Poll: High-Speed Rail for $53b

[Soggy in NOLA]

When the righties said they wanted their country back, it meant back to the Stone Age technologically. speaking.

"Our opponents say they want to take America back. I say let’s take America forward." - Rep. Alan Grayson​

Come on, you can't be this big a simpleton.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Breaking even is great.

Maybe so, but here in America we have this problem that we're spread out over a large geographical area. Like all but those two exception, I don't think we'd break even. We'd probably have hemorrage-like losses.

See: Amtrak

 

[The Joe]

Moron alert!!!

You're right...you have crush on Clay Aiken and I'm a moron for paying for everything you want. You're so worthless in life that you can't figure out to provide for yourself. How long will it be before you have the government tax us to provide somebody to feed you and wipe your ass?

I agree with the bolded.

Really?

 

[Synthaholic]

You have an interstate highway system linking all the major cities across the nation. You build the HSR on pylons in the median between opposing lanes. The land is already there, use it and follow the road routes. There would only be minimal right of way needs where the rail would split for the road coming into stations in the cities.

The other thing different about HSR over say airline travel is that you can't hijack a train to another country or turn it into a missle or knock it out of the sky. TSA anal probes would not be necessary and people could travel more quickly and easily. Unlike a plane, if you need additional passenger or luggage storage, you just insert another car.

With a plane you only need to protect the entry points to the plane. How do you protect a thousand miles of track? Knocking off a train will kill more passengers than a plane

Well, if you run them down the median of the interstate system, it becomes a little obvious when Mohammed and Hakim are trying to strap a bomb to a pylon. Terrorist use things that strike fear into peoples hearts. Many people fear flying and falling 30,000 feet out of the sky. How many people do you know who fear riding on a train? While they COULD kill more people on a train, the psychological impact just ins't the same and that is part of what they are looking for. We already have passenger trains and busses. How many terrorist attackes against them have you heard of? The only difference between a passenger train and HSR is speed.

If terrorists wanted to attack trains, what's kept them from doing so by now? We have trains and subways in many cities.

 

[The T]

There are only two HSR systems worldwide that don't require extensive government subsidies to remain in operation.

Tokyo-Osaka
Paris-Lyon

Two very busy lines... but not profitable...they only break even...

“High-speed rail is good for society and it’s good for the environment, but it’s not a profitable business,” said Mr. Barrón of the International Union of Railways. He reckons that only two routes in the world — between Tokyo and Osaka, and between Paris and Lyon, France — have broken even.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/30/b...l=1&adxnnlx=1297285439-0nEwN/6P0PVM4WaPc16bgg

Breaking even is great.

Breaking even is an unacceptable compromise to REAL Americans.

 

[The T]

You're right...you have crush on Clay Aikenand I'm a moron for paying for everything you want. You're so worthless in life that you can't figure out to provide for yourself. How long will it be before you have the government tax us to provide somebody to feed you and wipe your ass?

I agree with the bolded.

Really?

 

[Faccops]

Breaking even is great.

Maybe so, but here in America we have this problem that we're spread out over a large geographical area. Like all but those two exception, I don't think we'd break even. We'd probably have hemorrage-like losses.

See: Amtrak

Exactly.

 

[daveman]

Yeah, I know - it's your Entitlement Mentality. Doesn't matter if it's in the Constitution, right?

You must have me confused with...you.

Defense spending is in the Constitution, no matter how much you stamp your feet and pout.

However, the Constitution does not authorize the Federal government to build transportation systems. Period. End of story. I know this will come as a shock to you, but just because Obama wants something doesn't make it Constitutional.

The only thing the Constitution allows for is to post roads. Anything else requires Amendment.

Or legislation from the bench.

 

[kwc57]

You have an interstate highway system linking all the major cities across the nation. You build the HSR on pylons in the median between opposing lanes. The land is already there, use it and follow the road routes. There would only be minimal right of way needs where the rail would split for the road coming into stations in the cities.

There's plenty of room in the medians...until you get to an overpass.

If you can stack roads, you can certainly go up and over an overpass.

View attachment 12809

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

The USA is all about the cars .We come and go as well please.
We wont change until gas is 20 $ a gallon
Ive been on trains and public transportation around the world.
It works cause their is a bus or train every 10 minutes and people have been trained to walk the last half mile or so.
In America I would hope we had a revolution in technology and politics before we became europian flavor sheep.

 

[daveman]

You have an interstate highway system linking all the major cities across the nation. You build the HSR on pylons in the median between opposing lanes. The land is already there, use it and follow the road routes. There would only be minimal right of way needs where the rail would split for the road coming into stations in the cities.

There's plenty of room in the medians...until you get to an overpass.

If you can stack roads, you can certainly go up and over an overpass.

View attachment 12809

A high-speed train going up and over something probably isn't a good idea:

 

[SgtMeowenstein]

The rest of the world is also passing us by in killing Christians and mutilating woman.. Should we catch up with those as well?

While I love the fact that you have the Trailer Park Boys as your avatar - Let's go, two smokes - you are wrong on this subject. High speed rail is essential to ke-ep up with the growing needs of commuters in the US.

Name one need we need to keep up with. Also, how far away from work do you live? 500 miles?

