High speed rail...why?

[selector]

For a while there it was a great ride...one of the best threads in a long time, and kept so by those posting.  Now it's getting a little chippy and pointless.  Time to move on.

[locked]

[n012944]

schlimm

 I agree with henry6.  There is little point in trying to reason with RNC/FNC "talking points."   If you want to deny global climate change, perhaps you'd like a free membership to the Flat Earth Society.

I always get a kick out of how HSR cheerleaders always lump people who dare question the cost of HSR as from the far right.  I guess these guys are Democrats in name only...

 

http://thatsmycongress.com/index.php/2009/07/24/ten-democrats-vote-against-high-speed-rail-and-reasonable-housing/

 

But hey, don't let the facts get in the way your rant

 

Of course one could argue that there is little point to try and reason with DNC/MSNBC talking points......

[n012944]

henry6

Because no one here wants answers, they want arguements.  No matter what answer I give there will be a counter in the form of an arguement.

There is a difference between answers and opinions.

[blownout cylinder]

henry6

Because no one here wants answers, they want arguements.  No matter what answer I give there will be a counter in the form of an arguement.

That is where the manipulation comes in then. Assume brainwashing--then get someone like a latter day Ted Patrick--an early 70's deprogrammer. You may need either that or one of those marketing guys who can get 'an eskimo to buy a refrigerator'.

This is a tough audience. We may be too stuborn and warped to believe everything we read or hear---if one is an independent thinker they are not going to be very good at hearing the answer and leaving it at that

[Anonymous]

Well there is a school of thought that contends that getting people out of their cars and planes, and into HSR will help the environment by reducing the carbon footprint.  However, a subdivision of that school believes that high speed component of HSR is extravagant, unnecessary, and undesirable because the high speed creates too much CO2 compared to normal speed passenger rail.  So perhaps society’s need for high speed is just one of those marketing indoctrinations that we need to change.    

[henry6]

Because no one here wants answers, they want arguements.  No matter what answer I give there will be a counter in the form of an arguement.

[blownout cylinder]

schlimm

 I agree with henry6.  There is little point in trying to reason with RNC/FNC "talking points."   If you want to deny global climate change, perhaps you'd like a free membership to the Flat Earth Society.

If we are the only ones that have control of the climate---in that it was through the profligate use of non renewable energy, cars, disposable whatzits, meat and animal byproducts and all that then we're already too late. Global Clmate Change is here now. We can only stop doing what we are doing now and say to the knowing ones that we are under their control and teaching then-----

[schlimm]

 I agree with henry6.  There is little point in trying to reason with RNC/FNC "talking points."   If you want to deny global climate change, perhaps you'd like a free membership to the Flat Earth Society.

[tree68]

There's one thing that's generally true about a product that's being marketed.  

There's a product to market.

Can't market HSR if there isn't any (or it's not at least being seriously discussed).

 

[schlimm]

blownout cylinder

Acid Rain photos of the Black Forest wherein certain deciduous trees that had lost leaves--late October/early November tends to do that to trees around there at this time of year---the photos were supposed to depict a near leafless landscape due to acid rain yet--it became known that not only did some deciduous lose leaves but there was a certain type of evergreen lose its leaves too. OOPS. Rework the campaign...

 

The Black Forest consists(ed) almost entirely of conifer fir trees - not deciduous trees,has lost 25% of growth.  Other trees, such as spruce and some deciduous trees, such as birch and oak, are also affected and in other regions: the Harz Mountains, Bayernwald and the Czech Erzgebirge,

[blownout cylinder]

Bucyrus

henry6

I give up...I no longer have time to ride this merry-go-round of rhetoric.

Henry,

 

Don’t get off now.  We are finally getting right down to the core of your argument.  Why don’t you tell us how your theory of marketing indoctrination applies to the HSR?

I wouldn't mind finding out this myself. Maybe you do have a way to convince people to use trains?

[Anonymous]

henry6

I give up...I no longer have time to ride this merry-go-round of rhetoric.

Henry,

 

Don’t get off now.  We are finally getting right down to the core of your argument.  Why don’t you tell us how your theory of marketing indoctrination applies to the HSR?

