BaltACD HSR has the POTENTIAL to serve to a useful purpose when it is completed.
HSR has the POTENTIAL to serve to a useful purpose when it is completed.
Former Car MaintainerPotential inferring a ban of the automobile and commercial aircraft ? HSR= Government funded interurban
I mean, the gov't has been funding the automobile and airline sectors for decades...
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
BaltACDItaly's HSR network is being credited to driving the Italian national airline Alitalia into bankruptcy.
High speed trains have played a part.
But Alitalia hasn't had a profit since 2002. They had a large, inefficient management setup, along with almost no profitable international flights, and even worse, their local flights were losing to two smaller Italian airlines between cities.
I have no problem with California setting up a HSR system. They obviously have issues with the way the contracts were let, the way the plans were drawn, and the way the project has been handled by the state.
York1 John
Former Car Maintainerand serve no useful purpose....
In all sincerity I have to ask: 1. How do you expect the transportation needs of Californians to be met in the short and long term future? 2. So it's OK with you if decades of engineering work and expensive studies are to be counted simply as wasted money and thrown into the trash can? 3. How often do you drive I-5 and/or US 101?
* * * * *
And from what I can see, those pyramids are still paying off handsomely for Egypt and her people. Quite a return on investment!
Former Car Maintainer BaltACD HSR has the POTENTIAL to serve to a useful purpose when it is completed. Potential inferring a ban of the automobile and commercial aircraft ? HSR= Government funded interurban
Potential inferring a ban of the automobile and commercial aircraft ? HSR= Government funded interurban
How many lanes wide should California Interstates be expanded to to be able to handle all the non-carbon based vehicles that will be operating in the future - 5 lanes each way, 10 lanes each way, 20 lanes each way. Should they just pave a 1/2 mile wide swath of land - without lane lines so they don't impede anyone's 'freedom' and operate it as rolling helter skelter.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
California's population went down over 180,000 last year. Maybe they won't need more lanes.
NKP guy How often do you drive I-5 and/or US 101? And from what I can see, those pyramids are still paying off handsomely for Egypt and her people. Quite a return on investment!
How often do you drive I-5 and/or US 101?
Easier to fly than to drive I-5, and like the pyramids, the HSR might make a good tourist attraction
BaltACD How many lanes wide should California Interstates be expanded to to be able to handle all the non-carbon based vehicles that will be operating in the future - 5 lanes each way, 10 lanes each way, 20 lanes each way. Should they just pave a 1/2 mile wide swath of land - without lane lines so they don't impede anyone's 'freedom' and operate it as rolling helter skelter.
NKP guy So it's OK with you if decades of engineering work and expensive studies are to be counted simply as wasted money
So it's OK with you if decades of engineering work and expensive studies are to be counted simply as wasted money
Former Car Maintainer BaltACD Were the Egyptian pyramids completed 'On Time and Under Budget'? Good analogy: Both pyramid and HSR were envisioned by political demagogues, built as a tribute to themselves, and serve no useful purpose....
BaltACD Were the Egyptian pyramids completed 'On Time and Under Budget'?
Were the Egyptian pyramids completed 'On Time and Under Budget'?
Good analogy: Both pyramid and HSR were envisioned by political demagogues, built as a tribute to themselves, and serve no useful purpose....
The vote to spend the funds to build California's HSR was passed by a majority of the state's voters. Are you also as contemptuous toward the citizens as their elected officials?
MidlandMikeThe vote to spend the funds to build California's HSR was passed by a majority of the state's voters. Are you also as contemptuous toward the citizens as their elected officials?
California voters approved $9 billion in 2008.
California voters were promised before the vote that the entire 800 mile HSR system (including extensions to San Diego and Sacramento) would cost $40 billion, and their share would be the $9 billion.
California voters were promised before the vote that the first trains would be running by 2020.
MidlandMike The vote to spend the funds to build California's HSR was passed by a majority of the state's voters.
The vote to spend the funds to build California's HSR was passed by a majority of the state's voters.
This is supposed to be a forum about passenger trains, which include HSR. But every time there is a post about HSR, we get a chorus of right wing political posts condemning modern trains. We all get it,. You hate the government, hate HSR. Post if you have a constructive comment.
Charlie it could also be the simplest reason also. Perhaps people are tired of seeing the government whip out their credit card and forgetting how to do math. No one I work with Republicans or Democrat alike believe that the proposed 3.5 trillion dollar spending plan is going to add zero to the freaking federal government debt load. That is the current administration claim to generate support for it from the people. Sorry but 3,500,000,000,000 is not equal or less than 0 in any form of math I can tell except government spending plans.
charlie hebdoThis is supposed to be a forum about passenger trains, which include HSR. But every time there is a post about HSR, we get a chorus of right wing political posts condemning modern trains. We all get it,. You hate the government, hate HSR. Post if you have a constructive comment.
"This is supposed to be a forum about passenger trains, which include HSR."
The title of this thread is, "Contractors Want An Additional $1B - Admit California Line Will Not Open in 2030".
It seems that the posts I've read are all on point. From that, you get that the posts show hatred of the government and hatred of HSR.
Constructive comments?
I didn't realize that all the comments were supposed to be cheerleading.
charlie hebdo This is supposed to be a forum about passenger trains, which include HSR. But every time there is a post about HSR, we get a chorus of right wing political posts condemning modern trains. We all get it,. You hate the government, hate HSR. Post if you have a constructive comment.
Constructive criticism does not mean cheerleading. It also doesn't mean what you and the carman do.
charlie hebdoConstructive criticism does not mean cheerleading. It also doesn't mean what you and the carman do.
I'm a little confused here (which for me is not unusual).
I just read through my posts, and I can't find anything that is "right wing political", or "condemning modern trains".
