Yesterday, President Obama, traveled to the Cincinnati,Ohio and Covington, Ky area to showcase the planned reconstruction of the Spence Bridge over the Ohio River.
Interestingly, he read the following comment: ""We’re the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad," Barack Obama."
This was taken from a Los Angeles Times
story by Andrew Malcolm
posted : September 23, 2011 | 5:24 am
FTA:'...That's what the president of the United States flat-out said Thursday during what was supposed to be a photo op to sell his jobs plan next to an allegedly deteriorating highway bridge.
A railroad between continents? A railroad from, say, New York City all the way across the Atlantic to France? Now, THAT would be a bridge!..."
FTA:"...Now, we used to have the best infrastructure in the world here in America. We’re the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad, the Interstate Highway System. We built the Hoover Dam. We built the Grand Central Station.
So how can we now sit back and let China build the best railroads? And let Europe build the best highways? And have Singapore build a nicer airport?..." I thought this was an interesting and unusual article and take on our President from what is usually thought to be a newspaper that is or has been considered in his 'camp'. The whole article is an interesting reading of who/how our President seems to view history, and railroads. He being a major force behind the current HSR Train movement in this Country. In posting this, I am curious what the 'take away' is currently here among our posters. Hope it can be commented on without getting it locked up.
So how can we now sit back and let China build the best railroads? And let Europe build the best highways? And have Singapore build a nicer airport?..."
I thought this was an interesting and unusual article and take on our President from what is usually thought to be a newspaper that is or has been considered in his 'camp'. The whole article is an interesting reading of who/how our President seems to view history, and railroads. He being a major force behind the current HSR Train movement in this Country.
In posting this, I am curious what the 'take away' is currently here among our posters. Hope it can be commented on without getting it locked up.
Samfp
I aint gona touch it,
Mac McCulloch
As long as it stays on topic it should be OK, but the topic will be irresistible bait for people with strong political opinions.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
He got it from his dim bulb Transportation Secretary who said the same thing in front of a room full of railroaders in Minneapolis on Monday (including me).
I am not concerned about the gaffe whatsoever. Here is the speech:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/09/obama-gaffe-jobs-act-speech-brent-spence-bridge-ohio.html
The premise is that we have people who need jobs and things that need doing. Therefore, put the people who need jobs to work doing the things that need doing.
The problem is that it does no good to enrich some people with a livelihood if sucking the money out of the economy to do so puts other people out of work.
I would say a lot more, but I don’t want get political.
BucyrusWhat exactly is the topic?
When I read this, I filed it under fluff by commenting at Siberian Tunnel thread.
samfp1943 Yesterday, President Obama, traveled to the Cincinnati,Ohio and Covington, Ky area to showcase the planned reconstruction of the Spence Bridge over the Ohio River.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Murphy Siding samfp1943: Yesterday, President Obama, traveled to the Cincinnati,Ohio and Covington, Ky area to showcase the planned reconstruction of the Spence Bridge over the Ohio River. Isn't this the bridge that ConcivtedOne thinks needs to be repainted by CSX?
samfp1943: Yesterday, President Obama, traveled to the Cincinnati,Ohio and Covington, Ky area to showcase the planned reconstruction of the Spence Bridge over the Ohio River.
Isn't this the bridge that ConcivtedOne thinks needs to be repainted by CSX?
Murphy Siding;
He Said: Leaving no stone unturned!
mudchicken He got it from his dim bulb Transportation Secretary who said the same thing in front of a room full of railroaders in Minneapolis on Monday (including me).
Besides, as our Canadian friends could remind us - we may have had transcontinental tracks in 1869, but we still don't have a transcontinental company, while they practically have 2 (depends on how you view CP).
- Paul North.
The only intercontinental railroads I know of connect Europe and Asia--such as one that goes across Russia and Siberia.
Johnny
The isthmus of Panama is generally considered the boundary between the North and South American Continents. In the 1850s, even before the canal, an American company built the Panama Railroad across the isthmus. It crossed over the Chagres River (the lowest points separating the two continents on the Atlantic side) so in effect it was an "Intercontinental" railroad. This may be nit-picking, but no more so than the original premise of this conversation.
....I'm not interested in putting value to the "intercontinental" issue. But I am interested in seeing someone....sincerely throwing out some thoughts, Ideas, effort, to somehow start digging us out of a critical low economic reality in our great country.
As for that bridge behind the President in view as he gave his thoughts....I was amazed at how much traffic was crossing in both directions....Didn't they say, it is carrying 150,000 vehicles a day...! If that route had to be closed, I wonder where or what location could absorb that much additional traffic....Not a good situation.
Quentin
So what if we have an old bridge? Bridges go though a life cycle. They age and wear out. If they become unsafe, we close them. Eventually we blow them up and build them over. Old bridges don’t put people at risk. They might slow down traffic, but that’s just part of the price of the bridge life cycle. We have never believed that every bridge should always be in like new condition. It would be a waste of money. If we worked on them all the time to maintain them like new, we would not be able to use them as much. If we had a prospering economy, we could probably take better care of the bridges, but taxing and spending just to fix bridges will not fix the economy.
I believe that government taxing the economy and using the money to stimulate the economy has the unintended consequence of putting a drag on the economy because the money taken out of the private sector does more harm than the money added for stimulus. It is axiomatic that raising taxes during a recession makes the recession worse.
When we have a hurricane or other natural disaster, people expect the government to step in and help us deal with it. It seems to me that the government is assuming that same role in regard to this recession. Just like cleaning up after a hurricane, the government feels they need to fix the economy as though the recession were a natural disaster. It is incredible hubris for government to think they have a bag of tricks to heal a faltering economy by creating new markets through taxing and spending. The best way to heal the economy is for the government to stop trying to heal it.
....No response to that from me.
The word Intercontinental might've been on the president's mind because of the June attack on the Intercontinental Hotel in Kabul. It's always the first word in ICBM. He has spoken the word Transcontinental without mistake at least twice.
Quoting his 'jobs speech' to Congress...
:"We all remember Abraham Lincoln as the leader who saved our Union....But in the middle of a Civil War, he was also a leader who looked to the future - a Republican president who mobilized government to build the Transcontinental Railroad, launch the National Academy of Sciences, set up the first land-grant colleges. And leaders of both parties have followed the example he set."
Quoting his 'stump speech' the other day...
"Hello, Cincinnati! It is good to be back in the great state of Ohio....We used to have the best infrastructure in the world. We're the country that built the Transcontinental Railroad and the Interstate Highway system; the Hoover Dam and Grand Central Station."
Mike
I'm just glad that some of the posters on this site do not have aspirations to hold high office.
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
Ahh you were there too?
Mechanical Department "No no that's fine shove that 20 pound set all around the yard... those shoes aren't hell and a half to change..."
The Missabe Road: Safety First
Probably just a bug in the wrong spot on the teleprompter.
Jay
I goofed, in my post above, quoting the text of Obama's Cincinnati speech "as prepared for delivery."
Bucyrus So what if we have an old bridge? Bridges go though a life cycle. They age and wear out. If they become unsafe, we close them. Eventually we blow them up and build them over. Old bridges don’t put people at risk. They might slow down traffic, but that’s just part of the price of the bridge life cycle. We have never believed that every bridge should always be in like new condition. It would be a waste of money. If we worked on them all the time to maintain them like new, we would not be able to use them as much. If we had a prospering economy, we could probably take better care of the bridges, but taxing and spending just to fix bridges will not fix the economy. I believe that government taxing the economy and using the money to stimulate the economy has the unintended consequence of putting a drag on the economy because the money taken out of the private sector does more harm than the money added for stimulus. It is axiomatic that raising taxes during a recession makes the recession worse. When we have a hurricane or other natural disaster, people expect the government to step in and help us deal with it. It seems to me that the government is assuming that same role in regard to this recession. Just like cleaning up after a hurricane, the government feels they need to fix the economy as though the recession were a natural disaster. It is incredible hubris for government to think they have a bag of tricks to heal a faltering economy by creating new markets through taxing and spending. The best way to heal the economy is for the government to stop trying to heal it.
Some would seem to believe that it was not the government, but the unfettered & under-regulated activities of a great number of firms in the private sector, which created (or at least largely worsened) the current economic crisis.
Taking money from those individuals & enterprises who have more (through taxation), to distribute to those who need more, as well as to use on projects that are too massive in scope (or too important for society) for the private sector to handle on its own, has been an accepted role of our government since its foundation.
To get back on a railroad track (so to speak), can we give the Prez the benefit of the doubt and say that he was trying to combine the concepts of "transcontinental" & "intercoastal"?
You can't build muscle with a bad circulatory system.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Bucyrus I am not concerned about the gaffe whatsoever. Here is the speech: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/09/obama-gaffe-jobs-act-speech-brent-spence-bridge-ohio.html The premise is that we have people who need jobs and things that need doing. Therefore, put the people who need jobs to work doing the things that need doing. The problem is that it does no good to enrich some people with a livelihood if sucking the money out of the economy to do so puts other people out of work. I would say a lot more, but I don’t want get political.
Too late.
Do you really believe that?
I knew this thread would go in this direction. I'm out of here.
This thread has become not merely political, but theatre of the absurd.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Phoebe Vet I knew this thread would go in this direction. I'm out of here.
Gosh, this thread began with the president giving what many on both sides are calling a campaign speech, and apparently that is okay here. The centerpiece of his speech was job creation by raising taxes, an economic principle that is perhaps at the heart of the debate over the direction this country should take. If that was not political, it ought not to be political to say you disagree with it. What am I missing?
Excerpt from The Encyclopedia Americana (1904)
Railway, Intercontinental, or Pan-American, a proposed railway system extending from the United States through Mexico and the Central American states to Panama, and thence southward to Brazil. The Intercontinental Railroad Commission was organized in Washington in 1889 to study the feasibility of extending a trunk railway from our country to Buenos Ayres. The report of the commission on its studies and its surveys for the best route was published in 1899. The proposed all-rail route to Buenos Ayres will be 10,228 miles long by the route which the surveyors selected. In 1900 the existing lines that might be used as a part of the trunk railway were about 4,7/2 miles in length, leaving 5,456 miles to be constructed. Since that time the Latin-American countries have built 656 miles of track along the international route, reducing the portion yet to be constructed to 4,800 miles. Only about an eighth of the mileage has been built since 1900, but this has been done in the natural course of railway building without any reference to the Intercontinental project. The estimated cost of construction for the 4,800 miles is placed at $150,000,000. This is based on an average of 50 cents gold as the daily wage labor, with an efficiency of 75 per cent as compared with similar labor in the United States.
http://books.google.com/books?id=b55UAAAAYAAJ&pg=PT239
Excerpt from American Druggist and Pharmaceutical Record (1903)
THE ALL-AMERICAS RAILROAD.
Through by Rail from New York to Buenos Ayres - Only 5,000 Miles to Be Built - Carnegie to Finance the Project - A Great Future for Inter-American Trade.
The most gigantic railroad scheme ever contemplated, of far greater magnitude than the Trans-Siberian Railway or even the Cape-to-Cairo line, has been revived and active steps are now being taken toward its realization. The project contemplates nothing less than connecting the vast railway systems of the United States with those of the South American republics, thereby affording a through rail service from New York and other trade centers of North America to the southernmost points reached by the South American railroads. In fact, if the great Pan-American system becomes a reality, it will be possible to travel or send freight from New York or other points across two continents, possibly without change of cars, to the most southern points in South America, for both Argentine and Chili are now building southward to Cape Horn.
Andrew Carnegie has become actively interested in the undertaking, the accomplishment of which would mean so much in developing our trade relations with South America. That he is in earnest is shown by the fact that he has offered to pay the expenses of a Pan-American commissioner to visit various South American republics to secure their co-operation, and should the South Americans receive the project favorably Mr. Carnegie agrees to finance the scheme of a Pan-American railway and raise the sum required to construct the necessary connecting links of railroad between New York and Buenos Ayres. The total distance between these two cities is about 10,000 miles, of which fully 5,000 miles remain to be built, or a distance in itself as great as the entire length of the TransSiberian Railway.
Some 13 years ago the project was taken up by James G. Blaine, who was then Secretary of State. A Pan-American Congress was held at Washington and Mr. Blaine worked indefatigably to put the plan through. This Government appropriated $360,000 for surveys which were made, but after Mr. Blaine's death little if any progress was made until last year when, at the Pan-American Congress at the City of Mexico, it was recommended that the United States take the initiative and carry out the recommendations made by that congress. Secretary Hay has accordingly just appointed Charles M. Pepper a special commissioner to the South American republics and Mr. Carnegie has agreed to defray the expenses of this investigation. It is a singular coincidence that A. J. Cassatt, who was chairman of the first Pan-American Congress in 1890, is now president of the Pennsylvania Railroad, which has a mileage exactly equal to the distance from New York to Buenos Ayres, and which will form the first section of the through route of the proposed Pan-American Railway.
Some progress has been made on the intercontinental railroad since the United States surveys were made, and it will soon be possible to travel by direct train from New York to Ayutla, on the border of Guatemala, a distance of about 3,700 miles. From that point to Cuzco in the mountains of southern Peru, however, some 5,000 miles of railroad will have to be built.
The American Druggist has already called attention to the opportunities for trade in South America, from the druggists' standpoint and It requires no argument to show the vast importance of such a Pan-American railway as a factor in increasing commerce with the South American republics.
The United States imports from Central and South America at present amount to about $120,000,000, or, approximately, 14 per cent of our total imports, while our exports to those countries amount only to some $52,000,000, or 10 per cent of their imports. Mexico, on the other hand, owing to her railway connections, sends to the United States fully 70 per cent, of her exports and imports from this country goods of an equal value.
Extensive as is the present project for an intercontinental railway, the route of which is shown in the accompanying map, there is reason to believe that by the time it is completed, the system will be much more extensive. As already noted, both Argentine and Chili are building railroads southward to the Cape; Canada is also constructing a line to Alaska, which American capital may extend further north, possibly to meet the railroad already being built southward from Cape Nome. A few years hence, therefore, America may have a cape-to-cape railway some 15,000 miles in length.
The cost of constructing the necessary links In the proposed Pan-American railway is estimated at $200,000,000, which is, approximately, the cost of the Trans-Siberian Railway, and it will probably take ten years to build these connecting links. At an average speed of 25 miles an hour, it is reckoned that it will take some 17 days and nights to make the trip from New York to Buenos Ayres.
http://books.google.com/books?id=ItEAAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA232
I am glad to see that he mentioned Grand Central Station, as the only one I recall was in Chicago, used primarily by the B&O.
Of course, the construction of Grand Central Terminal, in New York City, was a much grander undertaking.
....And so was the late great NYC Penn Station.
In the meantime....the economy / financial state of things will "trundle" along at the pace it is now.
Thanks for stopping by, though. We always appreciate your company and feel both honored and humbled when you grace us with your presence. But please don't be a stranger.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.