Just heard a news teaser saying someone in Columbus, Ga looking for HSR to Atlanta. More later??
edit: was just columbus pols pushing our governor to add columbus to any HSR plans. Want to bet that will go anywhere?? Actually I looked at the terain and present rail lines a while back and it could work fairly well. I-185 has room on east side to meet HSR curvature and gradient requirements but north of LaGrange a different problem. CSX from LaGrange iis completely unusable.
I think the word, "Dreaming," nailed it.
As things stand now, with a bunch of people charging through the budget with axes, ANY HSR plan would be dreaming.
Meanwhine, out here in the Dessicated Desert, the Desert Xpress was supposed to break ground for its Las Vegas to a park-and-ride on several different dates over the last year or so. If they have, it's the best kept secret in Sin City.
Chuck
Let's remember that the Road Builder's Association is very strong in Georgia as it is in other southern states.They have turned back rail initiatives before and probably will again.
George
Georgia does such a wonderful job with roads...
http://www.ajc.com/news/deal-lowers-tolls-on-1196014.html
Didn't any of the traffic engineers know about the tipping point from free flowing to jammed conditions? You chase traffic off the HOV lanes back into the regular lanes and the jam will start sooner, back up longer, and take longer to clear. Easily predicable....and just what occured!
Also predictable is that wrecks will be more severe as the speed differential between HOT and regular lanes is greater and occurs more hours of each day. The first thunderous crash between a commuter bus and car has yet to occur, but it's only a matter of time.
To make it worse, the HOT lanes were projected to require >$1M per year to staff and control. Now, with lower fares, and fewer takers than predicted, it will be much worse.
The only good to come of this is it can be thrown in the face of the highway guys the next time they start talking about specific light rail projects under performing estimates.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
oltmannd The first thunderous crash between a commuter bus and car has yet to occur, but it's only a matter of time.
The first thunderous crash between a commuter bus and car has yet to occur, but it's only a matter of time.
Don:
Is this what Governor Nathan Deal has in mind for your state?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNixDlRoMvA
That Onion satire video "High Speed Bus Plan" was funny as get out when it was new, and it brings tears to my eyes even today. "Get out of the way, because the High Speed Bus is on its way!"
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
oltmannd Georgia does such a wonderful job with roads... Georgia deserves your scarcasm. http://www.ajc.com/news/deal-lowers-tolls-on-1196014.html Didn't any of the traffic engineers know about the tipping point from free flowing to jammed conditions? You chase traffic off the HOV lanes back into the regular lanes and the jam will start sooner, back up longer, and take longer to clear. Easily predicable....and just what occured! Yes I have loved hearing the traffic gurus in the mornings this week. To make it worse, the HOT lanes were projected to require >$1M per year to staff and control. Now, with lower fares, and fewer takers than predicted, it will be much worse. Of course anything to give a few jobs to the party loyalists! The only good to come of this is it can be thrown in the face of the highway guys the next time they start talking about specific light rail projects under performing estimates. Don: It is getting hard to cite any underperforming estimated light rail lines. Heh Heh!! Norfolk is getting from 50 - 75% more riders than the 2900 / day perdicted. Some days more than double. Charlotte is another example.
Georgia deserves your scarcasm.
Yes I have loved hearing the traffic gurus in the mornings this week.
Of course anything to give a few jobs to the party loyalists!
Don: It is getting hard to cite any underperforming estimated light rail lines. Heh Heh!! Norfolk is getting from 50 - 75% more riders than the 2900 / day perdicted. Some days more than double. Charlotte is another example.
Don: I do not think that the our posters realize how automobile centric this state is. Our state gasoline tax is the lowest in the nation at 7.5 cents less than 1/3 of the US tax. How does Georgia finance roads you ask? It all comes out of general revenue. Voters have passed SPLOST ( special local option sales tax ) to rebuild and repave roads as there is not enough money from transportation funds to repair same. There is now a proposal for Ga. voters to pass a general sales tax increase in each separate transportation districs to finance road projects. Boy did I get soome people mad when I proposed instead higher fuel taxes instead. Wonder what Sam1 would think of this?
