[ARCHIVED THREAD] - California High Speed Rail (Page 1 of 4)
Posted: 7/6/2012 3:41:06 PM EDT
Just heard on the radio that the dipshits in Sacramento passed the funding bill for this boondoggle. |
|
The liberals are right. We should be more like Europe. We should have high-speed rail. We should have an official language. We should have a long-term military presence in former colonies. We should have official approval of tacit anti-semitism. We should have home-grown terrorist and secessionist movements. Etc... |
|
Quoted:
The liberals are right. We should be more like Europe. We should have high-speed rail. We should have an official language. We should have a long-term military presence in former colonies. We should have official approval of tacit anti-semitism. We should have home-grown terrorist and secessionist movements. Etc... We should have eight dollar a gallon gas. 
|
|
Awesome. Is this the one that is suppose to link up with our own ridiculous train from Vegas to Victorville ... ? I can't believe that either state is dumping money into these things right now. Fiscal responsibility, psshh. Let's just build stupid shit that no one needs and raise everyone's taxes to pay for it.
|
|
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/06/california-approves-funding-for-high-speed-rail-line/#ixzz1ztDUxtwF The bill authorizes the state to begin selling $2.6 billion in voter-approved bonds to build an initial 130-mile stretch in the Central Valley. Que the BCT crew that think this is a good idea.  |
|
Quoted:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/06/california-approves-funding-for-high-speed-rail-line/#ixzz1ztDUxtwF The bill authorizes the state to begin selling $2.6 billion in voter-approved bonds to build an initial 130-mile stretch in the Central Valley. Que the BCT crew that think this is a good idea.
$3,800 per foot. Just for the state portion.
|
|
Quoted: We do need high speed rail in America. I know it's cool to hate things liberals love, but high speed rail is a good thing. Now, if they could manage to build it for less than 200 billion a mile or whatever it's going to cost, I'd be a huge fan. High speed rail is not a good thing. As a country, we are too spread out for it to make sense. Hell, the only reason it works in Europe is because things are close together and it is heavily subsidized by the governments. |
|
Quoted:
We do need high speed rail in America. I know it's cool to hate things liberals love, but high speed rail is a good thing. CA does NOT need "high speed rail". What precise objective would be served? It can't go from SoCal to the rest of the state... mountains in the way. And what would be the benefit of a train ride from LA to Sacramento when you can fly it now in less time for not a lot of money? It's a boondoggle, period. After spending far more money than they thought it would cost, we'll be left with far less than they promised, along with thousands more unionized employees all demanding pensions and huge, mounting ongoing O&M costs. And then the solution will be... more high-speed rail! |
|
Quoted:
The liberals are right. We should be more like Europe. We should have high-speed rail. We should have an official language. We should have a long-term military presence in former colonies. We should have official approval of tacit anti-semitism. We should have home-grown terrorist and secessionist movements. Etc... And we should have states in our union like Greece who's citizens have learned to love the non-productive, Occupy Wall Street lifestyle and need a massive influx of other people's money to stay afloat. Oh, wait, we have Kalifornia... |
|
Quoted: Hawaii has a boondoggle rail that is estimated to cost $5 Billion....BILLON! Which will probably end up being $7 Billion...BILLON! IF it ever gets completed. The goal is to reduce traffic by 1.7% by 2022. WTF!!!! Why the fuck does Hawaii need high-speed rail? |
|
Quoted:
We do need high speed rail in America. I know it's cool to hate things liberals love, but high speed rail is a good thing. Now, if they could manage to build it for less than 200 billion a mile or whatever it's going to cost, I'd be a huge fan. Because AMTRAC makes so much $
|
For me it's a fiscal issue. Cali is bankrupt, NV is barely hanging on and each state government is spending millions (billions, who knows) on this thing, all the while laying off state and county workers because there is no money to pay them. It's basic budgeting that seems to have been forgotten: if I can't pay my electric bill, I'm not going to buy a new pair of shoes or a handbag (or guns and ammo, for you boys out there  ). If the government can't pay it's state workers, a high speed train should not even be on their radar.
