All of this talk and many links and I still haven't seen a map of the proposed tunnel anywhere.
Modeling the "Fargo Area Rapid Transit" in O scale 3 rail.
More tunnel articles:
http://www.mycentraljersey.com/article/20101011/STATE/101011011/ARC-Hudson-River-rail-tunnel-lacked-New-York-support
http://www.northjersey.com/columnists/doblin/doblin_101110.html
Henry, one of the big issues with the RTA, then Metra, was it's financing. And with good cause. The Citizens of the state, and the six collar counties surrounding Chicago, spent a huge amount of money to rescue those commuter services from extinction, and keep them operating. Thus, trains that leave the state, are not funded by IL citizens, but by the taxpayers in those respective states by law. People pay extra taxes on gasoline and booze in the six collar counties to fund it. I find it a very appropriate formula.
I also feel it intrusive, when an entity from one state, decides it will dictate what people will do or will not do in a different state. You may call it parochial, I call it good accountability for our money and rights.
henry6 . There was a PA Governor (Milton?) back in the 70's who proposed a Railroad Trust for his state to meet the demands of the future...he was all but laughed away as was his idea. But it certainly makes more sense to plan for the present and the future instead of patching yesterday's tar and concrete!
. There was a PA Governor (Milton?) back in the 70's who proposed a Railroad Trust for his state to meet the demands of the future...he was all but laughed away as was his idea. But it certainly makes more sense to plan for the present and the future instead of patching yesterday's tar and concrete!
That was Governor Milton Shapp.
As I answered you, Dave, on the Transit topics, no, this is political postion and positioning. But adding to that this morning is a Morris Daily Record report that the fact that neither the State nor the City of New York are interested or able to contribute to the project is a matter of concern for Christie and others. The story goes on to say that Warrington and others, upon being rebuffed by them, went to the NY-NJ Port Authority to get $3billion instead. This all does not sit well with many in NJ because of the tax burden NJians who work in NYC have to bear along with the contributions NJians make to the NYC work force at all levels. And that underscores another item alluded to in this article, one that I have spoken about many times.
Somewhere in the article someone is quoted or paraphrased that this project...a rail tunnel projecte under the Hudson be it ARC or otherwise...should actually be handled as a regional problem not a problem of any one or several states or cities. HURRAH! I have often noted the interdepenence of all of the NY Metropolitan Area, indeed from New Haven, Wassaic, Poughkeepsie, even, Ronkonkoma and Babylon, to points beyond Philadelphia and into South Jersey, is a region whose transportation system should be interconnected. The future will see Allentown-Bethlehem and Scranton-WilkesBarre in Pennsylvania and a broader and deeper stroke along the west bank of the Hudson into the Catskills become part of this "regional area of transportation" need. There should be, or will be eventually, Philadelphia to New Haven, maybe even ALbany regional Services....and from Allentown and Scranton through NYC to LI and Connecticuit points, too. I don't mean running trains but providing service of trains, connections, reliability, effeciency, and consistancy.
Yes, this is where ARC falls short, it stubs in the bedrock of Manhatten. There has to be more connectivity with MNRR and LIRR uptown and downtown! Why not connect the LIRR's Atlantic Terminal with Journal Square or Secaucus or anyother place on NJT or MNRR? Some minor improvements in this area are already being dealt with...NJT equipment from New Haven to Secaucus Jct. for Meadowlands events; one ticket from Long Island to the Meadowlands. Minor, miniscule, but a start in thinking and marketing in a regional rather than state or county parochialism.
You know, I was furious at Christie for pulling the plug on ARC. I still think he is short sighted and a political opportunist in wanting to take this same money to repave an already inadequate highway system. But if his actions can cause bigger and better thinking of how to deal with transportation matters in the area as I decribed above, then maybe the bruhaha has been worth it. If nothing happens, then the area, its population, its politicians, are doomed to clogging thier roads and choking themselves off while business moves elsewhere.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
Can someone say that he is both switching funds from rail to roads (from electrified rail at that) and also say that is thoroughly behind the war on terrorism?
Dutchrailnut RRKen: Is that fair use??????? it is according to this: http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html
RRKen: Is that fair use???????
Is that fair use???????
it is according to this:
http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html
schlimm When someone starts telling others "That's the American way" what they are really saying is, "That's my position."
When someone starts telling others "That's the American way" what they are really saying is, "That's my position."
Please don't put words in my mouth, or suggest to the readers here that is what was meant.