Our governor is taking money from dedicated funds to work the roads. .
That is hysterical....I wouldn't show that to anybody in the DOT down here.....
blue streak 1 oltmannd: Georgia does such a wonderful job with roads... Georgia deserves your scarcasm. http://www.ajc.com/news/deal-lowers-tolls-on-1196014.html Didn't any of the traffic engineers know about the tipping point from free flowing to jammed conditions? You chase traffic off the HOV lanes back into the regular lanes and the jam will start sooner, back up longer, and take longer to clear. Easily predicable....and just what occured! Yes I have loved hearing the traffic gurus in the mornings this week. To make it worse, the HOT lanes were projected to require >$1M per year to staff and control. Now, with lower fares, and fewer takers than predicted, it will be much worse. Of course anything to give a few jobs to the party loyalists! The only good to come of this is it can be thrown in the face of the highway guys the next time they start talking about specific light rail projects under performing estimates. Don: It is getting hard to cite any underperforming estimated light rail lines. Heh Heh!! Norfolk is getting from 50 - 75% more riders than the 2900 / day perdicted. Some days more than double. Charlotte is another example. Don: I do not think that the our posters realize how automobile centric this state is. Our state gasoline tax is the lowest in the nation at 7.5 cents less than 1/3 of the US tax. How does Georgia finance roads you ask? It all comes out of general revenue. Voters have passed SPLOST ( special local option sales tax ) to rebuild and repave roads as there is not enough money from transportation funds to repair same. There is now a proposal for Ga. voters to pass a general sales tax increase in each separate transportation districs to finance road projects. Boy did I get soome people mad when I proposed instead higher fuel taxes instead. Wonder what Sam1 would think of this? Our governor is taking money from dedicated funds to work the roads.
oltmannd: Georgia does such a wonderful job with roads... Georgia deserves your scarcasm. http://www.ajc.com/news/deal-lowers-tolls-on-1196014.html Didn't any of the traffic engineers know about the tipping point from free flowing to jammed conditions? You chase traffic off the HOV lanes back into the regular lanes and the jam will start sooner, back up longer, and take longer to clear. Easily predicable....and just what occured! Yes I have loved hearing the traffic gurus in the mornings this week. To make it worse, the HOT lanes were projected to require >$1M per year to staff and control. Now, with lower fares, and fewer takers than predicted, it will be much worse. Of course anything to give a few jobs to the party loyalists! The only good to come of this is it can be thrown in the face of the highway guys the next time they start talking about specific light rail projects under performing estimates. Don: It is getting hard to cite any underperforming estimated light rail lines. Heh Heh!! Norfolk is getting from 50 - 75% more riders than the 2900 / day perdicted. Some days more than double. Charlotte is another example.
Our governor is taking money from dedicated funds to work the roads.
The fully allocated cost of driving, i.e. building and maintaining roadways, policing them, repairing the environmental damage attributed to driving, etc. should be reflected in the fuel taxes (user fees).
As a first step the federal government, as well as the states, should increase their fuel taxes to reflect an adjustment for inflation since 1980. This would, according to Simpson/Bowles or the Deficit Commission, raise the federal fuel taxes by approximately 25 cents per gallon.
Ultimately, the cost of local streets, farm to market roads, county roads, etc. should be reflected in the fuel taxes, as opposed to the current practice of paying for them out of property taxes. Doing so would have a significant impact on the price of fuel at the pump and would make the true cost of driving more apparent. Of course, there should be a corresponding reduction in property taxes.
As I have said, if the true cost of each mode of transportation was reflected at the price point, i.e. ticket counter, pump, etc., passenger rail probably would be a more viable option for many markets, especially relatively short, high density corridors.
Oh,intercity passenger rail should also pay fuel taxes, property taxes etc, where applicable. When I say that each form of transport should reflect its true cost at the price point, I don't exclude passenger rail.