I think a high speed train would be cool as shit, but now is not the time to buy it. |
|
I flew from BUR to SFO and it was an hour's flight. Why take some stupid train when you can fly? Or better, can't you just take the 5 to the 80 and into SF that way?
The whole idea of high speed rail from LA to SF is just riflecocked. After all, they already have a rail that goes from Morgan Hill to SF. |
|
When I first heard the bare bones about it a couple years ago I thought it was great. Bullet train between LA and San Fran, with a connection to San Diego maybe later.
Then the usual CA politics began. To get votes they altered the route through every one horse town in the state. That jacked up the price so they decided to use the right of way they already had for Amtrack and freight. That line's not good for high speed so the new train will be only a bit faster than what they have now. Not "high speed" at all. Then the Vegas connection came up. To do that they have to route the train through the high desert, not up the 5. That's at least 100 Miles out of the way to San Fran. Then they said they planned to start the project in the middle, near Merced. WTF?? Who lives there? Who would use it?? The Senator fron Merced, that's who. That and the work crews building the dumb thing. So, it's become a jobs program for the middle of CA where nobody lives. And last but not least the cost estimate was released. Billions overbudget. Fuck that noise! |
|
Quoted: We do need high speed rail in America. I know it's cool to hate things liberals love, but high speed rail is a good thing. Now, if they could manage to build it for less than 200 billion a mile or whatever it's going to cost, I'd be a huge fan. Negatory, ghostrider. Who the hell ever put that idea in your head needs some blunt force trauma. We are not Europe, this country is spread the fuck out with only about 12% of it's real estate developed. A high speed rail system here is going to be running over a LOT of vacant land. Just like our highways do, only at 5,000 times the cost.
|
|
Quoted:
We do need high speed rail in America. I know it's cool to hate things liberals love, but high speed rail is a good thing. Now, if they could manage to build it for less than 200 billion a mile or whatever it's going to cost, I'd be a huge fan. Who is "we"? Speak for yourself. I don't need high speed rail, and I sure as hell don't want to pay for another states high speed rail. |
|
Quoted: Take the train to where? When folks don't have jobs, train, planes, automobiles don't matter. That is a temporary jobs fix for a long term problem of unemployment. Let's not forget that Californians LOVE their cars. Why would they take a train? I don't plan on taking a fucking train anywhere. I've been on bart before when I basically had no choice, let's just say that I don't like being in gen pop all that much.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
We do need high speed rail in America. I know it's cool to hate things liberals love, but high speed rail is a good thing. Now, if they could manage to build it for less than 200 billion a mile or whatever it's going to cost, I'd be a huge fan. High speed rail is not a good thing. As a country, we are too spread out for it to make sense. Hell, the only reason it works in Europe is because things are close together and it is heavily subsidized by the governments. This. I remember when Erie Lackawanna ran the commuter trains in New Jersey. The state bankrupted them. Conrail got the lines. They didn't want them, either. Meanwhile, the trains ran stuffed full every day and the infrastructure was long ago paid for, but Conrail didn't want it (or Metro North or the LIRR) because they knew it would never turn a profit. New Jersey bought it, the train cars are packed, so are the buses, it generates a billion dollars a year in revenue and they need almost a 50% subsidy. Now they're going to rebuild the tracks on right of ways that already exist to go seven more miles out to western NJ. It's only $37,000,000. |
|
Being a Hawaii resident, the reason for the proposed high speed rail is the state has pretty much since inception been controlled by the Democrats. Hawaii is pro union labor, the unions control the government.