"Heck, there is not even a National Transportation policy in this country, never has been. " Well what exactly do you think the Interstate Highway System was? Or the federal Airport Act? Or the Pacific railway Act? Random acts?
Well what exactly do you think the Interstate Highway System was? Or the federal Airport Act? Or the Pacific railway Act? Random acts?
They are basically random acts. They do not address the ineqities between modes of travel, they tax one to death, yet subsidize others. Published fact, not wishful thinking or college theory. Especially when some of those modes are both heavily subsidized, and a competing one, is not. Morgan talked about it (1957), A.C. Kalmbach talked about it(1944). The ATA and others may argue the point ad nausium, but there aint much substance that goes with it. So yes, they are random acts.
Excerpt from Character Above All by Robert Dallek....
As Majority Leader, he was thrilled to be the first legislator in Washington with a car phone. When Everett Dirksen, Republican Minority Leader and a friendly rival, also acquired one, he telephoned Johnson's limo to say that he was calling from his new car phone. "Can you hold on a minute, Ev?" Johnson asked. "My other phone is ringing."
Having been one who has screamed often about a national transportation policy for over 40 years, I can safely say there has never been one. Eisenhower crafted the Interstate Highway System seperate from the St. Lawrence Seaway and ignored the consequences and effects of railroading. None of them were considered as a "system" but as individual modes, seperate an apart from each other. If, indeed, there was a national transportation policy at any time it has been a non cohesive, non interdependent "no policy" policy.
henry: From today's perspective, yes, a true national policy would cover all the modes: air, highway, rails, mass transit, river and waterways, and pipelines. But at the time of those acts, there were either fewer modes or the notion of addressing all at the same time was not considered, though it certainly should be now.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Schlimm, there never has been a national transportation policy. Each item you mentioned has been seperate items not interacting with anyother form of transportation. A transportation policy needs to adress the ineractivity of air, ground and water modes rather than just building and using highways, airports, railroads and waterways.
"Heck, there is not even a National Transportation policy in this country, never has been. "
henry6 MerrilyWeRollAlong (and others); The fact is as I stated earlier that since the1840's there has been an ever increasing radius from NYC where people live and work........ In those areas you have townships, towns, villages, boroughs, cities, school districts, counties, states, federal, inter and intra agencies governing something. The politics is less idealogical and more parochial in many ways, each segment its own center of power, its own fiefdom. Unfortunately just one in the million can stop the rest from getting what is needed from maintaining the status quo (as opposed to going backward) to moving to meet today's and tomorrow's needs.
MerrilyWeRollAlong (and others); The fact is as I stated earlier that since the1840's there has been an ever increasing radius from NYC where people live and work........ In those areas you have townships, towns, villages, boroughs, cities, school districts, counties, states, federal, inter and intra agencies governing something. The politics is less idealogical and more parochial in many ways, each segment its own center of power, its own fiefdom. Unfortunately just one in the million can stop the rest from getting what is needed from maintaining the status quo (as opposed to going backward) to moving to meet today's and tomorrow's needs.
That's the American way. If I am a citizen in that boro or town, and I think the investment is not prudent, or timed wrong, I will hit the reject button, and urge others to do the same. To a great extent, outsiders cannot bully us around with what “they” think.
But the fact remains people are, always have been and always will be, moving into, out of, through this now almost 150 mile radius of NYC. Christie's actions fly in the face of whatever progress has been made, not so much in the ARC project specifically, but in general planners' programs to meet the overall needs of transportation capacity, land usage, and air (and ground) environmental quality. Conservatives want to "conserve" or maintain the status quo. Progressives want to make today pallatable and the future workable. To say we can't afford something today has to be buffered with whatever the cost of tomorrow will be. As long as people somehow, in some way or another, keep relying on NYC as a center for business, finance, entertainment, and even residential housing, then there will be ever increasing needs to provide a system of moving people in an economical, safe, environmental, pratical, efficient manner. What will it cost to do? What will it cost not to do?
[/quote]
So, where was this idea 40 or 60 years ago, in an era where the expense could be reasonable and affordable? Heck, there is not even a National Transportation policy in this country, never has been.
The point again is, right now, there is no money. And salivating over what is in my wallet is not an option. I do have a radical idea though. Package it up, and invite private enterprise to take ownership, if the idea is worth it, they will come. If not, this will die on the vine like the DM&E coal project.
