted to a bullet train project in California? Wouldn't it make more sense to use that money to invest in the entire country than support a politically favored fat cat who wants to line his pockets?

 

[Mad Scientist]

Republicans have spent trillions on Iraq and Afghanistan. During the presidential debate, Romney said we should invest in economies and schools and infrastructure overseas.

What will it take to get conservatives to want to invest in this country?

The Election is over, Obama "won".

Will Obama keep his campaign promise from 2008 and bring the troops home?

Let's see $700 Billion is Stimulus didn't work. I have an idea!

More Stimulus!

 

[Mad Scientist]

Republicans have spent trillions on Iraq and Afghanistan. During the presidential debate, Romney said we should invest in economies and schools and infrastructure overseas.

What will it take to get conservatives to want to invest in this country?

I love it when idiots talk about crumbling infrastructure like it actually means something. Tell me something, do you have any idea why the Secretary of Transportation wants federal transportation funds, which should be used to maintain that infrastructure, to be diverted to a bullet train project in California? Wouldn't it make more sense to use that money to invest in the entire country than support a politically favored fat cat who wants to line his pockets?

But, but, but the Infrastructure is crumbling! Why do you support infrastructure that crumbles?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Republicans have spent trillions on Iraq and Afghanistan. During the presidential debate, Romney said we should invest in economies and schools and infrastructure overseas.

What will it take to get conservatives to want to invest in this country?

I love it when idiots talk about crumbling infrastructure like it actually means something. Tell me something, do you have any idea why the Secretary of Transportation wants federal transportation funds, which should be used to maintain that infrastructure, to be diverted to a bullet train project in California? Wouldn't it make more sense to use that money to invest in the entire country than support a politically favored fat cat who wants to line his pockets?

But, but, but the Infrastructure is crumbling! Why do you support infrastructure that crumbles?

Because I LOVE crumb cake.

 

[Rshermr]

Republicans have spent trillions on Iraq and Afghanistan. During the presidential debate, Romney said we should invest in economies and schools and infrastructure overseas.

What will it take to get conservatives to want to invest in this country?

The Election is over, Obama "won".

Will Obama keep his campaign promise from 2008 and bring the troops home?

Let's see $700 Billion is Stimulus didn't work. I have an idea!

More Stimulus!

So, Mad. You say the stimulus did not work. The CBO says it did. Who should I believe??? A con tool like Mad, or the CBO. Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Tough choice, but my money is on the CBO.

 

[Rshermr]

Republicans have spent trillions on Iraq and Afghanistan. During the presidential debate, Romney said we should invest in economies and schools and infrastructure overseas.

What will it take to get conservatives to want to invest in this country?

I love it when idiots talk about crumbling infrastructure like it actually means something. Tell me something, do you have any idea why the Secretary of Transportation wants federal transportation funds, which should be used to maintain that infrastructure, to be diverted to a bullet train project in California? Wouldn't it make more sense to use that money to invest in the entire country than support a politically favored fat cat who wants to line his pockets?

And there goes Windbag. Who would have guessed that he would be against infrastructure spending. And who would have believed he would bring up bullett trains, like they made no sense? Or that he would accuse those in favor of "supporting a politically favored fat cat who wants to line his pockets"?

Why any of us would. And we would know that Windbag has no evidence that infrastructure spending does not stimulate the economy. And that he has no evidence that a fat cat is to be supported in building a bullet train in California. It is just Windbag, doing what windbag does. He is posting con dogma. Because that is what windbag is capable of.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Republicans have spent trillions on Iraq and Afghanistan. During the presidential debate, Romney said we should invest in economies and schools and infrastructure overseas.

What will it take to get conservatives to want to invest in this country?

I love it when idiots talk about crumbling infrastructure like it actually means something. Tell me something, do you have any idea why the Secretary of Transportation wants federal transportation funds, which should be used to maintain that infrastructure, to be diverted to a bullet train project in California? Wouldn't it make more sense to use that money to invest in the entire country than support a politically favored fat cat who wants to line his pockets?

And there goes Windbag. Who would have guessed that he would be against infrastructure spending. And who would have believed he would bring up bullett trains, like they made no sense? Or that he would accuse those in favor of "supporting a politically favored fat cat who wants to line his pockets"?

Why any of us would. And we would know that Windbag has no evidence that infrastructure spending does not stimulate the economy. And that he has no evidence that a fat cat is to be supported in building a bullet train in California. It is just Windbag, doing what windbag does. He is posting con dogma. Because that is what windbag is capable of.

Being against federal spending on bullet trains that run between two small cities in central California is not the same as being opposed to infrastructure spending. If bullet trains actually made sense, it wouldn't take 3 trains and longer than it takes to fly from San Francisco to New York to take a bullet train from San Francisco to Los Angeles. We would also see private sector investment in making it happen, the same way we see private sector investment in maintaining rail lines for freight trains.

Please, I beg you, try to justify investing in 19th century technology in the 21st century and call yourself a progressive, I enjoy trashing the idiots who think trains are new.

 

[daveman]

Derpy wants unskilled and untrained people building infrastructure.