When the voters go to the polls to vote they cannot logically reason whom to vote for, it is automatic to vote Democrat. I'm sure if you combine the majority of citizens in Hawaii, they fail to possess a single brain cell among them. |
|
Quoted: Being a Hawaii resident, the reason for the proposed high speed rail is the state has pretty much since inception been controlled by the Democrats. Hawaii is pro union labor, the unions control the government. When the voters go to the polls to vote they cannot logically reason whom to vote for, it is automatic to vote Democrat. I'm sure if you combine the majority of citizens in Hawaii, they fail to possess a single brain cell among them. Icehead! Go with christ, brah.
|
|
Quoted:
Just heard on the radio that the dipshits in Sacramento passed the funding bill for this boondoggle. Oh for god's sake. Next stop, Ogdonville... There's a good chance that pile of crap will pass within about 200 yards of my house if they take it to the full plan. Hate the idea of that thing, I am fine with the heavy freight trains that go by but they can take that high speed rail and cram it up their ass. Quoted:
We do need high speed rail in America. I know it's cool to hate things liberals love, but high speed rail is a good thing. Now, if they could manage to build it for less than 200 billion a mile or whatever it's going to cost, I'd be a huge fan. My city/town doesn't need the kind of people that support high speed rail. They can run it from Fresno to the bay area but keep it out of Kern County or take it along the I5 corridor connect with Los Angeles. Oh, and I am going to laugh my ass off continuously at the notion of them cutting tracks through the Grapevine area to connect it to Los Angeles. So again, go ahead and do Fresno to bay area cause coming to Kern County is pointless. There is absolutely zero reason why I would subject myself to a ground based version of air travel when I can just drive my damned car to where I want to go. So, again, don't need or want the people that are huge fans of high speed rail. If the 6 or so AmTrak trains that go up and down the valley are not good enough for you then tough shit. High speed rail will be a huge subsidized failure to the point of making the standard form of passenger rail look modest. |
|
Quoted:
CA does NOT need "high speed rail". What precise objective would be served? It can't go from SoCal to the rest of the state... mountains in the way. And what would be the benefit of a train ride from LA to Sacramento when you can fly it now in less time for not a lot of money? It's a boondoggle, period. After spending far more money than they thought it would cost, we'll be left with far less than they promised, along with thousands more unionized employees all demanding pensions and huge, mounting ongoing O&M costs. And then the solution will be... more high-speed rail! Flying is extremely expensive at the last moment. For example, if you want to go to a weekend getaway to Disneyland or concert in LA. You have to deal with the TSA when you fly, which I hate. You can get up and walk around on a train. You can use your phone or laptop on a train. Seats are bigger and more comfortable on trains. You can see the scenery go by on a train. If the trip is long enough, you can even take a nice nap with a significant other on a train. We need other public transportation options in the US, our systems in most of the country are a joke. Do I need to explain the importance of public transportation and how it helps the economy? What would America be without the transcontinental railroad or interstate system? |
|
Quoted:
Flying is extremely expensive at the last moment. And how exactly is this high speed rail nonsense not "expensive." If you are such a fan of trains, Am Trak, if you don't like how slow it is or it doesn't live up to your standards of travel, use another option. For example, if you want to go to a weekend getaway to Disneyland or concert in LA. You have to deal with the TSA when you fly, which I hate. You can get up and walk around on a train. You can use your phone or laptop on a train. Seats are bigger and more comfortable on trains. You can see the scenery go by on a train. If the trip is long enough, you can even take a nice nap with a significant other on a train. We need other public transportation options in the US, our systems in most of the country are a joke. Do I need to explain the importance of public transportation and how it helps the economy? What would America be without the transcontinental railroad or interstate system? Sounds like you've got your own problems. Again, foisting a huge mistake on the tax payers is most certainly not something that I am in favor of just because of a vocal minority of idiots. The issue is virtually identical to the issue of more gun laws, it is a media darling and the pet project of a few deluded politicians. |
|
Quoted:
High speed rail is a taxpayer funded program to provide union jobs, nothing more. They propose it all o ed the country to buy votes, both parties. Easy to spend money when it can lose money every day it runs. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Rhetorical question time. When has a govt sponsored roads/building project EVER come in on budget or even within projected budget? On that premise alone, kill it. |
|
Quoted:
High speed rail is amazing. I lived in Germany for 20 years and their mass transit system can teach the US a thing or two. Germany is also smaller than Montana and has 81 times the population density. A profitable high speed rail would only be vaible in a select few markets in the U.S. |
|
Amtrak is stupid slow. It's faster to drive, which is just sad.
