No speed limit = bye-bye HST

[YoHo1975]

On employment. Its nice and all that people are self employed and get to fully chose where they live and work, but stop right now and realize that you are by far the exception not the rule. You can be incredulous that people put up with that lack of freedom, but they do and you best think about passenger rail and commuting in terms of that reality, not in terms of your narrow view. For example, being in home restoration is likely broadly considered a construction job yes? in 2012, that was 4.2% of the US population. https://www.npr.org/news/graphics/2012/03/pm-jobs-whatwedo/gr-pm-whatwedo2012b-462.jpg Not to be overtly political, but look at the percentage of logging and mining...makes you wonder why anyone cares what coal miners think. (Trick question, we care, because they are concentrated in a small number of low population states and so have power....if they all lived and worked n California or New York nobody would ever care about coal miner. Sad but true) My point being that your anecdotes about your employment are just that, anecdotes and only have value if you compare them to what is typical. You aren't doing that. What is Typical is what is most important if we want to spend money where it will be most impactful.

[YoHo1975]

Convicted One

• I guess I can appreciate his position, however.                                                   Any driver driving the legal speed limit in the left lane could put a serious hurt on speeding ticket revenues.

 

 

The next time I see CHP ticketing a Speeder on I5 will be the first time. Ponch don't write speeding tickets in SoCal and the Central Valley. Sometimes up north here, but never down south. I5 is something that must be endured and gotten overwith as quickly as possible. CHP knows this. 

[CMStPnP]

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

I have been self employed in several different fields for 2/3rds of my adult life. 

So I've worked for large companies, as a government contractor, small companies (mom and pop less than 100 employees), and even ran my own franchised sub shop which I closed.   

Now people say here because I closed it, it was a failure but it was my choice to close it and I closed it gracefully.   First attempting to find a buyer, then attempting to sell back to franchise for $1.   Then closing it, and paying all creditors in full.......still had money left after closing.   So happy closing and I did not go bankrupt nor did it cause me financial distress in other areas.   I could have been really stupid and kept the doors open and run it another year or two then borrowed money for another 3 years.   End result is it was marginally profitable at very best and not worth the hours I was putting in for the money made.   

I have another growing surplus in my 401k so I get to try my hand at another business after retirement when I have a pension comming in at least.   Even if I went bankrupt, having my own business with 15-20 employees was the best business experience, learned a lot.   More than willing to try again but never again in the restaurant business.........too much work and not enough rewards.

[zugmann]

zardoz

While you're busy looking in the mirror, trying to count how many vehicles are behind you, what are you missing in front of you?

Doesn't take but a quick glance to see if someone is behind you.

 

And thus is why we will never have autobahn-type roads in this country.

[zardoz]

zugmann

5 cars?  Frankly, one is too many.  Get over.

 

While you're busy looking in the mirror, trying to count how many vehicles are behind you, what are you missing in front of you?

 

[ATLANTIC CENTRAL]

CMStPnP

 

 

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

So if you don't mind, what is it that you do? I have been to Milwaukee, I have a good sense of how far it is from Chicago. I would no sooner live in Milwaukee and work in Chicago than I would live here north of Baltimore and drive/commute to Washington DC every day. But others do it.....good for them. Still does not explain fully why others should pay to build them transportation.  I'm not the corporate type, been locally self employed most of my life, really hate the idea of travel for work like describe.  Now at age 61, I can keep doing what I'm doing for a few more years and be fine. We all make choices, what works for one does not work for all. I actually worked in an office when I was young, got tired of that fast. I have done a lot of different stuff, and always loved my jobs/businesses or moved on, unlike some people I have known who hated every day at work for 40 years..... To each their own, Sheldon

 

 

I'm in Information Technology Big Data / Analytics is about as far as I can go.   My specific area is in heavy demand right now and they cannot find enough people to fill it anywhere in the country.  Demand even greater in fly-over country.