Only a leftist would think that's a good idea.

But then, leftists are stupid.

 

[Avorysuds]

Republicans have spent trillions on Iraq and Afghanistan. During the presidential debate, Romney said we should invest in economies and schools and infrastructure overseas.

What will it take to get conservatives to want to invest in this country?

Many many Dems voted for the wars, then after obtaining a super majority (not that they needed it) Obama and Dems spent Trillions on military, more than Bush year by year. If you attack Republicans over military spending and war spending then wouldn't you have to attack Democrats seeing as they spend more on it?

Obama and Dems will have spent far more on wars than Bush by the end of Obama's second term. The only reason the Iraq war ended was because of Bush, Obama tried to stay in... Dems have been in power in congress since 2006, the last 2 years of Bush's Presidency.

Republicans are for the most part progressive liberal big spenders, to pretend either party is any different when they actually have power makes you just look hyper partisan or flat out stupid. Obama used to vote against raising the debt ceiling, now he wants to have congress concede that power to a king, him… Dems ran off stopping wars and Bush’s mass spending, now they spend more than Reps. Same goes for Republicans.


Oddly, despite the OP being a flat out misguided in their one sided hate they will continue their bigotry because their hate is not really based off ignorance but in fact is purposeful. In this day in age it's just too hard to be this out of touch with reality, the OP is simply a liar and a hater, nothing more.

 

[Rozman]

I thought the election was over...

 

[Rshermr]

So, Windbag says:

Being against federal spending on bullet trains that run between two small cities in central California is not the same as being opposed to infrastructure spending.

Why am I surprised that Windbag is lying. The train is projected to run from Sacramento to San Diego. Sorry, but those would not be considered small cities. And yes, there are small cities in central California that will be served. But they are not the reason for the train.

If bullet trains actually made sense, it wouldn't take 3 trains and longer than it takes to fly from San Francisco to New York to take a bullet train from San Francisco to Los Angeles.

It does not. Projections are between 2.5 and 3.5 hours. Try driving to the airport, getting there early enough to get through security, waiting for a gate, and so forth at a couple airports. And then consider the cost difference.

We would also see private sector investment in making it happen, the same way we see private sector investment in maintaining rail lines for freight trains.

Uh, Windbag, nice try. Apples and oranges you know. One is maintaining old technology, the other is building new technology.

Please, I beg you, try to justify investing in 19th century technology in the 21st century and call yourself a progressive, I enjoy trashing the idiots who think trains are new

Really? They had high speed trains in the 1800's?? You know something no one else knows. How did they hide that technology for all of those years??

Currently the only high-speed train in the United States, Acela runs from Washington, D.C., to Boston via Baltimore, Philadelphia and New York. It is the only part of Amtrak's network that actually makes money instead of losing it, and has been gobbling market share from commercial airlines. According to a recent New York Times story, 75% of travelers between New York and Washington now go by train; before Acela's arrival in 2000, only about one-third of travelers between those cities chose Amtrak.
Here you go. An actual link to an article about the bullet train system in California. You know, Windbag, actual link.
Business travelers prefer Acela to flying because the train has power outlets, Wi-Fi and cellphone access, making it easy to work during the trip. They also don't face the security hassles of airports nor the long ground travel and waiting times that can erase the speed advantage of airplanes.
Acela defies California's bullet-train naysayers - Los Angeles Times

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Republicans have spent trillions on Iraq and Afghanistan. During the presidential debate, Romney said we should invest in economies and schools and infrastructure overseas.

What will it take to get conservatives to want to invest in this country?

Wasn't that filibustered early on?

Get rid of over the road trucking. Replace it with trains and train truckers to work on trains. Then, offload at the destination and truck goods that last bit. We'd be out from under middle east oil in a very few years.

Yeah, its the obvious thing to do but the pubs will never allow anything that could help our economy that much. The R would never allow the money for retraining, for infrastructure and they sure as hell don't want us energy independent.

Now, if there is a way to make it pay China or other countries or, or that matter, the Kochs, that would be a different story. The GObP would love it.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

High speed trains really are amazing. We took a regular train from Paris to Carcassonne in the south of France in the wine country.

Photos are in case you might be interested in traveling there. It is an amazing experience.

Anyway, we stayed there a few days and then took the high speed train from there to the other end of France and to Belgium. We left mid-morning, had wonderful food on the train, sat back and enjoyed the scenery. The cost was minimal, very pleasant trip and we arrived in Belgium feeling terrific.

But, sadly, Europe is way ahead of us in this way too.

Here in the US, we do have the Zip cars in some cities - like Boston. You pick up a car where ever you happen to be and leave it where ever you happen to be. Its cheap and convenient.

Some cities have bicycles and in Europe they have the very cool little two wheeled, stand up scooter things.

It really is stupid of us to keep on sucking down the gas when we know it will someday run out, its dirty and its its expensive.

But, we're the United States and we take pride in using more than our fair share, especially if it harms others.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Republicans have spent trillions on Iraq and Afghanistan. During the presidential debate, Romney said we should invest in economies and schools and infrastructure overseas.

