[ARCHIVED THREAD] - No More choo choo train (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 11/4/2010 11:12:01 AM EDT
|
http://www.channel3000.com/news/25635287/detail.html Can this be for real "MADISON, Wis. –– The Madison-Milwaukee high-speed rail project has been scrapped, according to an unnamed source. The source, who asked to remain anonymous, said that she and several staffers were told the "project is done" and all were let go on Thursday morning."Good riddance, to the money pit. |
|
Quoted:
I was excited by the idea, until I heard the proposed ticket prices and realized I could drive far cheaper. If they can't make it break even, scrap it. That said, I'm going to need more than just a single unidentified anonymous source to believe it. Mass transit is NEVER cheaper then just driving yourself. |
|
I'm in favor of the rail plan because I would use it and I think it could get a lot of use by other people. I have no idea what ticket prices are to be. Taking the train to Chicago from a station in Madison or Waterloo is good.
I disagree with calling it high-speed. This would not be a "bullet-train" and because of speed limits and stops I don't know how long a trip would take. |
|
I recently moved, and thought about buying a house close to a station. Then I heard some of the proposed ticket prices. IIRC, they were looking at ~$40 for a round-trip ticket from Watertown to somewhere in Madison, and at that time the train was going to the airport. So every passenger would then have to get a cab, or take MORE time waiting for a bus, to get into Madison itself. It was a really stupid idea. Who's going to pay $40/day commuting? No one would have ridden that thing.
It IS interesting to hear the lefties in the Williamson street neighborhood implode, because they're in favor of mass transit and high-speed rail...but not in their backyard. 
|
|
Quoted:
I'm in favor of the rail plan because I would use it and I think it could get a lot of use by other people. I have no idea what ticket prices are to be. Taking the train to Chicago from a station in Madison or Waterloo is good. I disagree with calling it high-speed. This would not be a "bullet-train" and because of speed limits and stops I don't know how long a trip would take. So everyone who doesnt use it can subsidize it for you too? If it was a good idea, and a money maker there be no need to force it on us. A privately owned company would do it. God love the capitalist system, if only politicans would leave it alone. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Hypothetical scenario here: WI gets CCW. We also have the "highspeed" rail built between what ever cities. Would CCW be allowed on said trains? Is the train on a treadmill? You know trains on a tread mill don't go anywhere and certainly won't take off. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Hypothetical scenario here: WI gets CCW. We also have the "highspeed" rail built between what ever cities. Would CCW be allowed on said trains? Is the train on a treadmill? You know trains on a tread mill don't go anywhere and certainly won't take off. But they will if the wind is blowing just right... 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Hypothetical scenario here: WI gets CCW. We also have the "highspeed" rail built between what ever cities. Would CCW be allowed on said trains? Is the train on a treadmill? You know trains on a tread mill don't go anywhere and certainly won't take off. But they will if the wind is blowing just right... like in a tornado? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm in favor of the rail plan because I would use it and I think it could get a lot of use by other people. I have no idea what ticket prices are to be. Taking the train to Chicago from a station in Madison or Waterloo is good. I disagree with calling it high-speed. This would not be a "bullet-train" and because of speed limits and stops I don't know how long a trip would take. So everyone who doesnt use it can subsidize it for you too? If it was a good idea, and a money maker there be no need to force it on us. A privately owned company would do it. God love the capitalist system, if only politicans would leave it alone. Yes, many people don't realize that even in urban areas with sufficient density to justify mass transit, like NYC and Chicago, those trains don't operate without massive tax subsidy. The real cost per rider, even if you use the pro-train sides inflated wishful-thinking figures for ridership would have been something like $150 or more when you gave an honest accounting of all the state and fed money required to keep it running. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I was excited by the idea, until I heard the proposed ticket prices and realized I could drive far cheaper. If they can't make it break even, scrap it. That said, I'm going to need more than just a single unidentified anonymous source to believe it. Mass transit is NEVER cheaper then just driving yourself. Roads aren't free. The bottom line is, basically all modes of transport are subsidized in one way or another. Walker is a moron, with federal operating subsidies it would cost the state nearly nothing to operate while probably putting a significant amount of money into the local economy. The Hiawatha line between Milwaukee and Chicago is Amtrak's third busiest route by passengers per mile, this line would feed into or directly connect to that. I'm pretty sure there isn't any shortage of people who want to go from Madison to Chicago or Milwaukee and vice versa. Not to mention Talgo (train maker that is going to be making trainsets for all these "high speed" routes being built) located their factory in Wisconsin, if WI loses the train that is in jeopardy. Good job Walker. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: If it was a good idea, and a money maker there be no need to force it on us. A privately owned company would do it. God love the capitalist system, if only politicans would leave it alone.  OK DLoken, you are correct that roads cost money but READ above. Why must EVERYTHING be from "mother government" and nothing from the "evil" corporations? I am not against planes, trains or automobiles. There will someday be a need for a high speed train somewhere in Wisconsin. Something that travels through big stretches of the country. That the MAJORITY of people would use. High speed being key –– like the trains that are actually popular and have a system that works (i.e. other countries). That time is NOT now. Come up with a train (or any other) plan that is self-funded (operationally) and has a reasonable ROI for the construction costs with a private company involved. Not some forever subsidized B.S. feel good but accomplish nothing boondoggle. Once again it is all emotion and no logic. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If it was a good idea, and a money maker there be no need to force it on us. A privately owned company would do it. God love the capitalist system, if only politicans would leave it alone. OK DLoken, you are correct that roads cost money but READ above. Why must EVERYTHING be from "mother government" and nothing from the "evil" corporations? I am not against planes, trains or automobiles. There will someday be a need for a high speed train somewhere in Wisconsin. Something that travels through big stretches of the country. That the MAJORITY of people would use. High speed being key –– like the trains that are actually popular and have a system that works (i.e. other countries). That time is NOT now. Come up with a train (or any other) plan that is self-funded (operationally) and has a reasonable ROI for the construction costs with a private company involved. Not some forever subsidized B.S. feel good but accomplish nothing boondoggle. Once again it is all emotion and no logic. I don't think there are /any/ privately (at least 100% so) built high speed rail lines in the entire world. They're just too expensive for corporations to build. Have the government build a line and then lease it to a company to operate on. AFAIK, if you separate capital costs from operating costs it would probably be profitable. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If it was a good idea, and a money maker there be no need to force it on us. A privately owned company would do it. God love the capitalist system, if only politicans would leave it alone. OK DLoken, you are correct that roads cost money but READ above. Why must EVERYTHING be from "mother government" and nothing from the "evil" corporations? I am not against planes, trains or automobiles. There will someday be a need for a high speed train somewhere in Wisconsin. Something that travels through big stretches of the country. That the MAJORITY of people would use. High speed being key –– like the trains that are actually popular and have a system that works (i.e. other countries). That time is NOT now. Come up with a train (or any other) plan that is self-funded (operationally) and has a reasonable ROI for the construction costs with a private company involved. Not some forever subsidized B.S. feel good but accomplish nothing boondoggle. Once again it is all emotion and no logic. I don't think there are /any/ privately (at least 100% so) built high speed rail lines in the entire world. They're just too expensive for corporations to build. Have the government build a line and then lease it to a company to operate on. AFAIK, if you separate capital costs from operating costs it would probably be profitable. You're proving our own damn point! 
If it's too expensive to be done, than it DOES NOT NEED TO BE DONE! 
And the second part I bolded, there is no such thing as "separation of costs". COSTS ARE COSTS, PERIOD. Do you ever wonder why we accuse liberals of not operating in the "real world", and emoting rather than reasoning? It's the same damn thing with the liberal/left mantra of "Tax the rich" and "Tax the corporations!". All costs go SOMEWHERE and that SOMEWHERE is US. The only people who don't understand the concept "I've never gotten a job from a poor guy." are lefties who either willfully ignore this fact, or they work for the .gov or non-profits. 
Yes, I know we won't convince you. Which is why you simply must suffer. No train for you! Sorry. 
|
|
You libtards act like this Federal money is some magic gift that appeared from nowhere and was "free" and we are going to "lose" it. We already lost it when it was taken from us the first time. It never should have been taken from us and redistributed in this bullshit ponzi scheme. The almost billion dollars shouldn't even be in play period. We'd all be better off across the country. Shit, I'd rather see you take the almost billion dollars and give it to some other (non-wasteful) lefty program that helps people in need before wasting it on this shit. By "in need" I don't mean too lazy to get off their ass and work other than election day when they managed to do the most work of all year voting dozens of times. Yes, I understand that is not an option because of how the money is earmarked. Well, that is bullshit too and that needs to be changed. Screw this "lost jobs" bullshit for the first 40 people they hired and all the rest of the hype for a handful of people just beginning to start operations on this with Doyle's back room eleventh hour corrupt dealings. They are a foreign company, not a Wisconsin company, opening a local office. Big deal. How can you possibly argue the point that this train would have expensive fares and STILL NEED public assistance to operate... forever? With what logic does that make any sense whatsoever? Knowing that costs will go up over time, that is in essence a permanent tax increase just for this. If we applied that same logic to your household finances, how would you survive? Oh yeah, government handout. I forgot. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If it was a good idea, and a money maker there be no need to force it on us. A privately owned company would do it. God love the capitalist system, if only politicans would leave it alone. OK DLoken, you are correct that roads cost money but READ above. Why must EVERYTHING be from "mother government" and nothing from the "evil" corporations? I am not against planes, trains or automobiles. There will someday be a need for a high speed train somewhere in Wisconsin. Something that travels through big stretches of the country. That the MAJORITY of people would use. High speed being key –– like the trains that are actually popular and have a system that works (i.e. other countries). That time is NOT now. Come up with a train (or any other) plan that is self-funded (operationally) and has a reasonable ROI for the construction costs with a private company involved. Not some forever subsidized B.S. feel good but accomplish nothing boondoggle. Once again it is all emotion and no logic. I don't think there are /any/ privately (at least 100% so) built high speed rail lines in the entire world. They're just too expensive for corporations to build. Have the government build a line and then lease it to a company to operate on. AFAIK, if you separate capital costs from operating costs it would probably be profitable. You're proving our own damn point!