[blownout cylinder]

schlimm

It is rather surprising to realize that many here think that advertising is simply designed to inform folks of what is available.  Some is, but most has has been based (since at least the 20's) on associations to situations or objects that most folks already desire.  Beauty, violence, sex, power, wealth, etc.  And apparently many have never heard of behavioral economics and finance (the world of irrational choices).

Of course many did not because not ALL advertizing comprised of that out and out manipulation. SOME did BUT NOT ALL=hence the sanity producing drug--Sumbunall. The thing that gets me is that there are all kinds of it even in the realm of environmental issues. We do not need fear and paranoia being used as the chief motivators here. Theodor Roczak, author of novels like Flicker and a social activist way back in the 1960's challenged many people into thinking about ways to motivate people without using shame and guilt as the prime motivators. He said that these motivators, which prime the emotional centers, will burn out and leave people desensitized to the very issues many feel strongly about. Maybe in the area of RR there is a need to approach the whole thing DIFFERENTLY.

schlimm

It also appears that many here seem unaware of the many historical contributions of the US (and Canadian) federal and state governments to various modes of transportation, including initiating massive projects such as highways, bridges, mass transit and railroads since the early national period

And these were without some form of central planning as such--again. Each project was generally regional in scope----which built up the nation(s). Mind, some ideas did not pan out too well. If you go along Highway 60 through Algonquin Park here in ON you will go through, along, between sites that tell of an ambitious scheme to colonize the way of the Opeongo Trail. This route went from just outside of Ottawa ON then finished near Opeongo Lk. It did not really succeed simply because those at the top did not pay attention to what certain reports from surveyors were telling the 'knowing ones' ,that it was basically not a farmers dreamscape. Governments could play a role in the transportation scenario---it is just that I think a more participatory, in other words, more democratic, type of schema is more useful---

Where are the so called classic manipulators when you need them?

[henry6]

I give up...I no longer have time to ride this merry-go-round of rhetoric.

[schlimm]

It is rather surprising to realize that many here think that advertising is simply designed to inform folks of what is available.  Some is, but most has has been based (since at least the 20's) on associations to situations or objects that most folks already desire.  Beauty, violence, sex, power, wealth, etc.  And apparently many have never heard of behavioral economics and finance (the world of irrational choices).

It also appears that many here seem unaware of the many historical contributions of the US (and Canadian) federal and state governments to various modes of transportation, including initiating massive projects such as highways, bridges, mass transit and railroads since the early national period.  Example: the federal National Road (Pike) from 1811 to 1835; the eastern portion was turned over to the states in 1835 and became a turnpike (toll).  State of New York appropriated $7 mil.for the Erie Canal, completed in 8 years.  The Pacific Railway Acts of 1862 financed the construction of the UP/CP with land grants and 6% 30 year US government bonds at a rate of $16000 to 48000 per mile and corporate bonds up to the total amount of US government bonds. It is interesting that Lincoln had the vision to do so in the middle of the bloodiest war in our history, as well as a financially burdensome one.

[htgguy]

henry6

Bucyrus said

: But I don’t think that all of the desire to consume is simply the result of marketing/ advertising indoctrination....There has to be more to the formula than just brainwashing people into consuming what you want them to consume. .

So what do you eat for breakfast?  Where do you have lunch?  How' bout dinner?  You have a need to eat but some marketer has forced you into the answers to those three questions!  So if need were the sole criteria for success or failure, there would only be one choice for each answer, like the whole world would have Egg McMuffins for breakfast now matter where you live.  And your market makes the choice theory is what the Edsel failure was all about: there were so many other, so many better choices, so why buy an Edsel?  But what if Edsel were the only car available? 

   

Marketers have not forced me into these decisions. I eat what I am hungry for in a location that is convenient. If someone offers (in a free market) an especially delicious breakfast that is further away or more expensive, I may decide to travel and eat that. If someone else decides to cut the price, they will see demand increase. That's not because it is marketed-it's a result of people deciding how to allocate their resources.