Unfortunately, my rational, business model recommendations are not likely to be adopted. Amongst other things neither political party, especially at the federal level, appears am mendable to raising the federal fuel taxes, which by the way have not been increased since 1993. Last year a Texas state senator from Dallas recommending increasing the state gasoline tax by five cents. It has not been increased since 1992. His suggestion was a non-starter.
I have an even better suggestion:
How about a law that says the proceeds of the gas tax can ONLY be used for road construction and repair. No bus stops, no museums, no walking trails, etc.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
Phoebe Vet I have an even better suggestion: How about a law that says the proceeds of the gas tax can ONLY be used for road construction and repair. No bus stops, no museums, no walking trails, etc.
I agree. In the case of the federal fuel taxes, two cents of every gallon goes to the Mass Transit Fund. And approximately four cents goes to the U.S. Treasury for general deficit reduction. In addition to the fuels taxes, the feds collect a variety of fees and excise taxes, especially from commercial operators, to support the federal spend on highways.
In Texas 25 per cent of the fuel tax goes to education. In addition, a small portion of it, probably a fraction of a cent per gallon, is used by TXDOT to support the Heartland Flyer. Whoops, that's a chop chop. Maybe that is not such a bad idea. Surely, there must be some justification for it that I am overlooking.
Fuel taxes are user fees. They should be devoted exclusively to supporting the infrastructure and services required by motorists.
What is real fact is HSR is set for zero funding from the US Congress . This has already been stated from majority leaders. In addition the House Transportation Subcommittee has proposed a devastating 60% budget cut for Amtrak in 2012. This will end all long distance and some short haul services.Bottom line is with the current makeup and mood of the House, both HSR and Amtrak are dead. We are basically living the final times of psgr train service as we know it.
Sam1. Fuel taxes are user fees. They should be devoted exclusively to supporting the infrastructure and services required by motorists.
Would that include all police, ambulance, fire etc items going to roads??
This is where many of us posters disagree with your philosophy. There should be a transportation department that receives transportation taxes. ( both Fed and state ) This department would disperse transportation tax funds as needed not to the highway lobby.
I cannot understand why transportation (all segments ) is so fragmented when we have the FCC, Dept of Justice, Agriculture, public health, etc that is integrated with revenue and disbursments.
blue streak 1 Sam1: . Fuel taxes are user fees. They should be devoted exclusively to supporting the infrastructure and services required by motorists. Would that include all police, ambulance, fire etc items going to roads?? This is where many of us posters disagree with your philosophy. There should be a transportation department that receives transportation taxes. ( both Fed and state ) This department would disperse transportation tax funds as needed not to the highway lobby. I cannot understand why transportation (all segments ) is so fragmented when we have the FCC, Dept of Justice, Agriculture, public health, etc that is integrated with revenue and disbursements.
Sam1: . Fuel taxes are user fees. They should be devoted exclusively to supporting the infrastructure and services required by motorists.
I cannot understand why transportation (all segments ) is so fragmented when we have the FCC, Dept of Justice, Agriculture, public health, etc that is integrated with revenue and disbursements.
Motorists should pay for the police and fire services that are incurred by them. In most cases ambulance fees are billed directly to the person needing them and are paid by insurance or other third party payer, depending on whether the beneficiary can afford to cover the cost of the emergency services.
The federal government, as well as each state, has a transportation department. Amongst other things, at least at the federal level, as well as in Texas, the departments collect fuel taxes. They use them for a variety of transportation projects. Actually, they receive the fuel tax payments from refiners, which in turn re-capture them from motorists at the pump. The DOT manages the Highway Trust Fund, which is intended primarily to fund the federal road system. TXDOT does the same for Texas, and I assume that most other state departments of transportation act accordingly.
Not all fuel taxes are used for highway construction and maintenance. Of the 18.4 cents levied on a gallon of gasoline by the federal government, two cents goes to the Mass Transit Administration, and approximately four cents goes to the U.S. Treasury for deficit reduction. Recently, as described in Trains latest issue, the feds have granted funds to the railroads to improve their infrastructure to accommodate more double stack trains.
If you think that a bureaucrat in Washington or Austin is in a better position to determine what should be grown in the panhandle of Texas, then you probably think that a centralized, top down transportation department or function is the way to go. I don't.
Behavior is a function of its consequences. If users see the true cost of their transport options, they are likely to choose the one that will do the least damage to their pocketbooks, although there are numerous other factors that guide their decision.
If the government would price the true cost of transport at the price point, people would tend to select the most viable option within the framework of their value system. In this case, I believe that passenger rail could be competitive in relatively short, high density corridors. Unfortunately, as long as transport is heavily influenced by politics as opposed to economics, the politics, including the highway lobby, will continue to influence unduly transport decisions in the United States or around the world for that matter.
Most western economics treatises argue that properly regulated, competitive markets do a better job of allocating scarce resources than planned, centralized economies. This means that the free market should be allowed to operate wherever it can, with appropriate regulation, under a relatively loose framework. The best example of a top down, centralized economy failure is the late Soviet Union.
My views relate to commercial activities, i.e. transportation, communications, postal services, etc. I am not arguing that the Department of Defense, Department of Justice, are regulator agencies overseeing commercial activities. Clearly they are not. On the other hand, in the case of commercial activities, I favor a market based approach. From what I have seen it beats a political approach.
Your belief is based on the theory that competition will regulate the market. Unfortunately we have evolved into a society where the markets are controlled by a small handful of mega corporations who fear little from their competitors. Those corporations see greater profit opportunity in buying their competitors than in competing with them.
Rail, in particular, is an industry that is nearly impossible for a new player to enter because a company must either build their own ROW or pay a toll to use the ROW of their competitors. Either way they are not serious competition.
If the FEDS owned the mainlines and the railroads owned their yards, power, and rolling stock then anyone who could afford to buy equipment could afford to start a railroad. It could be finance with some kind of ticket tax, fuel tax, mileage toll, or other user fee.
Of course the downside of that is we can see what a terrible job the Feds do of maintaining the highway system. They have lots of money to build, which is high visibility and popular with voters, but little money to maintain, which is low visibility and not even noticed by the voters.
Phoebe Vet Your belief is based on the theory that competition will regulate the market. Unfortunately we have evolved into a society where the markets are controlled by a small handful of mega corporations who fear little from their competitors. Those corporations see greater profit opportunity in buying their competitors than in competing with them. Rail, in particular, is an industry that is nearly impossible for a new player to enter because a company must either build their own ROW or pay a toll to use the ROW of their competitors. Either way they are not serious competition. If the FEDS owned the mainlines and the railroads owned their yards, power, and rolling stock then anyone who could afford to buy equipment could afford to start a railroad. It could be finance with some kind of ticket tax, fuel tax, mileage toll, or other user fee. Of course the downside of that is we can see what a terrible job the Feds do of maintaining the highway system. They have lots of money to build, which is high visibility and popular with voters, but little money to maintain, which is low visibility and not even noticed by the voters.
You have misread my beliefs. Competitive markets optimize the allocation of scare resources. Smart regulation at the federal and state level is necessary for a level playing field. When governments intervene extensively in markets, they invariable get it wrong, although of course the winners don't see it that way.
The notion that the economy is controlled by a handful of mega corporations is debatable. There are 10s of thousands of corporations in the United States. They compete vigorously. That's why you can choose to buy a car from GM, Chrysler, Ford, Toyota, Honda, Mercedes, BMW, etc.
The Fortune 500 corporations are large, to be sure, but most of them compete not only with U.S. corporations but foreign corporations as well. In 2010 the Fortune 500 had a median return on sales of 5%, although 62 of them lost money. Their average return on equity was approximately 10 to 11 per cent, which is not great when considering the risks associated with business. This does not strike me as a picture in which a few players have a stranglehold on the economy, although oligrachies certainly exist. This is one of the reasons that smart regulation is critical.
Having the federal government own the rail infrastructure in the U.S. does not seem like a good idea. On there other hand, having an independent equity third party own it, as is the case with electric transmission in some countries, and rent space on it to qualified users might be a good idea. But the railroads would not allow it.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.