If it's too expensive to be done, than it DOES NOT NEED TO BE DONE!
And the second part I bolded, there is no such thing as "separation of costs". COSTS ARE COSTS, PERIOD. Do you ever wonder why we accuse liberals of not operating in the "real world", and emoting rather than reasoning? It's the same damn thing with the liberal/left mantra of "Tax the rich" and "Tax the corporations!". All costs go SOMEWHERE and that SOMEWHERE is US. The only people who don't understand the concept "I've never gotten a job from a poor guy." are lefties who either willfully ignore this fact, or they work for the .gov or non-profits.
By that logic we wouldn't have highways or most roads. Expensive fares? $20 from Milwaukee to Madison isn't bad at all when you figure in gas, parking and time. Transit enables money to be made through the easy movement of people and goods. It doesn't necessarily make money directly. |
|
If the people want the train, let them vote on the train. You want to do the same for roads? Fine. Applying logic would tell us that less than half would vote for spending that amount of $ on the train. Especially now. More than half –– almost all –– would vote for having roads. When more than half vote for the train, I guess they get it. Even if I don't like it. Billion dollar projects need accountability to the people on a per project basis. It is OUR billion dollars. Not accountability four years later when they forget. Unfortunately a large portion of our country –– both sides –– have become complacent and forgetful over time. Look at 9/11. Unfortunately for you the whatever percentage of you progressive ultra-left wing nuts don't get to choose for everyone else based upon your feelings and emotion. At least not for the next few years. See, a lot of the people who voted for Barrett didn't want or need the train. It became a popular thing to talk about but there are a lot of people who vote democrat because of their union job or what not but could give a shit about that stupid train. And yes, I'd even bet there were some who voted for Walker that wanted it. I could accept a system in which the people by majority rule decide on things like this. Big expensive things. Not at the "whim of the king" –– the king of the moment that is. |
|
Quoted:
By that logic we wouldn't have highways or most roads. Actually, the successful toll roads (The entire Illinois system that runs surpluses, or breaks even) prove otherwise. A coporation could do the same, or even more efficiently. And even if I concede the point for the sake of argument, so that means we need a redundant mode of transport that will be under-utilized and nowhere near the cost per mile passenger efficency? For the price of this damn worthless train, (ever hear the phrase, there's nothing so expensive as a free puppy?) we could buy several hundred buses, and give free rides forever the poor downtrodden masses who've been mistreated by the evil corporations who need access to jobs or whatever it was that was so important out by the airport at Madison. You won't admit it, but there is just something about trains that liberals love. It jives with their psychology. A set schedule. No personal responsibility for driving the thing. Not too many options (you have to stay on the rails) so someone with more gas, free time, or money can't go places that you can't. You ALL have to go to the same place. Simply put, a train is "Harrison Bergeron" on rails. That's why the left loves them so much. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: By that logic we wouldn't have highways or most roads. <snip> You won't admit it, but there is just something about trains that liberals love. It jives with their psychology. A set schedule. No personal responsibility for driving the thing. Not too many options (you have to stay on the rails) so someone with more gas, free time, or money can't go places that you can't. You ALL have to go to the same place. Simply put, a train is "Harrison Bergeron" on rails. That's why the left loves them so much. Bingo. I think you cracked the secret!! That is exactly right!