So outlining my personal experience with job search.   Also ties into this discussion because it is also a key point in California's reasoning to putting in the HSR system in the first place.    Silicon Valley is always tight with ability to hire good tech workers even with their current collusion with India to abuse the H1b VISA program to keep tech workers salaries low.   If Silicon Valley could tap the cheap living conditions of the valley and potentially cheap labor as well.   It could cut some of the paperwork costs with cheating our immigration system and instead use American property values in the Valley and potentially American labor to hold costs down instead of relying so heavily on Asia.

This would benefit the state of California MORE because it would increase poperty values in the valley.......raising property tax revenue.   Residents of the valley would have more job opportunities open to them which they allegedly would be greatful for and it would boost California GDP by increasing mobility as well as reducing inefficiencies by having open jobs in one part of the state and higher unemployment in another part of the state.     Thats the theory CA was acting on in part by routing HSR via the valley.    Same general theory with LA basin and extending the cheap / fast commute to the Valley from LA.    

Having the HSR just be within the borders of the Valley shreds a good part of the former dream of California HSR politicians.   Though there might still be benefits to having a Valley only system.

 

Thank you for the thoughtful and interesting response and for sharing what you can about your occupation.

I do understand the dynamic of the "bedroom community" issue for those types of workers. Still not sure who should pay, or not pay, to get them to work......?

And again, based on your reply, I'm so happy I never worked for any big companies......

At age 20, in 1977, I took a job as a junior draftsman with Baltimore Aircoil Company, the worlds largest manufacturer of cooling towers. Their home office is right here in - Baltimore..... After only three days, I was having conflicts with the "system", through no malicious intent on my part.

I had few clothes in my wardrobe that met their dress code (the other engineering office I had worked in had casual standards), lunch was like grammer school, the bell rang and off to the lunch room they marched.

I was not thrilled with the idea of putting a parking sticker on my freshly restored 1963 Nova SS convertible........

The best was the morning ritual - company provided coffee and doughnuts that you were expected to be present for 15 miuntes before your "offical" work day - but here was the catch. I don't drink coffee, not then, not now 42 years later, but they would not allow any other beverages on the drafting department production floor - so I guess no doughnuts for me..........just 15 minutes of my time wasted.....

So after other workers complained about my dress code "violations", and I could get no traction on getting a Coke or an OJ in the morning, I called back another outfit that had offered me a job - they said "we would still love to have you".

So the next morning I gathered my personal drafting equipment, walked out of the drafting department and down to HR and into the HR directors office. I announced my departure from their fine establishment, saying "You can send me the three days pay, or you can keep it, but I can't work here. You are not paying me enough to buy clothes to work here, and I have not been treated like this since the third grade."

The woman was a bit upset, and asked me to sit down and explain, which I did.

Basicly I was told that these issues were not negotiable, and I said good day.....

From that point on in my life, the biggest companies I ever worked for were construction outfits or engineering consultants with maybe 60 employees.

In less than two years I was a lead construction project manager/in house designer draftsman for a well established electrical contractor in Baltimore, managing multi million dollar commercial and industrial projects.

Today I restore old houses, do custom residential design work, and custom high end remodeling. I work as both the designer/project manger and as part of our team of craftsman.

I can't even imagine a life of commuting and cubicals......my resume includes about a dozen different job descriptions/trades/skills in the last 44 years. 

I have been self employed in several different fields for 2/3rds of my adult life. 

Sheldon

 

 

[Convicted One]

• I guess I can appreciate his position, however.                                                   Any driver driving the legal speed limit in the left lane could put a serious hurt on speeding ticket revenues.

[Convicted One]

7j43k

I guess he just doesn't see the paradox

Well, by gawrsh, if it was the head of the California Highway Patrol behind me, I'd pull over and let him pass!

[7j43k]

Convicted One

Am I the only one who sees the paradox in these people crowing about the need for other drivers to observe so called "slowpoke laws" Just so their own desire to break speed limit laws is not interfered with? 