I don't "hate the government" or "hate HSR".
In fact, back in the early 2000s, I was excited to read that California was going to build this system.
Since then, the HSR system they are constructing has been so mishandled, they have probably, at least in the near future, hindered any further HSR systems in the U.S. from being proposed.
There's a good possibility I'm wrong, and California's system will go forward without any more major cost overruns, engineering mistakes, major delays, etc. Maybe in a couple of years, there will be a very nice system that takes riders from LA to SF at over 200 mph. Unfortunately (for me), I will probably be dead before that happens.
York1 MidlandMike The vote to spend the funds to build California's HSR was passed by a majority of the state's voters. Are you also as contemptuous toward the citizens as their elected officials? California voters approved $9 billion in 2008. California voters were promised before the vote that the entire 800 mile HSR system (including extensions to San Diego and Sacramento) would cost $40 billion, and their share would be the $9 billion. California voters were promised before the vote that the first trains would be running by 2020.
MidlandMike The vote to spend the funds to build California's HSR was passed by a majority of the state's voters. Are you also as contemptuous toward the citizens as their elected officials?
Maybe the voters are more understanding. Have they voted to end or revise the project yet?
Former Car Maintainer MidlandMike The vote to spend the funds to build California's HSR was passed by a majority of the state's voters. HSR seed money came from the "TARP" funds just like the failed "SOLYNDRA". I'm sure the citizens of the State will gladly stomach additional "HSR tax increases" as well as receiving federal handouts from "Joe likes to ride trains" infrastructure money. The question remains, will people prefer the 49 minute flight or will they take a three hour train ride? Perhaps a train mandate is in the cards...
HSR seed money came from the "TARP" funds just like the failed "SOLYNDRA". I'm sure the citizens of the State will gladly stomach additional "HSR tax increases" as well as receiving federal handouts from "Joe likes to ride trains" infrastructure money. The question remains, will people prefer the 49 minute flight or will they take a three hour train ride? Perhaps a train mandate is in the cards...
Didn't the voters know they were voting for a train ride?
Will the term "High Speed" be eliminated? https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/california-might-remove-the-high-speed-from-its-high-speed-rail-project/ar-AAPzXzB
MidlandMike York1 MidlandMike The vote to spend the funds to build California's HSR was passed by a majority of the state's voters. Are you also as contemptuous toward the citizens as their elected officials? California voters approved $9 billion in 2008. California voters were promised before the vote that the entire 800 mile HSR system (including extensions to San Diego and Sacramento) would cost $40 billion, and their share would be the $9 billion. California voters were promised before the vote that the first trains would be running by 2020. Maybe the voters are more understanding. Have they voted to end or revise the project yet?
I would guess that some of the voters are more understanding. The rest are moving out of the state.
York1 MidlandMike York1 MidlandMike The vote to spend the funds to build California's HSR was passed by a majority of the state's voters. Are you also as contemptuous toward the citizens as their elected officials? California voters approved $9 billion in 2008. California voters were promised before the vote that the entire 800 mile HSR system (including extensions to San Diego and Sacramento) would cost $40 billion, and their share would be the $9 billion. California voters were promised before the vote that the first trains would be running by 2020. Maybe the voters are more understanding. Have they voted to end or revise the project yet? I would guess that some of the voters are more understanding. The rest are moving out of the state.
Have the moving Californians squeezed you out of flyover country yet?
Zero taxes is out of range for us 'wage earners'; we need to be multi-billionaires to reach that tax bracket.
You may think this a "right wing political post" or something else, but the fact is that the Democratic Party controlled California state legislature didn't even think enough of HSR this year to send Governor Newsom a bill to sign approving more HSR spending (4.2 billion). Many legislative leaders on both sides of the aisle would prefer any money spent for HSR to instead go toward local commuter rail service. This is not opinion, this is fact.
As a native born California resident, we have to pay some of the highest state taxes found anywhere in the country. We have the highest state income tax, the highest sales tax AND the highest state gas tax (66.98 cents per gallon. We have state legislators and other "politicians" that can't balance a budget, so the result is always more taxes that are approved by a certain party's supermajority. The result is families and businesses leaving in droves. My wife and I are tired of paying these endless taxes, and are planning to leave this state when we retire. Until then, we will continue to pay taxes for a train that likely won't run LA to SF for another 20 years.
For political reasons, the HSR line was started in the central valley. Maybe the legislators in Sacramento should have walked from the state capitol a mile over to the California State Railroad Museum to learn some history from the "Big Four". Other than political reasons, does starting a railroad in the middle of California's central valley (away from any of California's major metropolitan areas) make any sense? Perhaps if the railroad was started in either LA or SF, more people might have supported the additional funds needed for HSR. I think I would have.
You can support this project or not. But don't denigrate those of us in California that have to pay for this boondoggle.
Jeff
groundeffects... You can support this project or not. But don't denigrate those of us in California that have to pay for this boondoggle. Jeff
Remember - to somebody - EVERY government supported project is a BOONDOGGLE!
True, but some projects are more "pork/boondoggle" than others......
The 105 Freeway in LA took around 25 years to complete about 19 miles, why should this be different.
rdamon The 105 Freeway in LA took around 25 years to complete about 19 miles, why should this be different.
Well said.
groundeffectsTrue, but some projects are more "pork/boondoggle" than others......
It is only a boondoggle if you are not the beneficiary of the pork.
York1I would guess that some of the voters are more understanding. The rest are moving out of the state.
Californians moved out of state first to Arizona, and now they are proposing HrSR Tucson-Pheonix-LA. Then they moved to Nevada, and now Brightline is putting together Xpress HSR. Now they are moving to Idaho, is there a Boise Bullet in the furure?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.