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
By that logic we wouldn't have highways or most roads. Actually, the successful toll roads (The entire Illinois system that runs surpluses, or breaks even) prove otherwise. A coporation could do the same, or even more efficiently. And even if I concede the point for the sake of argument, so that means we need a redundant mode of transport that will be under-utilized and nowhere near the cost per mile passenger efficency? For the price of this damn worthless train, (ever hear the phrase, there's nothing so expensive as a free puppy?) we could buy several hundred buses, and give free rides forever the poor downtrodden masses who've been mistreated by the evil corporations who need access to jobs or whatever it was that was so important out by the airport at Madison. You won't admit it, but there is just something about trains that liberals love. It jives with their psychology. A set schedule. No personal responsibility for driving the thing. Not too many options (you have to stay on the rails) so someone with more gas, free time, or money can't go places that you can't. You ALL have to go to the same place. Simply put, a train is "Harrison Bergeron" on rails. That's why the left loves them so much. Trains are the most efficient mode of transit mankind has thus developed. Let me know when you invent the teleporter. And this: "and give free rides forever the poor downtrodden masses who've been mistreated by the evil corporations who need access to jobs or whatever it was that was so important out by the airport at Madison." You're making an assumption that this is for poor people, also it isn't going to the airport, it would be going right into downtown Madison near the capitol. And last I looked, buses and cars don't go 100+ MPH down I94, at least not legally. As far as a corporation building a highway? Yeah, let me know where the ROW (right of way) comes from; Last I looked corporations don't have an eminent domain power to secure such land that is undoubtably needed. |
|
Quoted:
Trains are the most efficient mode of transit mankind has thus developed. Let me know when you invent the teleporter. And this: "and give free rides forever the poor downtrodden masses who've been mistreated by the evil corporations who need access to jobs or whatever it was that was so important out by the airport at Madison." You're making an assumption that this is for poor people, also it isn't going to the airport, it would be going right into downtown Madison near the capitol. And last I looked, buses and cars don't go 100+ MPH down I94, at least not legally. As far as a corporation building a highway? Yeah, let me know where the ROW (right of way) comes from; Last I looked corporations don't have an eminent domain power to secure such land that is undoubtably needed. LOL... I know it's for people sipping Starbucks tapping away on their iPads... people who already pay road-taxes and can afford their own damn car too. And the train will only be efficient if people use it. And not enough will. Unless of course you want to ADMIT the ultimate liberal desire is to get rid of a lot of our roads, and use taxes and .gov policy to make automobiles too expensive for most people and force us on those trains. And 100mph? Don't make me laugh, not with all the local liberals in every small town along the corridor trying to make a stop. I and everyone else can get to Madison at about 70mph, get there EXACTLY when they need to, leave EXACTLY when they want to, and drive wherever EXACTLY it is in Madison or the Madison area they needed to go. We're not fucking Europe and never will be. We didn't go through all that trouble to cross the Atlantic and kill all those Indians to live like they do.
So just deal with it. |
|
I just realized that this isn't even about saving money. Walker wants the money for roads and bridges.
"Walker, who defeated Democratic train proponent Tom Barrett on Tuesday, called the suspension "a step in the right direction." He said his aides are "exploring all legal options to stop the train from moving forward" and working Congress members to redirect the money toward roads and bridges". What an asshat. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Trains are the most efficient mode of transit mankind has thus developed. Let me know when you invent the teleporter. And this: "and give free rides forever the poor downtrodden masses who've been mistreated by the evil corporations who need access to jobs or whatever it was that was so important out by the airport at Madison." You're making an assumption that this is for poor people, also it isn't going to the airport, it would be going right into downtown Madison near the capitol. And last I looked, buses and cars don't go 100+ MPH down I94, at least not legally. As far as a corporation building a highway? Yeah, let me know where the ROW (right of way) comes from; Last I looked corporations don't have an eminent domain power to secure such land that is undoubtably needed. LOL... I know it's for people sipping Starbucks tapping away on their iPads... people who already pay road-taxes and can afford their own damn car too. And the train will only be efficient if people use it. And not enough will. Unless of course you want to ADMIT the ultimate liberal desire is to get rid of a lot of our roads, and use taxes and .gov policy to make automobiles too expensive for most people and force us on those trains. And 100mph? Don't make me laugh, not with all the local liberals in every small town along the corridor trying to make a stop. I and everyone else can get to Madison at about 70mph, get there EXACTLY when they need to, leave EXACTLY when they want to, and drive wherever EXACTLY it is in Madison or the Madison area they needed to go. We're not fucking Europe and never will be. We didn't go through all that trouble to cross the Atlantic and kill all those Indians to live like they do.