 

The head of the California Highway Patrol has said: slower traffic keep to the right.  When it was pointed out that the faster traffic was speeding, he said: slower traffic keep to the right.

I guess he just doesn't see the paradox.

 

Ed

[Deggesty]

As to the necessity of making left turns, back when I was in the world of  a five day week work, I made use of a three lane limited access highway for the greater part of my travel to and from work--and I made left turns to get off the highway. Knowing the reluctance of other people to let prospective left-turners move to the proper lane, I would move over well in advance.

I was also amused, especially in the morning, by the behavior of many others. Every mile or so, I would come to a cross street and its traffic light. In the morning, the lights would be set for traffic in the direction opposite to mine--and I would be passed by many who did not understand how the lights were set--and I would pass them at the next light without having to even slow down. Think if the wear on brakes and saving on gasoline by traveling as fast as the traffic lights permitted.

[Convicted One]

CMStPnP

Just a few points that importing the autobahn without some of the German rules of the autobahn might also be messy. :)

Strictly in the context of autobahn-like unlimited speed highways, I agree completely. The discussion by some had veered into a debate about "existing laws on existing highways" and their seeming perspective that the road somehow belonged to them and they only shared it with others as a courtesy....was what I was responding to.

[Convicted One]

BaltACD

By being the road block in the left lane you are creating decisions among other drivers that don't need to be made if YOU were properly in the right lane

"Properly" is an interesting concept in this case. Am I the only one who sees the paradox in these people crowing about the need for other drivers to observe so called "slowpoke laws" Just so their own desire to break speed limit laws is not interfered with?

Personally, I am not one to languish in the left hand lane, unless I have a left turn coming up,  in which case I could care less how big of a hurry the guy behind me happens to believe that he is in. I've had too many instances where other drivers are too busy getting where they are going to allow me to merge infront of them, causing me to miss my turn all together.  So, first chance I get within two miles of my turn to occupy the left lane, I'm taking it. Don't care how pretty the driver behind me thinks his hi-beams are. 

[YoHo1975]

Ugh, this thread. 2 pages of nothing related to the actual proposal on the table. A bunch of partisan bloviating and finally on page 3 we start talking actual boots on the ground reality in California.

•  This proposal is specially for I5 and more precisely for I5 between roughly the grapevine and Stockton. AKA, 200+ miles of absolute nothing.
• The proposal as I understand it would be to move from a 4 lane to a 6 lane highway with 1 lane being no speed limit.
• There's no small amount of truck traffic on I-5, but it's mostly long haul. the vast majority of local truck moves are on US99 or possible US101. Again though, this is to add a lane, so presumably existing truck traffic would stay as is.
• I can state categorically as reinforced by driving from Roseville to Anaheim and back last week that the average speed on this section of I5 in the left lane is easily around 80MPH and you will often get passed if you set cruise at that speed. This isn't LA or the bay. This is running outside of the major valley communities.
• Why would people live in the San Joaquin Valley and work in Silicon Valley? Because they would like to have a cost of living that is almost reasonable. The the Bay area in particular and the LA basin to a lesser extent are incredibly, remarkably expensive to live in. For young people and those in the service industry it can be impossible to afford to live in. So you move out to Tracy, Stockton and Beyond and you hope on a train or sit in a car for hours. I have a friend whose parents built a ranch house in Sunnyvale in the mid 50s for around $55k, When his mom died a few years back, they were able to sell that same house for 1.2million...the house was then torn down and a 6 figure McMansion built on the spot. "Normal" people don't live in Silicon Valley.