And I ain't eating egg mcmuffins for breakfast. I don't like them, so I will go elsewhere whether they are marketed or not. You are failing to consider that people are individuals. Give them some credit.

If marketing is so all-powerful, why doesn't Amtrak do some and conjure up some more demand for rail travel?  Or does it just work for airplanes and highways? Heck, some smart marketer should be able to have people begging for HSR at any price by week after next. Right?

[blownout cylinder]

henry6

And that because of today's circumstances and the planners' foreseeable needs, things have to be different than they have for the past 50 or 60 years.  Its not a matter of just thinking outside the box, its almost a matter of rebuilding the box!  Then you have to indoctonate the masses into accepting it.

That to me is kind of problematic. I heard way too many prophets of doom in my time to really believe in the hype that is pushed around at times. Acid Rain photos of the Black Forest wherein certain deciduous trees that had lost leaves--late October/early November tends to do that to trees around there at this time of year---the photos were supposed to depict a near leafless landscape due to acid rain yet--it became known that not only did some deciduous lose leaves but there was a certain type of evergreen lose its leaves too. OOPS. Rework the campaign...

And again, the bold print. And excitement--as if the world will collapse on its butt in 20 years. And then this?

henry6

Then you have to indoctonate the masses into accepting it.

EH? This is exactly what I don't think is a good idea---now we see the classic--undifferentiated 'masses'--of the socialist mind. Sheeesh. Why? Classical socialistic ideology ---

Sorry if I bounce here but this is exactly the kind of thing that environmentalists that I know and work with are not too fond of---those who speak loudly against manipulation are most likely to use it--

henry6

And your market makes the choice theory is what the Edsel failure was all about: there were so many other, so many better choices, so why buy an Edsel?  But what if Edsel were the only car available?   

Then what you have is a closed/managed market...potentially in a closed/managed society.

[henry6]

Bucyrus said: But I don’t think that all of the desire to consume is simply the result of marketing/ advertising indoctrination....There has to be more to the formula than just brainwashing people into consuming what you want them to consume. .

  So what do you eat for breakfast?  Where do you have lunch?  How' bout dinner?  You have a need to eat but some marketer has forced you into the answers to those three questions!  So if need were the sole criteria for success or failure, there would only be one choice for each answer, like the whole world would have Egg McMuffins for breakfast now matter where you live.  And your market makes the choice theory is what the Edsel failure was all about: there were so many other, so many better choices, so why buy an Edsel?  But what if Edsel were the only car available?    

blownout cylinder

 Sorry that you do not find this society open to a planned economy or methodology as you'd like. The politicohistorical culture in THIS society is different---

I am not saying its not as I'd like necessarily.  I am saying that the future has to be met and planned.  And that because of today's circumstances and the planners' foreseeable needs, things have to be different than they have for the past 50 or 60 years.  Its not a matter of just thinking outside the box, its almost a matter of rebuilding the box!  Then you have to indoctonate the masses into accepting it.

[blownout cylinder]

henry6

Very little has ever happened without a planned or unplanned indoctrinization.  We have smoked for years even though we know it will kill us because it was made so attractive by marketing, for instance. People bought war bonds and savings bonds because they were marketed as much as being the patriotic thing as they were a good buy.  Read what I have written above about how things happen.  We don't just wake up one morning and decide we want or need something...from what we eat, drive, do, think, etc., it is implanted in our minds until we react the way the implimenter wants.  Tell me one thing we do, think, eat, drive, or whatever, except breath, that has not been introduced to us by other forces.

There is NO thing that has not been in one way or another 'socially constructed' as a need---excepting food --maybe. Now, what is your vision going to be? What is your ideal? And are you  sure it is yours and not some system monger? Since we are all socially constructed/created with all these ideologies stamped on us from the time we are born then I can suggest that we are born blank slates for whatever ideology to write upon us. We are not born prior to the society we are born into. It is what it is. 