So just deal with it. The Hiawatha Line between Milwaukee and Chicago has 5 stops. This would have similar or less more than likely. When I go to Chicago I almost always take the train even though I have a nice car (and an IPASS even), why? It's more convenient than dealing with traffic, parking and the cost of parking. Plus during the ride I can play on my iPhone or laptop while enjoying a drink. |
|
Quoted:
The Hiawatha Line between Milwaukee and Chicago has 5 stops. This would have similar or less more than likely. When I go to Chicago I almost always take the train even though I have a nice car (and an IPASS even), why? It's more convenient than dealing with traffic, parking and the cost of parking. Plus during the ride I can play on my iPhone or laptop while enjoying a drink. Yep, and bringing family along without packing the kids away in their seats. |
|
Quoted:
The Hiawatha Line between Milwaukee and Chicago has 5 stops. This would have similar or less more than likely. When I go to Chicago I almost always take the train even though I have a nice car (and an IPASS even), why? It's more convenient than dealing with traffic, parking and the cost of parking. Plus during the ride I can play on my iPhone or laptop while enjoying a drink. Yeah, Amtrak's non-profitability is why we should have even MORE trains... Right. (Everyone else, we see the pathology here, right?) And the tax dollars of those who don't ride the train are worth it so you can play on your iPhone or laptop and have a drink. Gotcha. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The Hiawatha Line between Milwaukee and Chicago has 5 stops. This would have similar or less more than likely. When I go to Chicago I almost always take the train even though I have a nice car (and an IPASS even), why? It's more convenient than dealing with traffic, parking and the cost of parking. Plus during the ride I can play on my iPhone or laptop while enjoying a drink. Yeah, Amtrak's non-profitability is why we should have even MORE trains... Right. (Everyone else, we see the pathology here, right?) And the tax dollars of those who don't ride the train are worth it so you can play on your iPhone or laptop and have a drink. Gotcha. "Revenue during FY 2010 totaled $14,092,803, a 6% increase from FY 2009's $13,300,511 total revenue." Hiawatha between Milwaukee and Chicago. Sounds like this one might pay for itself after construction. So, look at that. 6% increase in one of the worst economies we've seen in decades. Definitely a demand there. I'm just curious, AJ, where in the state do you live? I'm assuming somewhere rural. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The Hiawatha Line between Milwaukee and Chicago has 5 stops. This would have similar or less more than likely. When I go to Chicago I almost always take the train even though I have a nice car (and an IPASS even), why? It's more convenient than dealing with traffic, parking and the cost of parking. Plus during the ride I can play on my iPhone or laptop while enjoying a drink. Yeah, Amtrak's non-profitability is why we should have even MORE trains... Right. (Everyone else, we see the pathology here, right?) And the tax dollars of those who don't ride the train are worth it so you can play on your iPhone or laptop and have a drink. Gotcha. "Revenue during FY 2010 totaled $14,092,803, a 6% increase from FY 2009's $13,300,511 total revenue." Hiawatha between Milwaukee and Chicago. Sounds like this one might pay for itself after construction. So, look at that. 6% increase in one of the worst economies we've seen in decades. Definitely a demand there. I'm just curious, AJ, where in the state do you live? I'm assuming somewhere rural. What did it cost to run the train? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The Hiawatha Line between Milwaukee and Chicago has 5 stops. This would have similar or less more than likely. When I go to Chicago I almost always take the train even though I have a nice car (and an IPASS even), why? It's more convenient than dealing with traffic, parking and the cost of parking. Plus during the ride I can play on my iPhone or laptop while enjoying a drink. Yeah, Amtrak's non-profitability is why we should have even MORE trains... Right. (Everyone else, we see the pathology here, right?) And the tax dollars of those who don't ride the train are worth it so you can play on your iPhone or laptop and have a drink. Gotcha. "Revenue during FY 2010 totaled $14,092,803, a 6% increase from FY 2009's $13,300,511 total revenue." Hiawatha between Milwaukee and Chicago. Sounds like this one might pay for itself after construction. So, look at that. 6% increase in one of the worst economies we've seen in decades. Definitely a demand there. I'm just curious, AJ, where in the state do you live? I'm assuming somewhere rural. What did it cost to run the train? No certain figures that I can find but Googling revealed this: "This year, the cost to operate the Hiawatha line between Milwaukee and Chicago is $5.5 million." I'm going to assume it is probably more though. Also "Even with the federal government picking up the line's full construction cost, Walker has said he doesn't want state taxpayers to pay operating costs, projected at $7.5 million a year, starting in 2013. A state transportation official has said state taxpayers' share could be as little as $750,000 a year, if federal aid covers 90% of operating costs, as it does for Amtrak's existing Milwaukee-to-Chicago Hiawatha line." I think there is a good chance it would be funding neutral to the state. It's not a bad deal at all, the money is going to be spent one way or another; It can either come to Wisconsin and advance our economy/infrastructure or go to a state that isn't run by a fuckwit. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The Hiawatha Line between Milwaukee and Chicago has 5 stops. This would have similar or less more than likely. When I go to Chicago I almost always take the train even though I have a nice car (and an IPASS even), why? It's more convenient than dealing with traffic, parking and the cost of parking. Plus during the ride I can play on my iPhone or laptop while enjoying a drink. Yeah, Amtrak's non-profitability is why we should have even MORE trains... Right. (Everyone else, we see the pathology here, right?) And the tax dollars of those who don't ride the train are worth it so you can play on your iPhone or laptop and have a drink. Gotcha. "Revenue during FY 2010 totaled $14,092,803, a 6% increase from FY 2009's $13,300,511 total revenue." Hiawatha between Milwaukee and Chicago. Sounds like this one might pay for itself after construction. So, look at that. 6% increase in one of the worst economies we've seen in decades. Definitely a demand there. I'm just curious, AJ, where in the state do you live? I'm assuming somewhere rural. What did it cost to run the train? It's share of the roughly 1.5+ Billion dollars that Amtrak has been getting a year for the past few years.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I was excited by the idea, until I heard the proposed ticket prices and realized I could drive far cheaper. If they can't make it break even, scrap it. That said, I'm going to need more than just a single unidentified anonymous source to believe it. Mass transit is NEVER cheaper then just driving yourself. Roads aren't free. The bottom line is, basically all modes of transport are subsidized in one way or another. Walker is a moron, with federal operating subsidies it would cost the state nearly nothing to operate while probably putting a significant amount of money into the local economy. The Hiawatha line between Milwaukee and Chicago is Amtrak's third busiest route by passengers per mile, this line would feed into or directly connect to that. I'm pretty sure there isn't any shortage of people who want to go from Madison to Chicago or Milwaukee and vice versa. Not to mention Talgo (train maker that is going to be making trainsets for all these "high speed" routes being built) located their factory in Wisconsin, if WI loses the train that is in jeopardy. Good job Walker. Cool......so the feds can tax the shit out of me in order to fund the local train that few people will use.........instead of the state. Sounds like a great plan. All you are doing is insulating the spending from the tax collecting to obfuscate the usefulness of the spending in the first place. You guys and your illogic frighten me. Whether it is funded by federal tax monies, or state tax monies.....that money still comes out of OUR pocket. I worked for one of the railroads that was going to host this bullshit pork project. Owned by someone who I wouldn't trust not to skim a LOT of those millions, not to mention having dilapidated infrastructure that he holds a vested interest in replaced with government funds - so they could turn around and make money off the freight without having to invest their OWN money. Them, and the people looking to expand their Section 8 influence are the ONLY people who would benefit from this stupid thing in any real fashion. Then there are the State employees with fat pork jobs doing next to nothing, and the contractors they would hire to do the work (who pad the shit out of any government contract work and rake in shitloads of our tax money - way more than what it should be costing). Look at suburban Chicago - it's demographics, it's government structures, it's corruption, and it's taxes. That's what Doyle and his libtard cronies are trying to build in SE Wisconsin, and this stupid train is part of what will make it happen. It's bullshit. Pure fucking bullshit. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The Hiawatha Line between Milwaukee and Chicago has 5 stops. This would have similar or less more than likely. When I go to Chicago I almost always take the train even though I have a nice car (and an IPASS even), why? It's more convenient than dealing with traffic, parking and the cost of parking. Plus during the ride I can play on my iPhone or laptop while enjoying a drink. Yeah, Amtrak's non-profitability is why we should have even MORE trains... Right. (Everyone else, we see the pathology here, right?) And the tax dollars of those who don't ride the train are worth it so you can play on your iPhone or laptop and have a drink. Gotcha. "Revenue during FY 2010 totaled $14,092,803, a 6% increase from FY 2009's $13,300,511 total revenue." Hiawatha between Milwaukee and Chicago. Sounds like this one might pay for itself after construction. So, look at that. 6% increase in one of the worst economies we've seen in decades. Definitely a demand there. I'm just curious, AJ, where in the state do you live? I'm assuming somewhere rural. What did it cost to run the train? It's share of the roughly 1.5+ Billion dollars that Amtrak has been getting a year for the past few years. No doubt that Amtrak has some ridiculously unprofitable routes. The Hiawatha isn't one of them. Look at suburban Chicago - it's demographics, it's government structures, it's corruption, and it's taxes.