 

• As to the HSR component. The theory behind it is a perfect example of where government programs could do the most good. There are not specific set of business interests that alone could benefit from this given the costs, but a huge number of people would benefit if it did exist. And so Government steps in. The issue has ALWAYS been the section to the North and South. Getting HSR over the mountains and then figuring out where it's going in the Basin and then up on to the Pennisula through well heeled expensive neighborhoods was a monumental task. The sections with the fewest route miles were going to be the largest cost by an order of magnitude. But even the sections envisioned could have outsized value. For a number of years The Rail Authority has been talking about using this sectio of the HSR in conjunction with existing Freight/Amtrak lines. From Merced in particular, accessing points north on the existing Coridors is reasonably trivial. This would make the San Joaquins in particular even more attractive. Getting down into LA is significantly hard of course. I think upgrading the Bay area is challenging, but there are politically realistic possibilities that would create a service significantly faster than current. I think there's no solution to getting from the Central Valley into the LA Basin at anything approaching usable speed that doesn't involve a new railroad over the mountains. I suppose with the additional capacity over Tehachapi it might not be quite as bad as it was...though BNSF built that for a reason. It's not idle capacity. I'm honestly curious what a couple billion in custom equipment and proper track maintenance could do for the coast line. Certainly not HSR, but what could be done with the HSR money on that line LA to San Jose. What would be the end result?

[ATLANTIC CENTRAL]

Passing on the right is perfectly legal on muti lane limited access highways.

This whole converstation is based around the idea of raising or eliminating speed limits in some places, and to some degree assumes the position that current speed limits are artificially low.

This morning on I-95 I passed a Maryland State Trooper parked in the median, I was going about 83 in a 65 zone, he could not be bothered. Enforcement sets the speed, not the statue.........

Sheldon

[CMStPnP]

Convicted One

If the car coming up behind you has no respect for the speed limit laws, then what objection should they have to passing on the right?

And since we were talking about importing the autobahn.   Gemans use the flash to pass signal with their headlights and you better abide by their polite request with the headlights because....

This is Federal Law in Germany and you need to pull over to the right and let faster vehicles pass.   Same on two lane farmer roads, Germans build "move - over" lanes, similar to rail passing sidings every so often on their two lane bi-directional roads.    Failure to move over and let faster vehicles pass is a $$$ fine in Germany and I heard it was steep.

BTW, caught DUI and refuse a sobriety test?  German Police can forceibly withdraw the blood roadside for the test.....also the law.

Flip a German Policeman the bird........hauled in for "disrespect" or fined on the spot.   Barvaria where our little mustached friend rose to power from (that everyone likes to bring back from the grave) is particularly nortorious for insisting on respect for police folks.

Just a few points that importing the autobahn without some of the German rules of the autobahn might also be messy. :)

[CMStPnP]

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

So if you don't mind, what is it that you do? I have been to Milwaukee, I have a good sense of how far it is from Chicago. I would no sooner live in Milwaukee and work in Chicago than I would live here north of Baltimore and drive/commute to Washington DC every day. But others do it.....good for them. Still does not explain fully why others should pay to build them transportation.  I'm not the corporate type, been locally self employed most of my life, really hate the idea of travel for work like describe.  Now at age 61, I can keep doing what I'm doing for a few more years and be fine. We all make choices, what works for one does not work for all. I actually worked in an office when I was young, got tired of that fast. I have done a lot of different stuff, and always loved my jobs/businesses or moved on, unlike some people I have known who hated every day at work for 40 years..... To each their own, Sheldon

I'm in Information Technology Big Data / Analytics is about as far as I can go.   My specific area is in heavy demand right now and they cannot find enough people to fill it anywhere in the country.  Demand even greater in fly-over country.

So outlining my personal experience with job search.   Also ties into this discussion because it is also a key point in California's reasoning to putting in the HSR system in the first place.    Silicon Valley is always tight with ability to hire good tech workers even with their current collusion with India to abuse the H1b VISA program to keep tech workers salaries low.   If Silicon Valley could tap the cheap living conditions of the valley and potentially cheap labor as well.   It could cut some of the paperwork costs with cheating our immigration system and instead use American property values in the Valley and potentially American labor to hold costs down instead of relying so heavily on Asia.

This would benefit the state of California MORE because it would increase poperty values in the valley.......raising property tax revenue.   Residents of the valley would have more job opportunities open to them which they allegedly would be greatful for and it would boost California GDP by increasing mobility as well as reducing inefficiencies by having open jobs in one part of the state and higher unemployment in another part of the state.     Thats the theory CA was acting on in part by routing HSR via the valley.    Same general theory with LA basin and extending the cheap / fast commute to the Valley from LA.    

Having the HSR just be within the borders of the Valley shreds a good part of the former dream of California HSR politicians.   Though there might still be benefits to having a Valley only system.

[BaltACD]

Convicted One

 

7j43k

BUT, does it make sense to move over if the way is clear and you see a car coming up behind you as you drive along in the left lane 

If the car coming up behind you has no respect for the speed limit laws, then what objection should they have to passing on the right?

If they are the only two cars on the road - no problem. 

If there is a moderate amount of traffic - being slower in the left lane than overtaking traffic creates a 'ripple' in the right lane as the faster left lane traffic reaches your rolling road block.  Most in the left lane will slow to give YOU an opportunity to move right, which then slows the entire left lane until it is felt by the first following driver that YOU are a road block and a right pass is done.  Vehicles further back in the left lane may read the situation quicker and 'pull the trigger' on a right pass before car one behind the YOUR road block makes his decision.  By being the road block in the left lane you are creating decisions among other drivers that don't need to be made if YOU were properly in the right lane.  This applies to dual lane highway.

Where there are three or more lanes in your direction a different ettiqute applies.

 

[Convicted One]

7j43k

BUT, does it make sense to move over if the way is clear and you see a car coming up behind you as you drive along in the left lane

If the car coming up behind you has no respect for the speed limit laws, then what objection should they have to passing on the right?

[zugmann]

5 cars?  Frankly, one is too many.  Get over.

[7j43k]

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

 

But the idea that you should keep moving over to the right after you pass each slower vehicle is an obsolete idea, and many states have changed their laws and/or enforcement accordingly.

BUT, does it make sense to move over if the way is clear and you see a car coming up behind you as you drive along in the left lane - of course.

 

 

 

The latter seems to contradict the former.

But, yes:  I WAS today in the #2 of 4 lanes.  Traveling briskly.  No one coming up behind.  I could have moved to the right, but didn't.

So what.

But when you have FIVE cars behind you, as California law says, you have no excuse.  And, if other states have had similar laws and changed them, it's a sorry commentary on those states.  FIVE cars?  And the drivers are so clueless that they don't even know?  Or care?  Big ticket, in my world!

Ed

[zugmann]

BaltACD

and I suspect 'adaptive cruise control' will adjust your speed long before you would have adjusted your speed yourself.

I don't have that high tech stuff.

[ATLANTIC CENTRAL]

BaltACD

 

 

zugmann

 

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

BUT, does it make sense to move over if the way is clear and you see a car coming up behind you as you drive along in the left lane - of course. 

Just do it BEFORE I have to adjust my speed, please.

 

 

and I suspect 'adaptive cruise control' will adjust your speed long before you would have adjusted your speed yourself.

If you are no actively passing or visiblily overtaking cars in the right lane - get in the right lane yourself.  If there is enough space betweeen cars in the right lane for someone to come up behind you and then pass you on the right and complete the pass by getting ahead of you in the left lane - YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE RIGHT LANE ALL THE TIME.

 

Agreed, but typically like my trip tonight, as I cruised along at 80 plus in the left lane, I was consistantly overtaking cars/trucks in both right lanes.

If I saw a car gaining on me, I would speed up and/or find a hole to move over into.

When and if traffic volume reaches a lower level, I always move to the right if I can maintain my desired cruising speed.

My FLEX has adaptive cruise control, but I seldom use it for trips this short.