What will it take to get conservatives to want to invest in this country?

R "Shovel Ready" Dean

 

[asterism]

Republicans have spent trillions on Iraq and Afghanistan. During the presidential debate, Romney said we should invest in economies and schools and infrastructure overseas.

What will it take to get conservatives to want to invest in this country?

Wasn't that filibustered early on?

Get rid of over the road trucking. Replace it with trains and train truckers to work on trains. Then, offload at the destination and truck goods that last bit. We'd be out from under middle east oil in a very few years.

Yeah, its the obvious thing to do but the pubs will never allow anything that could help our economy that much. The R would never allow the money for retraining, for infrastructure and they sure as hell don't want us energy independent.

Now, if there is a way to make it pay China or other countries or, or that matter, the Kochs, that would be a different story. The GObP would love it.

You have no data to back up your claims. What do you think trains run on?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Republicans have spent trillions on Iraq and Afghanistan. During the presidential debate, Romney said we should invest in economies and schools and infrastructure overseas.

What will it take to get conservatives to want to invest in this country?

Wasn't that filibustered early on?

Get rid of over the road trucking. Replace it with trains and train truckers to work on trains. Then, offload at the destination and truck goods that last bit. We'd be out from under middle east oil in a very few years.

Yeah, its the obvious thing to do but the pubs will never allow anything that could help our economy that much. The R would never allow the money for retraining, for infrastructure and they sure as hell don't want us energy independent.

Now, if there is a way to make it pay China or other countries or, or that matter, the Kochs, that would be a different story. The GObP would love it.

You have no data to back up your claims. What do you think trains run on?

A whole hell of a lot less fuel than the hundreds of thousands of cars they could replace.

And THAT is why the pubpots are against it.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Hey! What if we ask Jon "I Stole $1.2 Billion from my clients and got away scot free" Corzine to come up with a Failed Stimulus Plan to fund "Shovel Ready" projects!

Think of the Infrastructure!

 

[rdean]

Republicans have spent trillions on Iraq and Afghanistan. During the presidential debate, Romney said we should invest in economies and schools and infrastructure overseas.

What will it take to get conservatives to want to invest in this country?

I love it when idiots talk about crumbling infrastructure like it actually means something. Tell me something, do you have any idea why the Secretary of Transportation wants federal transportation funds, which should be used to maintain that infrastructure, to be diverted to a bullet train project in California? Wouldn't it make more sense to use that money to invest in the entire country than support a politically favored fat cat who wants to line his pockets?

The structural failure injury attorneys at Denena and Points remark that transportation experts have been calling attention to the aging U.S. highway infrastructure over recent years. Especially in bridges and elevated portions of the interstates, wear and tear caused by aging materials and long use by heavy trucks have led to weaknesses in these structures that hold the potential for eventual collapse.

Sudden structural collapses, like the failure of the I-35W Bridge in Minneapolis in 2007, can result in multiple deaths and severe injuries. The Minneapolis bridge collapse injured 145 people and killed 13.

U.S. researchers investigate potential new aid to structural stability

I think it's pathetic when ignorant dumb fucks point to a crumbling infrastructure and insist it means "nothing".

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Why am I surprised that Windbag is lying. The train is projected to run from Sacramento to San Diego. Sorry, but those would not be considered small cities. And yes, there are small cities in central California that will be served. But they are not the reason for the train.

You must think I am dumber than you are. The first leg is going from Merced to Fresno, you want to tell me how many people are going to ride that? Even if they manage to build the whole thing, and it actually goes from LA to Sacremento, why is the federal government supporting it? Want to tell me how that has anything to do with the general welfare of the union, or why gasoline tax money should be diverted to support it?

It does not. Projections are between 2.5 and 3.5 hours. Try driving to the airport, getting there early enough to get through security, waiting for a gate, and so forth at a couple airports. And then consider the cost difference.

Projections and reality do not always meet. If you lived in California you would know that.

Uh, Windbag, nice try. Apples and oranges you know. One is maintaining old technology, the other is building new technology.

One is something that is economically feasible, the other is a government boondoggle.

Really? They had high speed trains in the 1800's?? You know something no one else knows. How did they hide that technology for all of those years??

Actually, I know history. Steam locomotives were capable of 90+ mph speeds, and diesel trains have set been clocked at 200 mph

Currently the only high-speed train in the United States, Acela runs from Washington, D.C., to Boston via Baltimore, Philadelphia and New York. It is the only part of Amtrak's network that actually makes money instead of losing it, and has been gobbling market share from commercial airlines. According to a recent New York Times story, 75% of travelers between New York and Washington now go by train; before Acela's arrival in 2000, only about one-third of travelers between those cities chose Amtrak.
Here you go. An actual link to an article about the bullet train system in California. You know, Windbag, actual link.
Business travelers prefer Acela to flying because the train has power outlets, Wi-Fi and cellphone access, making it easy to work during the trip. They also don't face the security hassles of airports nor the long ground travel and waiting times that can erase the speed advantage of airplanes.
Acela defies California's bullet-train naysayers - Los Angeles Times

You want links?

Land speed record for rail vehicles - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia