QUOTE: Originally posted by TheAntiGates QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb Well in my case you were/are preaching to the choir!!! [:-^] I'm sorry. I didn't mean to come across as "preachy"...my bad.
QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb Well in my case you were/are preaching to the choir!!! [:-^]
QUOTE: Originally posted by TheAntiGates QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb QUOTE: Originally posted by TheAntiGates It was just a thought..... Think about this!! There are only 2 companies who have a huge financial stake in the DME not going into the PRB. Yes, I think that I acknowledged that possibility several pages ago
QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb QUOTE: Originally posted by TheAntiGates It was just a thought..... Think about this!! There are only 2 companies who have a huge financial stake in the DME not going into the PRB.
QUOTE: Originally posted by TheAntiGates It was just a thought.....
QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb It was the STB that denined the re-route, not the railroad! DME offered to reroute but was denied. What would you have them do. Move it anyway? [?] P.S. The reroute would not have been anything close to superior and in fact they said it was geogrphically undesirable. While you do not know for sure if it was not the way to go, they (the STB) though it was. [tdn] [:-^] [%-)]
QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb To change the routing now to a more goegraphically less desirable route will cost the railraod money, will need the condemnation of peoples land(split farms in half) and so far there has not been shown a compelling reason except "Not In My Backyard".
Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.
QUOTE: Originally posted by solzrules Alright, then I guess it could be a possibility. It would seem that some people in these towns are attempting to re-open the agreements. I don't think it is because they are afraid of big smelly diesels, but maybe because they think they might get some more out of it. I always thought once you signed on the dotted line that was it. Sounds like more court battles to me.
QUOTE: Originally posted by TheAntiGates QUOTE: Originally posted by solzrules A yes, the exciting world of the hypothetical. Before we spar over this, has it actually happened, or are we trying to think of every conceivable bad thing that could plague the DME's proposal? Sorta, but not to the sinister extent you put it. I just like to evaluate as many potential variables in a given scenario as come to mind, and ,....strictly speculating, this one has some possibilities. just trying to understand WHY so many of the small fry along the wayside had no second thoughts about blaring horns and smelly diesels forever changing the world as they have come to know it....and the possibility of -not being able to do a darn thing about it for lack of funds- struck me as a possibility
QUOTE: Originally posted by solzrules A yes, the exciting world of the hypothetical. Before we spar over this, has it actually happened, or are we trying to think of every conceivable bad thing that could plague the DME's proposal?
QUOTE: Originally posted by TheAntiGates QUOTE: Originally posted by solzrules A yes, the exciting world of the hypothetical. Before we spar over this, has it actually happened,[b} or are we trying to think of every conceivable bad thing that could plague the DME's proposal[/b]? Sorta, but not to the sinister extent you put it. I just like to evaluate as many potential variables in a given scenario as come to mind, and ,....strictly speculating, this one has some possibilities. just trying to understand WHY so many of the small fry along the wayside had no second thoughts about blaring horns and smelly diesels forever changing the world as they have come to know it....and the possibility of -not being able to do a darn thing about it for lack of funds- struck me as a possibility
QUOTE: Originally posted by solzrules A yes, the exciting world of the hypothetical. Before we spar over this, has it actually happened,[b} or are we trying to think of every conceivable bad thing that could plague the DME's proposal[/b]?
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Winona MN - population 30,000+ Mankato MN - 30,000+ Owatonna MN - 20,000+ New Ulm MN - 15,000+ Brookings SD - 15,000+ Huron SD - 15,000+ Pierre/Ft. Pierre SD - 15,000+ Souix Falls SD - 100,000 Rapid City SD - 50,000 Mitchell SD - 15,000 Murphy Siding SD - 4[;)]
QUOTE: Originally posted by TheAntiGates Ha Ha,.... There are those who argue that making the loan is an even bigger waste of taxpayer money. I'm gonna retract my earlier attempt to be objective, it was late last night, I was tired, feeling concillatory.... It doesn't matter if you call it an appeal, a protest, an anti-railroad conspiracy (heh heh) or whatever, the game play is the same, and I think that DME could and would outspend any small fry municipality who opted to stand in their way, and the attempts to obfuscate that reality with dicey games with semantics, is BS My bet is that the "stand" made against Schieffer and his henchmen in Rochester, is due in no small part to the resources brought to the table by coalition member Mayo. Mayo has the deep pockets that those other small towns lacked. Just perhaps they decided to circle the wagons there because they could afford to?
QUOTE: Originally posted by TheAntiGates QUOTE: Originally posted by solzrules QUOTE: Winona MN - population 30,000+ Mankato MN - 30,000+ Owatonna MN - 20,000+ New Ulm MN - 15,000+ Brookings SD - 15,000+ Huron SD - 15,000+ Pierre/Ft. Pierre SD - 15,000+ Souix Falls SD - 100,000 Rapid City SD - 50,000 Mitchell SD - 15,000 Murphy Siding SD - 4[;)] Those towns don't sound that small to me to be intimidated by the big bad railroad. Poor things. How will they cope? well, just for the sake of discussion, in a hypothetical scenario where any one of those towns opted to resist the DME, how much re$ource$ would you say that DME would be willing to throw at them? I'm just pulling numbers from thin air, but I'd hazard a guess that those towns smaller than 30K would be hard pressed to come up with more than just a couple $thousand for legal fees. So, all DME would have to do is out spend them until they exhausted their resources. Maybe many of them simply opted to not fight a battle they (the small fry villages) couldn't afford to win? IF SO, that is certainly a new spin on the "everybody else approved it, except Rochester" argument.
QUOTE: Originally posted by solzrules QUOTE: Winona MN - population 30,000+ Mankato MN - 30,000+ Owatonna MN - 20,000+ New Ulm MN - 15,000+ Brookings SD - 15,000+ Huron SD - 15,000+ Pierre/Ft. Pierre SD - 15,000+ Souix Falls SD - 100,000 Rapid City SD - 50,000 Mitchell SD - 15,000 Murphy Siding SD - 4[;)] Those towns don't sound that small to me to be intimidated by the big bad railroad. Poor things. How will they cope?
QUOTE: Winona MN - population 30,000+ Mankato MN - 30,000+ Owatonna MN - 20,000+ New Ulm MN - 15,000+ Brookings SD - 15,000+ Huron SD - 15,000+ Pierre/Ft. Pierre SD - 15,000+ Souix Falls SD - 100,000 Rapid City SD - 50,000 Mitchell SD - 15,000 Murphy Siding SD - 4[;)]
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.