Christies actions were political posturing...nothing more and nothing less. He had no intentions of actually stopping the project...he just wanted the action to show on his resume for his next election if the political winds at that time are against it.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
I don't care how "progressive" the idea is, or important the “investment” is, the State don't got the money, and is having to cut programs to balance it's budget. The item of a Tunnel under the Hudson would certainly be removed from the table and put into the deep freeze in that instance.
Money at the government level is not unlimited. Even if it is for "investments". There is a huge difference between a government making an “investment” and private enterprise. Government just takes the money from taxpayers (or prints it) based upon the notion that John Q. Public might support it, and private enterprise has to convince others the project is worth supporting.
Murray Phoebe Vet: I am now done with the political portion of this thread and will no longer be following it. You have no idea how much pleasure this statement brings us each time you toss a hand grenade in here, then make your "dramatic" departure.
Phoebe Vet: I am now done with the political portion of this thread and will no longer be following it.
You have no idea how much pleasure this statement brings us each time you toss a hand grenade in here, then make your "dramatic" departure.
Reminds me of the ol' coot next door. Anything you say is an instant arguement, and there is no way you could be right. If all else fails, he mumbles something and shuffles away. Not quite as dramatic, but the same thing.
Then I respectfully withdraw the question.
Something else that seems to be missing in this and other threads is distinguishing types of spending, whether by corporations, individuals or government. It often appears that capital investments into various assets such as roads, tunnels, rail infrastructure improvements and equipment purchases are confounded with expenses. One is an investment into the future that generally leads to efficiencies while the latter is concerned with operating expenses in the present. Different animals.
Couple what I last posted with today's Star Ledger article about the meeting between LaHood and Christie and the major question posed is: what would the cost of doing nothing?
Murray: Fine, but next time if you don't want to have the thread locked, then don't post a rather irrelevant 45 year old political video .
NJ finances have been bad for years. If Christie wants to drop out of a project to which it committed long ago and then have the nerve to try to still get the federal bucks to pay for his roads, good luck! The tunnel situation illustrates the problems of political boundaries (NJ v NY) that no longer make any economic sense. Folks living in northern NJ are very connected to NYC, (as are folks in SW NJ connected to Philly) even if they don't commute there. Port Authority was an attempt at regionalism, but it can be undercut by decisions in Trenton. Not building for the future capacity needs to get from home in NJ to work in Manhattan is going to cause a lot of problems later. As several have said, short-sighted.
Copyright law isn't the clearest, but the proper thing to do is to provide a link so you have to read it off of their page (giving them the ad revenue if nothing else).
But from the trains.com forum policies as posted by Erik Brgstrom (http://cs.trains.com/trccs/forums/t/151369.aspx) :
- Please respect copyright material. If you want to share copyright material with our users, please link to it. Don’t take a story from another Web site and post it in our forum. Don’t take a photo that you don’t own the rights to and use it in our forum.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
Phoebe Vet I am now done with the political portion of this thread and will no longer be following it.
I am now done with the political portion of this thread and will no longer be following it.
I always wonder why you have to announce that. Just stop reading the thread if you aren't going to follow it.
So, how much to rebuild the ferry slips that once existed?
From today's Newark Star Ledger:
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/10/frantic_36_hours_of_behind-the.html
MerrilyWeRollAlong (and others); The fact is as I stated earlier that since the1840's there has been an ever increasing radius from NYC where people live and work...today people come from west and north of Scranton, and west of Philadelphia, PA; well north of the NJ-NY line into the Catskills; up the east bank of the Hudson many miles north of Poughkeepsie; northeast to Waterbury and New Haven and beyond in CT; and to both far eastern tips of LI. Daily. In those areas you have townships, towns, villages, boroughs, cities, school districts, counties, states, federal, inter and intra agencies governing something. The politics is less idealogical and more parochial in many ways, each segment its own center of power, its own fiefdom. Unfortunately just one in the million can stop the rest from getting what is needed from maintaining the status quo (as opposed to going backward) to moving to meet today's and tomorrow's needs. But the fact remains people are, always have been and always will be, moving into, out of, through this now almost 150 mile radius of NYC. Christie's actions fly in the face of whatever progress has been made, not so much in the ARC project specifically, but in general planners' programs to meet the overall needs of transportation capacity, land usage, and air (and ground) environmental quality. Conservatives want to "conserve" or maintain the status quo. Progressives want to make today pallatable and the future workable. To say we can't afford something today has to be buffered with whatever the cost of tomorrow will be. As long as people somehow, in some way or another, keep relying on NYC as a center for business, finance, entertainment, and even residential housing, then there will be ever increasing needs to provide a system of moving people in an economical, safe, environmental, pratical, efficient manner. What will it cost to do? What will it cost not to do?
schlimm I did not say you said anyone was making a political statement. You made a political comment with your Dirksen post; others had previously made political comments because politics is an important, if not central ingredient in in tunnel issue. I only objected to your response to PV as though he was the only one who had thrown in a political grenade and then walked away.
Schlimm, I merely posted Senator Dirksen's video as a historical reference. Dirksen, as you are well aware was a fiscal conservative, much different than today's social conservative. As a student of history, I have always admired Dirken's principles of sound fiscal practice.
OK, now lets tie this back to the Hudson Tunnels before the moderators shut it down. New Jersey is for all practical purposes BROKE. I am a former New Jersey resident, and I am also well aware of the high cost of living associated with the State. It has been (in my opinion) financially mismanaged for many years, and the time has approached (finally) for a complete overhaul of how the state spends its money.
It has nothing to do with Democrat or Republican...its just common sense.
So...that having been said....lets all stop sniping at each other and get back to the Hudson River Tunnels shall we?
Murray: Calm down. Your sarcastic "supposedly educated person" as well as the cruder efforts with Phoebe Vet serve no useful purpose.
Let me explain myself more clearly: I did not claim you said anyone was making a political statement. You made a political comment with your Dirksen post; others had previously made political comments because politics is an important, if not central ingredient in in tunnel issue. I only objected to your response to PV as though he was the only one who had thrown in a political grenade. I meant to draw particular attention to the use of the term us, as though you are the arbiter of what goes on here, but was not sufficiently direct about that in your comment:
"You have no idea how much pleasure this statement brings us each time you toss a hand grenade in here, then make your "dramatic" departure."
schlimm Murray: I think its an appropriate time in this debate to view this video from the late Senator Everett Dirksen of Illinois. Senator Dirksen makes very reasoned explanation for the need of fiscal responsibility: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lm6fnQ5no0o I guess you are the self-appointed first and final arbiter of what is political or not and then, as in the recent past, resort to personal attacks on anyone who calls you on it.
Murray: I think its an appropriate time in this debate to view this video from the late Senator Everett Dirksen of Illinois. Senator Dirksen makes very reasoned explanation for the need of fiscal responsibility: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lm6fnQ5no0o
I think its an appropriate time in this debate to view this video from the late Senator Everett Dirksen of Illinois. Senator Dirksen makes very reasoned explanation for the need of fiscal responsibility:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lm6fnQ5no0o
I guess you are the self-appointed first and final arbiter of what is political or not and then, as in the recent past, resort to personal attacks on anyone who calls you on it.
Sigh....
Once again I am forced to explain to a supposedly educated person about an obviously innocuous post. Now look up above there Schlimm. WHERE IN THE WORLD DID I SAY IN THAT POST ABOVE THAT ANYONE POSTING ON THIS THREAD WAS MAKING A POLITICAL STATEMENT? Gee, you can't see it, because it's not there!!!!
You and Phoebie are the only individuals who made this false accusation. Furthermore, and much to his credit, I even received a very polite and reasoned response to my original post from Henry6, and I thank him for that.
Kindly read more carefully next time before posting Schlimm.
Murray I think its an appropriate time in this debate to view this video from the late Senator Everett Dirksen of Illinois. Senator Dirksen makes very reasoned explanation for the need of fiscal responsibility: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lm6fnQ5no0o
I guess you are the self-appointed first and final arbiter of what is political or not and then, as in the recent past, resort to personal attacks on anyone who calls you on it. But as long as you brought up the late Sen. Dirksen, there is a "quote" of his that is regularly used on here that he never said:
A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon, you're talking real money.
Although often quoted, it seems Dirksen never actually said this. The Dirksen Congressional Research Center made a search when fully 25% of enquiries to them were about the quotation. They could find Dirksen did say "a billion here, a billion there", and things close to that, but not the "pretty soon you're talking real money" part. They had one gentleman report to them he had asked Dirksen about it on an airflight and recieved the reply: "Oh, I never said that. A newspaper fella misquoted me once, and I thought it sounded so good that I never bothered to deny it."
Pure speculation, but I doubt if this fine man would be welcome in today's GOP, as he worked cooperatively with the opposition and was instrumental in the passage of Civil Rights legislation.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.