Good vision this that you ended up with. Since there is all manipulation and nothing else--then you will have to fight with all other ideals and systems and such for the people's 'allegience' . You will have to market that idea just as much as everyone else does. Sorry that you do not find this society open to a planned economy or methodology as you'd like. The politicohistorical culture in THIS society is different---

 

[Anonymous]

henry6

Very little has ever happened without a planned or unplanned indoctrinization.  We have smoked for years even though we know it will kill us because it was made so attractive by marketing, for instance. People bought war bonds and savings bonds because they were marketed as much as being the patriotic thing as they were a good buy.  Read what I have written above about how things happen.  We don't just wake up one morning and decide we want or need something...from what we eat, drive, do, think, etc., it is implanted in our minds until we react the way the implimenter wants.  Tell me one thing we do, think, eat, drive, or whatever, except breath, that has not been introduced to us by other forces.

I assume that when you mention marketing you are including advertising, and I agree that advertising does attempt to indoctrinate, and to some extent, it succeeds.  People do have to learn about something they might want before they will attempt to acquire it, so advertising can merely serve to inform some people of something they would want without indoctrinating them to buy it. 

But I don’t think that all of the desire to consume is simply the result of marketing / advertising indoctrination.  If it were, all marketers would have a sure-fired path to wealth.  There has to be more to the formula than just brainwashing people into consuming what you want them to consume.  Something must have kicked in that told the public not to listen to the marketing for the Edsel.    

[henry6]

Very little has ever happened without a planned or unplanned indoctrinization.  We have smoked for years even though we know it will kill us because it was made so attractive by marketing, for instance. People bought war bonds and savings bonds because they were marketed as much as being the patriotic thing as they were a good buy.  Read what I have written above about how things happen.  We don't just wake up one morning and decide we want or need something...from what we eat, drive, do, think, etc., it is implanted in our minds until we react the way the implimenter wants.  Tell me one thing we do, think, eat, drive, or whatever, except breath, that has not been introduced to us by other forces.

[Anonymous]

henry6

Bucyrus, that is almost the exact conditions that exist in the Northeast!  NJ can't build anymore roads; the NY Metropolitan area has poor air quality, clogged roads, jammed airports, no place to build more but plenty of underutilized rail ROW's.  Its like that virtually from Portland, ME to Norfolk, VA!  The scenerio is too real. 

But more to my other point.  Nothing has ever been accepted by the public which hasn't been "sold" to them through a well planned and executed marketing program.  Everything we encounter, use, abuse, enjoy, rely on, whatever, has been marketed so that we accept what those in charge of whatever, wants us to believe.  Look at the hell being raised right now with the new concepts of *** cancer screening...after years of marketing one idea, now another has popped up and has to be marketed until settled.  We were told about our cars and the highways as the way to be free, be able to travel at will, to be American.  But now that concept has to be changed and remarketed.  To make a change or promote someting new or different, you've got to market and sell, market and sell, market and sell.  Until the next change comes along.

In your outline of the problem scenario, what makes you think that people will just switch to rail just because it is offered as an alternative?  Highways and cars were welcomed as a wonderful alternative to being tied to schedules of transit with its limited range of routing.  Why would people change their mind unless you outlaw cars?

 

As I said before, I think you have the cart and horse mixed up with your belief that human behavior is lead and controlled by marketing.  Maybe you are a marketing guy and therefore believe that.  If it were true, why don’t they just market that we all live in peace and prosperity?

[henry6]

Bucyrus, that is almost the exact conditions that exist in the Northeast!  NJ can't build anymore roads; the NY Metropolitan area has poor air quality, clogged roads, jammed airports, no place to build more but plenty of underutilized rail ROW's.  Its like that virtually from Portland, ME to Norfolk, VA!  The scenerio is too real. 

But more to my other point.  Nothing has ever been accepted by the public which hasn't been "sold" to them through a well planned and executed marketing program.  Everything we encounter, use, abuse, enjoy, rely on, whatever, has been marketed so that we accept what those in charge of whatever, wants us to believe.  Look at the hell being raised right now with the new concepts of *** cancer screening...after years of marketing one idea, now another has popped up and has to be marketed until settled.  We were told about our cars and the highways as the way to be free, be able to travel at will, to be American.  But now that concept has to be changed and remarketed.  To make a change or promote someting new or different, you've got to market and sell, market and sell, market and sell.  Until the next change comes along.