Middle class and rich people who ride trains to work? |
| The infrastructure improvements which would go along with this are much needed. Trains can haul certain freight more efficiently than trucks do. This is not just a route from Madison to Milwaukee, it is part of a much longer route which other trains could utilize. That is why Federal funds were made available. Projects like this are good for the long term. Anyone who thinks that this is just for commuters is not looking at the big picture. This money can not just be taken and spent on highways. WI will loose it forever along with the jobs and tax revenue. |
|
Quoted:
Roads aren't free. Right, the people who use the roads pay for the roads, via fuel tax and registration. Trains are only used by a few, and paid for by everyone. It's bad enough that I have to pay to educate other people's kids, I don't need to pay for some fuckin train that I will never ride, as well. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I was excited by the idea, until I heard the proposed ticket prices and realized I could drive far cheaper. If they can't make it break even, scrap it. That said, I'm going to need more than just a single unidentified anonymous source to believe it. Mass transit is NEVER cheaper then just driving yourself. Roads aren't free. The bottom line is, basically all modes of transport are subsidized in one way or another. Walker is a moron, with federal operating subsidies it would cost the state nearly nothing to operate while probably putting a significant amount of money into the local economy. The Hiawatha line between Milwaukee and Chicago is Amtrak's third busiest route by passengers per mile, this line would feed into or directly connect to that. I'm pretty sure there isn't any shortage of people who want to go from Madison to Chicago or Milwaukee and vice versa. Not to mention Talgo (train maker that is going to be making trainsets for all these "high speed" routes being built) located their factory in Wisconsin, if WI loses the train that is in jeopardy. Good job Walker. The part that I bolded isn't really an argument to keep the train either. The Spanish wind turbine company that Doyle/Barret brought in to Milwaukee isn't adding Wisconsin jobs at all. A friend who was hired there initially as an electrical engineer was just laid off so that a SPANISH worker could come and take his place. Employees at just about all levels of the company are being laid off so that a Spanish counterpart, who was moved here by the company, can do their job. I'd expect the same to happen for the train maker once they got all set up. |
|
Quoted:
The infrastructure improvements which would go along with this are much needed. Trains can haul certain freight more efficiently than trucks do. This is not just a route from Madison to Milwaukee, it is part of a much longer route which other trains could utilize. That is why Federal funds were made available. Projects like this are good for the long term. Anyone who thinks that this is just for commuters is not looking at the big picture. This money can not just be taken and spent on highways. WI will loose it forever along with the jobs and tax revenue. That's why the motherfucking railroad owners should be paying to upgrade the infrastructure. I've seen FIRST HAND, IN PERSON, how this shit works. If there is potential to make profit there, then make the investment. Instead, they go to the government with their hand out, get a shitload of OUR tax dollars, then rake in the cash. FUCK THAT. |
|
Quoted:
The infrastructure improvements which would go along with this are much needed. Trains can haul certain freight more efficiently than trucks do. This is not just a route from Madison to Milwaukee, it is part of a much longer route which other trains could utilize. That is why Federal funds were made available. Projects like this are good for the long term. Anyone who thinks that this is just for commuters is not looking at the big picture. This money can not just be taken and spent on highways. WI will loose it forever along with the jobs and tax revenue. The commuter rail lines aren't compatible with freight due to scheduling conflicts. So that means even MORE rail lines in parallel, if that were to be true. Quoted:
The part that I bolded isn't really an argument to keep the train either. The Spanish wind turbine company that Doyle/Barret brought in to Milwaukee isn't adding Wisconsin jobs at all. A friend who was hired there initially as an electrical engineer was just laid off so that a SPANISH worker could come and take his place. Employees at just about all levels of the company are being laid off so that a Spanish counterpart, who was moved here by the company, can do their job. I'd expect the same to happen for the train maker once they got all set up. http://www.biztimes.com/daily/2010/10/13/former-employee-accuses-talgo-of-discrimination-in-milwaukee Seems to be the usual MO for Spanish companies. I thought Europe was supposed to be "enlightened" as opposed to us racist intolerant Americans.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The infrastructure improvements which would go along with this are much needed. Trains can haul certain freight more efficiently than trucks do. This is not just a route from Madison to Milwaukee, it is part of a much longer route which other trains could utilize. That is why Federal funds were made available. Projects like this are good for the long term. Anyone who thinks that this is just for commuters is not looking at the big picture. This money can not just be taken and spent on highways. WI will loose it forever along with the jobs and tax revenue. The commuter rail lines aren't compatible with freight due to scheduling conflicts. So that means even MORE rail lines in parallel, if that were to be true. Quoted:
The part that I bolded isn't really an argument to keep the train either. The Spanish wind turbine company that Doyle/Barret brought in to Milwaukee isn't adding Wisconsin jobs at all. A friend who was hired there initially as an electrical engineer was just laid off so that a SPANISH worker could come and take his place. Employees at just about all levels of the company are being laid off so that a Spanish counterpart, who was moved here by the company, can do their job. I'd expect the same to happen for the train maker once they got all set up. http://www.biztimes.com/daily/2010/10/13/former-employee-accuses-talgo-of-discrimination-in-milwaukee Seems to be the usual MO for Spanish companies. I thought Europe was supposed to be "enlightened" as opposed to us racist intolerant Americans.
Stop talking out of your ass. METRA's entire system (300k+ riders a day) is almost entirely run on freight rail lines. Not to mention, the train from Milwaukee to Madison isn't a commuter train. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The Hiawatha Line between Milwaukee and Chicago has 5 stops. This would have similar or less more than likely. When I go to Chicago I almost always take the train even though I have a nice car (and an IPASS even), why? It's more convenient than dealing with traffic, parking and the cost of parking. Plus during the ride I can play on my iPhone or laptop while enjoying a drink. Yeah, Amtrak's non-profitability is why we should have even MORE trains... Right. (Everyone else, we see the pathology here, right?) And the tax dollars of those who don't ride the train are worth it so you can play on your iPhone or laptop and have a drink. Gotcha. "Revenue during FY 2010 totaled $14,092,803, a 6% increase from FY 2009's $13,300,511 total revenue." Hiawatha between Milwaukee and Chicago. Sounds like this one might pay for itself after construction. So, look at that. 6% increase in one of the worst economies we've seen in decades. Definitely a demand there. I'm just curious, AJ, where in the state do you live? I'm assuming somewhere rural. POPULATION DENSITY. End of story. Madison and its surrounding area's do not have the density to support a commuter rail. Milwaukee does, but those people work in either Milwaukee, or Chicago, a very small minority work in Madison that would actually utilize the train. I doubt many people would commute to and from work between the two cities. A commuter train or a passenger train in general does not make sense in this area. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The Hiawatha Line between Milwaukee and Chicago has 5 stops. This would have similar or less more than likely. When I go to Chicago I almost always take the train even though I have a nice car (and an IPASS even), why? It's more convenient than dealing with traffic, parking and the cost of parking. Plus during the ride I can play on my iPhone or laptop while enjoying a drink. Yeah, Amtrak's non-profitability is why we should have even MORE trains... Right. (Everyone else, we see the pathology here, right?) And the tax dollars of those who don't ride the train are worth it so you can play on your iPhone or laptop and have a drink. Gotcha. "Revenue during FY 2010 totaled $14,092,803, a 6% increase from FY 2009's $13,300,511 total revenue." Hiawatha between Milwaukee and Chicago. Sounds like this one might pay for itself after construction. So, look at that. 6% increase in one of the worst economies we've seen in decades. Definitely a demand there. I'm just curious, AJ, where in the state do you live? I'm assuming somewhere rural. POPULATION DENSITY. End of story. Madison and its surrounding area's do not have the density to support a commuter rail. Milwaukee does, but those people work in either Milwaukee, or Chicago, a very small minority work in Madison that would actually utilize the train. I doubt many people would commute to and from work between the two cities. A commuter train or a passenger train in general does not make sense in this area. This isn't a commuter train. |
|
Quoted:
Then the ridership will be even worse, and will make even less economic sense. SNCF (France's rail operator) did a study and it showed that the Midwest has a similar population distribution to France. Killing this is stupid and shortsighted. http://www.midwesthsr.org/sites/default/files/pdf/SNCF_Midwest.pdf |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Then the ridership will be even worse, and will make even less economic sense. SNCF (France's rail operator) did a study and it showed that the Midwest has a similar population distribution to France. Killing this is stupid and shortsighted. http://www.midwesthsr.org/sites/default/files/pdf/SNCF_Midwest.pdf LOL... as if our similar population density or (rough) distribution is all that it takes. Commerce, land use patterns etc. our weather (while you're standing around waiting on the platform, or walking to the train, freezing your ass off half the year...) are all very different. And yeah... the Midwest High Speed Rail Association's figures and outlook is going to be unbiased. I'm sure.
You've got to get over this "If you build it, they will come" bullshit. If you build it, a handful will ride it, because the rest of us want to leave our house when we need to, and leave work when we need to, and be able to drive wherever we need to in between, like stop at the supermarket or pharmacy on the way home. I and the vast majority of us aren't going to drive our car a few miles to park at the train station when we could just get on I-94 and be there in the same amount of time (with platform stops and waits, and even assuming you get over 100mph after all the NIMBY lawsuits), with complete freedom to come and go on our timetable. Much less make it even worse while you wait for a bus to take us to and from the train station. Of course you and other rail advocates will say, "of course no one rides it, we need ANOTHER line, and some light rail to feed to the main stations." The first lines and proposals are a camel's nose in the tent attempt to begin the process of deemphasizing cars and roads, and engage in social engineering, to try and force people back into cities and higher density urban living. Again, trains are HARRISON BERGERON. Not just in controlling how and where you can travel, but ultimately where you're "allowed" to live. Liberals with trains-on-brain have this fantasy of us all living in some facsimile of Europe, or trendy bohemian Manhattan/San Fransisco neighborhoods, walking, bicycling, and riding trains, and going to little individual shops for bread and meat in our neighborhoods instead of driving wherever it is we (by we, I mean the free market) wanted to go. They won't come right out and say it, but they want to eliminate suburbs. The fact that there are those of us who worked hard and paid good money to live out there away from the problems of the city is infuriating to Liberals. So the response to over 40 years of failed "Great Society" programs is to try and restructure transportation and land use to FORCE the rest of us back into the very place we fled from. If you ride the train in Chicago, or the Northeast seaboard because driving and parking is such a PITA, fine. If you like trains that much, then move there and use those systems that are somewhat adequately utilized. (yet still can't operate in the black..) IT IS NOT NEEDED HERE. |