Sheldon

[BaltACD]

zugmann

 

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

BUT, does it make sense to move over if the way is clear and you see a car coming up behind you as you drive along in the left lane - of course. 

Just do it BEFORE I have to adjust my speed, please.

and I suspect 'adaptive cruise control' will adjust your speed long before you would have adjusted your speed yourself.

If you are no actively passing or visiblily overtaking cars in the right lane - get in the right lane yourself.  If there is enough space betweeen cars in the right lane for someone to come up behind you and then pass you on the right and complete the pass by getting ahead of you in the left lane - YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE RIGHT LANE ALL THE TIME.

[ATLANTIC CENTRAL]

zugmann

 

 

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

BUT, does it make sense to move over if the way is clear and you see a car coming up behind you as you drive along in the left lane - of course.

 

 

Just do it BEFORE I have to adjust my speed, please.

 

Completely agreed!

 

[zugmann]

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

BUT, does it make sense to move over if the way is clear and you see a car coming up behind you as you drive along in the left lane - of course.

Just do it BEFORE I have to adjust my speed, please.

[ATLANTIC CENTRAL]

zugmann

 

 

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

Here in Maryland, and most of the east, there are no more "keep right" laws. Many highways have at least a few left side exits.

 

 

Your neighbor to the north has that law (PA).  So does NJ.  There's exceptions, of course, but generally, stay to the right. 

 

And they have become the exception to what was once the rule. A rule that largely defeats the purpose of multi lane highways. And even in NJ and PA, from what I see, it is seldom enforced.

I can be in PA in 15 min, and NJ in 25 or 30, I've driven more than a couple miles in those states........

Maryland does have posted "slower traffic keep right" areas, and trucks are restricted from left lanes on sections of many highways.

But the idea that you should keep moving over to the right after you pass each slower vehicle is an obsolete idea, and many states have changed their laws and/or enforcement accordingly.

BUT, does it make sense to move over if the way is clear and you see a car coming up behind you as you drive along in the left lane - of course.

Just this evening I made a trip down and back up I-95 to suburban east Baltimore and back to my home in Havre de Grace. I cruised along at 80-85 for the most part, with only one or two cars not respecting the idea of slower traffic keeping right.

Sheldon 

 

[zugmann]

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

Here in Maryland, and most of the east, there are no more "keep right" laws. Many highways have at least a few left side exits.

Your neighbor to the north has that law (PA).  So does NJ.  There's exceptions, of course, but generally, stay to the right. 

[spsffan]

7j43k

People are ALREADY going 100 MPH on Highway 5.  If it becomes legal, they can spend less time looking in the rearview mirror, and more looking ahead.  Although, when they're looking for cops, they're at least spending more time being aware of traffic than SOME people I've seen driving.

The article talks about more lanes.  Oh, yeah!  For some reason, there's a goodly number of drivers who think, if they're going a long way, they should be in the left lane, no matter what speed they're going.  When one of those catches up to a person who just wants to drive slowly (perfectly acceptable), it turns into a rolling roadblock (Highway 5 is mostly 4 lanes).  I don't know about other states, but in California, if you've got 5 cars on your tail, it's the law that you must pull over to let them pass.  There appears to be a lot of people IN the state that don't know that.

 

Ed

 

 

Well, I certainly know about the 5 cars behind you rule. It's the one question I missed back in 1978 when I first took the driver's test. I thought 3 was a better answer. 

 

But more to the point, yes, people do regularly drive, if not 100, certainly 90 mph on I-5. But only for a while until you get stuck behind a truck or cars going like 70, trying to pass a truck in the right lane that is doing 65. This happens over and over again on a typical trip. 

As far as it goes, yes there are people who have 2 hour commutes, and not just in the Silicon Valley area. It's a function of housing prices and wages. But I wouldn't expect a whole lot of them to take he HSR if it were built. The HSR would take some, of course, but mostly it would provide relief for the overtaxed highways and airports on the end points, plus, for the first time, a much better transportation option for intermediate points to the major population centers. 