[Anonymous]

henry6

Ok.  Scenerio: Air pollution is out of control, very dangerous situation exists in your area.  All land has been used up by industry and homes. Two reasons you can't build new or expand your highway system for autos or trucks.  Airports cannot be enlarged in any way for the same reasons, but passenger demand is up.  There are no navigable rivers or canals nearby.  Railroad technology is further ahead than what is being used, tracks and rights of way are underutilized.  What is the natural determination and how does letting the market determine the future work here?

Well in that scenario, a public sector response is called for.  It is a crisis similar to a natural disaster.  Such crisis contingencies are well within the scope of appropriate government application. 

 

However, I don’t believe you can cite one example of an actual situation where the details of your scenario either exist or have ever existed.  Moreover, I think it is highly unlikely to ever occur.  It sounds like a made up crisis to justify getting HSR by government fiat.   

[blownout cylinder]

henry6

Ok.  Scenerio: Air pollution is out of control, very dangerous situation exists in your area.  All land has been used up by industry and homes. Two reasons you can't build new or expand your highway system for autos or trucks.  Airports cannot be enlarged in any way for the same reasons, but passenger demand is up.  There are no navigable rivers or canals nearby.  Railroad technology is further ahead than what is being used, tracks and rights of way are underutilized.  What is the natural determination and how does letting the market determine the future work here?

By having human beings who note the above and work on developing the means to deliver the services necessary to expand train service---you see, I do not think that an "Idea"--"Open Market" does one thing or another. Have you ever physically "SEEN"--ie with the eyes--an "open market" act on something itself? No. It does not exist as a physical entity. But we seem to have forgotten that humans do things in the arena/idea called an open market. There is that free will thing here too, right?

I think this central planning thing is a little overwrought precisely because we have some who think that there is a serious need to do HSR and there may very well be some demand but where is it?. Me? I'd like someone not affiliated with one group or the other to come up with a market survey that we can start from----

[tree68]

daveklepper

Do you let the market decide when it comes to police, firemen, traffic lights, water, sewerage, etc?

A form of that has happened - Subscription fire departments.  You pay your money, you get fire protection.  You don't pay your money, your neighbors stand around and watch while the fire department protects their property and lets your burn.

Let's not forget Conrail - that half-hearted attempt to save a bunch of railroads that otherwise would have been abandoned (never mind "If the South had Won the Civil War" - imagine what would have happened if all those NE railroads had been shuttered.)  The public (us) kept that afloat until (!) it started making money.

[henry6]

Ok.  Scenerio: Air pollution is out of control, very dangerous situation exists in your area.  All land has been used up by industry and homes. Two reasons you can't build new or expand your highway system for autos or trucks.  Airports cannot be enlarged in any way for the same reasons, but passenger demand is up.  There are no navigable rivers or canals nearby.  Railroad technology is further ahead than what is being used, tracks and rights of way are underutilized.  What is the natural determination and how does letting the market determine the future work here?

[Anonymous]

Both private sector and public sector (central planning) business activities have their share of corrupt individuals, but the fundamental difference is that central planning has a self-interest of growing the empire of the central planners, coupled with the force of law.

 

So when it comes to projects such as HSR, the issue is not so much whether the private sector or the public sector would be the least corrupt.  The issue is that if there is no genuine public need for HSR, the private sector will realize that, and therefore not pursue HSR.  Whereas the public sector is liable to pursue HSR for the purpose of expanding its own empire even if there is no public need for HSR. 

[blownout cylinder]

You should be able to in the case of Transportation as such. The question would be though in what manner? I'd like to see a combination of ways being used here through open market/government body/consumer body scenarios. It would be also financially funded through a variety of means as well. Also including a mix of open market/government bond issues/IPO's and such. I just get piculous when someone thinks that transportation would be better served through certain forms of government fiat---as if any government has handled that well

daveklepper

Do you let the market decide when it comes to police, firemen, traffic lights, water, sewerage, etc?   Some people do think transportation should be treated similarly.

I don't think in the case of police and such that a truly open market would necessarily work but then some do like those positions---