You guys ever visit San Fransisco? It's much more convenient NOT having a car while there. Same thing with New York, DC, Chicago, pretty much any big city with good public transportation. I know it's hard to imagine going somewhere without jumping in a car, but if you expand your world, you may see the advantages of reliable, fast public transportation. The problem is not public transportation. The problem is politicians and unions seeing this as their little pet pork project. It should be connecting large cities, not podunk towns. It should cost far less, but the budget is undoubtedly padded with special interest bribes, do-nothing contracts, and kickbacks. Taking the opposite view of democrats isn't always smart. Solar panels are a great idea and Solyndra had a genius product. It's the way projects are structured and run that are the problem, not the technology. |
|
Quoted: plus... theres the fact that in the US .. "high speed" is 70-80 mphQuoted: We do need high speed rail in America. I know it's cool to hate things liberals love, but high speed rail is a good thing. Now, if they could manage to build it for less than 200 billion a mile or whatever it's going to cost, I'd be a huge fan. High speed rail is not a good thing. As a country, we are too spread out for it to make sense. Hell, the only reason it works in Europe is because things are close together and it is heavily subsidized by the governments.  . then theres the rest of the system that, if they wanted it to be transcontinental, would mean a complete rebuild of the ENTIRE network. |
|
Quoted:
Amtrak is stupid slow. It's faster to drive, which is just sad. You guys ever visit San Fransisco? GOD FUCKING NO. Why in god's name would I want to do that. Did you not see the major clue about keeping that pile of crap out of Kern County? We have enough problems keeping the people from Los Angeles out of Kern County. Last thing we need is to have a funnel that brings the worst of both worlds/cities to us and drops them on our door step. I have about as much reason for going up there as those northernish Ca. coastal liberal shit heads have for coming to my rural backwoods hick county. And if I did go there then damn yes I'm going to drive so that way I can get the hell out of there on my own accord without having to sit around waiting for another train. It's much more convenient NOT having a car while there. Same thing with New York, DC, Chicago, pretty much any big city with good public transportation. I know it's hard to imagine going somewhere without jumping in a car, but if you expand your world, you may see the advantages of reliable, fast public transportation.
Again, sounds like you have your own set of problems which is that you enjoy living in a big city and the world of stupidity that exists in big cities. Keep your expanded world, your culture, and your high speed rail. The problem is not public transportation. The problem is politicians and unions seeing this as their little pet pork project. It should be connecting large cities, not podunk towns. It should cost far less, but the budget is undoubtedly padded with special interest bribes, do-nothing contracts, and kickbacks. Taking the opposite view of democrats isn't always smart. Solar panels are a great idea and Solyndra had a genius product. It's the way projects are structured and run that are the problem, not the technology. And that is the reason why nobody who understands how these things actually get funded and work is in favor of it. Go get a Prius and drive. Saving that, fly. Choose your evil, don't force us to endure yet another shitty option that nobody wants. |
|
Quoted: We do need high speed rail in America. I know it's cool to hate things liberals love, but high speed rail is a good thing. Now, if they could manage to build it for less than 200 billion a mile or whatever it's going to cost, I'd be a huge fan. High speed rails might make sense in some highly density regions in large area...ony place I can think of is the northeast. Even still AMTRAK has the Acela, not necessarily high speed compared to other trains but as far as I can see it has been failure. only saves a little time compare to other commuter rails and much more expensive. |