[ATLANTIC CENTRAL]

7j43k

People are ALREADY going 100 MPH on Highway 5.  If it becomes legal, they can spend less time looking in the rearview mirror, and more looking ahead.  Although, when they're looking for cops, they're at least spending more time being aware of traffic than SOME people I've seen driving.

The article talks about more lanes.  Oh, yeah!  For some reason, there's a goodly number of drivers who think, if they're going a long way, they should be in the left lane, no matter what speed they're going.  When one of those catches up to a person who just wants to drive slowly (perfectly acceptable), it turns into a rolling roadblock (Highway 5 is mostly 4 lanes).  I don't know about other states, but in California, if you've got 5 cars on your tail, it's the law that you must pull over to let them pass.  There appears to be a lot of people IN the state that don't know that.

 

Ed

 

Here in Maryland, and most of the east, there are no more "keep right" laws. Many highways have at least a few left side exits.

But most slower drivers do move over if/when they can.

The left lane pace on I-95 is pretty much 80 mph. 90 or agressiveness will get you a ticket. The posted limit is 65.

Sheldon

[ATLANTIC CENTRAL]

CMStPnP

 

 

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

Are you serious here? Who told them to live 2 or more hours from their job?

 

 

On average a rush hour typically adds an hour each way in commute time for most major cities.   In Milwaukee there are folks that live in Downtown Milwaukee that work in downtown Chicago and thats a 90 min commute just on the train probably 2+ hours each way with waiting time.    The salaries downtown Chicago are approx 20-33% greater than what you can get paid in Milwaukee because the cost of living in Illinois is so much.    If you can spend the time on the train, pack a lunch and commute into Chicago, your comming out ahead.

By living near the train station in Milwaukee vs the suburbs of Milwaukee they are only adding perhaps 30-40 min to their daily commute by taking the train to Chicago.   On top of that some employers have green transit programs and will subsidize a METRA, Amtrak or City Bus system monthly pass instead of having employees drive into work.

If they are a consultant making the commute they can bill the 90 min on the train in each direction and count it as part of their 8 hour workshift, just by opening their laptop and doing work on the train using wi-fi or a portable hot spot.

I work an hour and a half flight time from my employer's city, they allow me a 3 hour allowance on Mondays and Fridays to bill towards work and cover the time of the flight.   When I have to fly in.   I can fly in as many weeks as I see fit or not at all if I see that is the case.    They pay for everything while I am out of state and on their work site, meals, lodging in a 3-4 star hotel, per diem, and transportation costs.   It's a good deal for me because they threw in a full pension on top which I would have relied entirely on my 401k prior.   So with the 401k and pension I will retire slightly above what I am getting paid now with COLA's until age 90.

Moral of the story is, when someone interviews you in your home town for an out of state position or a position that requires travel.   You should always look into it instead of saying NO.

Also on the early morning Monday flights and afternoon Friday flights back there are approx 7-8 BNSF Managers with laptops.   So I kind of think BNSF has a similar program for it's Fort Worth, TX employees to suppliment shortages in other parts of their network.   Could be just coincidence but I have a suspicion as it seems to be the same faces.

 

So if you don't mind, what is it that you do?

I have been to Milwaukee, I have a good sense of how far it is from Chicago. I would no sooner live in Milwaukee and work in Chicago than I would live here north of Baltimore and drive/commute to Washington DC every day.

But others do it.....good for them.

Still does not explain fully why others should pay to build them transportation. 

I'm not the corporate type, been locally self employed most of my life, really hate the idea of travel for work like describe. 

Now at age 61, I can keep doing what I'm doing for a few more years and be fine.

We all make choices, what works for one does not work for all. I actually worked in an office when I was young, got tired of that fast.

I have done a lot of different stuff, and always loved my jobs/businesses or moved on, unlike some people I have known who hated every day at work for 40 years.....

To each their own,

Sheldon