If you lived in a congested area like New England, where it takes you an hour to drive a few miles because of all of the traffic, you wouldn't even ask such a silly question. Besides easing the commute isn't the only benefit to a good rail system. It will lessen our dependence on foreign oil. And it would be a huge infrastructure project - employing thousands for construction, and more for operational positions. Why do cons hate progress so much?

 

[Trajan]

I have posted this a few times, so I am gonna just provide the pay off pitch- the high speed rail in cali has been a dream decades, over the last 5 years they have done the skut work- they did all the studies, cost analysis etc. the draw was getting people off airplanes oand onto trains, say SF to LA and all point sin between....they studied and the data sppted a price point where in a train ticket as opposed to an airline ticket made it enviable and cost effective for a consumer to go by train. So it paid to do it....

well, 2 years later and as the studies started turning to concrete proposals it appears that the cross over point has receded. It is no longer under the price point they need, there fore the draw to get folks into the train is now an illusion. Its really that simple.

add to that, nothing they do comes in on budget, the big dig started at 2.6b and ballooned to over 10 billion, ending up at a cost of 22 Billion, read that again, 22 billion, 10 times the original cost ( inflation can scrape off 10% of the total so 18 billion, screw it lets say 15 billion....) and it started in 1991 and only ended in 2007.

 

[rdean]

I knew we'd see the claim we can't afford it! But,,,,,,

The Military Industrial Complex just keeps on humming.

Monies spent on Military spending (2009) and percentage of GDP.

1 United States 663,255,000,000 4.3%

2 China 98,800,000,000 2.0%

3 United Kingdom 69,271,000,000 2.5%

4 France 67,316,000,000 2.3%

5 Russian Federation 61,000,000,000 3.5%

6 Germany 48,022,000,000 1.3%

7 Japan 46,859,000,000 0.9%

8 Saudi Arabia 39,257,000,000 8.2%

The US already spends more than the rest of the World combined.

And then people complain that we don't have the funds to make America a better country, ala infrastructure, education and quality of life.

Find me an economist who doesn't agree having a solid and competitive infrastructure is good for the US economy.

I understand the apprehension of the government running a high speed rail, but there has been an increase of the private sector working with the government regarding the US infrastructure.

We pay for the military for PROTECTION......a faster train does not protect you....

If we can afford HSR then why can't we afford to fix our roads and bridges FIRST....that is...if you want a "solid and competitive infrastructure".....?

Have you asked the Republican leadership? You might want to start there.

 

[rdean]

While I love the fact that you have the Trailer Park Boys as your avatar - Let's go, two smokes - you are wrong on this subject. High speed rail is essential to ke-ep up with the growing needs of commuters in the US.

Name one need we need to keep up with. Also, how far away from work do you live? 500 miles?

If you lived in a congested area like New England, where it takes you an hour to drive a few miles because of all of the traffic, you wouldn't even ask such a silly question. Besides easing the commute isn't the only benefit to a good rail system. It will lessen our dependence on foreign oil. And it would be a huge infrastructure project - employing thousands for construction, and more for operational positions. Why do cons hate progress so much?

Because most of the time, it involves "science".

 

[westwall]

While I love the fact that you have the Trailer Park Boys as your avatar - Let's go, two smokes - you are wrong on this subject. High speed rail is essential to ke-ep up with the growing needs of commuters in the US.

Name one need we need to keep up with. Also, how far away from work do you live? 500 miles?

If you lived in a congested area like New England, where it takes you an hour to drive a few miles because of all of the traffic, you wouldn't even ask such a silly question. Besides easing the commute isn't the only benefit to a good rail system. It will lessen our dependence on foreign oil. And it would be a huge infrastructure project - employing thousands for construction, and more for operational positions. Why do cons hate progress so much?

If you were serious about helping workers you would make sure that employers had to let those who can telework. Nothing else gets people off the roads, improves their work/life balance, reduces fuel consumption etc. etc. etc. HSR is a multi billion dollar boondoggle that will never do what is claimed of it. Just because you have a HSR system you still would have to get the employees from the train to their work, good luck with all those buses and cabs.

 

[KissMy]

When the righties said they wanted their country back, it meant back to the Stone Age technologically. speaking.

Trains are Stone-Age technology. Railroads replaced horse & buggy Trails. The Interstate Highway System Replaced Railroads. Roads, Automobiles Motorcycles & Jet Aircraft are modern technology. Flying Cars, Jet Packs, Rockets, Rocket-Pack & Flying Saucers are the future.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EP3JIrJMrrY&NR=1&feature=fvwp"]Rocket-Pack[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtI1GP147Cs&feature=related"]Jet-Pack[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2Pbq6cqY40&feature=related"]Personal Helicopter [/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqxygnJIQVo"]Hoverwing[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYFEFekPzDM&feature=related"]AirFish[/ame]

 

[The T]

There's plenty of room in the medians...until you get to an overpass.

If you can stack roads, you can certainly go up and over an overpass.

View attachment 12809

A high-speed train going up and over something probably isn't a good idea:

Unless you happen to own one of these:

 

[daveman]

Unless you happen to own one of these:

"Where we're going, we don't need...railroads."