.
.
.
[poll id=”299″]
The Obama administration announced on Tuesday a six-year, $53-billion-dollar project to expand high-speed rail service in the United States - promising trains reaching 250mph. The budget request is in addition to $8-billion already allocated in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Even so, those billions are a drop in the bucket compared to the investment European and Asian countries have been making to their rail networks for decades. Above - a Japanese bullet train - top speed 275 mph.
Sorry Brother Larry. Sorry Brother Tony. California’s High Speed Rail is looking like an implacable force. Apparently we now have 2/3 of the funding we need – enough to attract the bulk of the rest in private investment. Here’s the latest from Loretta Sanchez in Washington:
*
Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez, Representing California’s 47th Congressional District
PRESS RELEASE – FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – February 11, 2011
MEDIA CONTACT – Adrienne Watson 202-309-0825
REP. LORETTA SANCHEZ APPLAUDS PROPOSED $53 BILLION INVESTMENT IN HIGH SPEED RAIL
Urges Administration to Commit Significant Portion of Funds to California
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez (CA-47), along with members of the California Democratic delegation, led a letter to President Obama applauding the Administration’s commitment to investing $53 billion over the next six years to high speed rail, and urging the Administration to commit a significant portion of that funding to high speed rail projects in California. Rep. Sanchez praised the President’s announcement, which represents a very significant expansion in rail funding, and encouraged the President to view California as a partner in building a better connected America.
“I am very pleased with President Obama’s proposal to make $53 billion in additional funding available for a national high-speed, intercity passenger rail network,” said Rep. Sanchez. “High speed rail is the way of the future, and investments in local infrastructure will help to create jobs and grow our economy. California, and particularly Orange County, has always been ahead of the curve when it comes to high speed rail, and already has the plans and initial infrastructure in place. I encourage the President as he moves forward to concentrate this federal investment in a state like ours that is ideal for a high speed rail and is also prepared to implement such a system. ”
A full copy of the letter can be found below:
Dear President Obama:
As House Members of the California delegation, we were thrilled to learn that the Administration plans to move forward with a job-creation initiative. Tuesday’s announcement of a proposed $53 billion investment in infrastructure – specifically high-speed rail – over the next six years is a smart investment to move our economy in the right direction.
As benefactors [sic – BENEFICIARIES – who writes this stuff? Ed.] of this new investment, we believe that our home state of California can significantly contribute to the prosperity of our nation’s future. As we work to repair our economy, we must make investments that can create and sustain a new innovative base that brings together the best of America and making high-speed rail a reality in California will accomplish this objective.
Already armed with $9 billion in state bonds and roughly $3.6 billion from the federal government, receiving funding from the newly proposed investment in infrastructure will place California about two-thirds of the way toward funding the entire project for a high-speed rail system in California. This is a smart investment because it would ensure that California would meet the 2020 deadline and attract investments from the private sector. Further, this investment will create the jobs that many Californians are desperately looking for; this will positively impact our state’s economy and play a pivotal role in bringing down an unemployment rate that surpasses the nation’s rate of unemployed Americans.
Our delegation supports your objective to give eighty percent of Americans access to high-speed rail within 25 years. We are hopeful that as your administration moves forward with this investment, you will continue to see California as a partner in building a 21st century America. An investment in California’s high-speed rail system is an investment in the nation’s prosperity.
We are hopeful that we can work with your administration to successfully move forward with this essential investment for the future of California and the country as a whole. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
CC: Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman and Ranking Member
Appropriations Committee Chairman and Ranking Member
*
The other day, Josh Marshall’s Talking Points Memo put up a photo essay entitled “Jealous Yet America? European and Asian Nations Speed Ahead on HSR Networks.” The photo and caption at the top are from that; below are some more. Maybe soon we won’t have to feel so jealous any more. I mean Ohio and Minnesota sure, with their just-say-no Republican Governors, but not California! Click on this soundtrack and enjoy the photos:
The inside of a Japanese bullet train. Japan's rail network carries over 150 million passengers annually on its 1,528 miles of track. Currently, the only high-speed passenger rail in the US is Amtrak's Acela line which runs between Boston to Washington, D.C., and it hits top speed only briefly along that route.
In this photo a German high-speed train sits next to a yellow Eurostar train. After Japan, West Germany was the second country to develop a high-speed rail network. Germany ordered its latest set of trains in 2008 - 15 trains costing 500 million euros. At current exchange rates that's $684.3 million, or 9% of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act allocation for high speed rail.
While Europe has had a head start, it is China that has the world's largest high-speed network with 5,193 miles of track. Above, a new high-speed line connects a Chinese provincial capital to a nearby city. The new line opened in January 2011.
Passengers wait board to trains at Shanghai Train Station. China's current high-speed rail plans call for over 10,000 kilometers of high-speed rail.
China's signature rail project is a connection of Beijing to Shanghai - the first commercial line designed to travel at a top speed of 380 kilometers per hour. The 820-mile trip will take under four hours. The engine above will be one of the engines propelling those new trains.
A prototype of France's next generation of high-speed trains. The prototype debuted in 2008, and a private Italian train company will receive the first production trains in 2011.
The Eurostar is famous for quick travel under the English Channel. Passengers get on in London and arrive in Paris less than two hours later.
A high-speed train in Taiwan.
But the future of rail travel may be maglev trains which never physically touch the ground when traveling. Currently, the only operational maglev train in the world connects Shanghai to its suburban airport. It makes the 19 mile trip in seven minutes. With Shanghai traffic, the trip by bus can take hours.
The unique track Shanghai's maglev train runs on. Shanghai's maglev uses magnets to levitate itself above the track even when the train is at rest in the station.
The current fastest train in the world is the Central Japan Railway Company's experimental maglev in Yamanashi, Japan. In 2003 it reached a top speed of 361 mph.
Another photo of Japan's experimental maglev.
Yet another photo of Japan's experimental maglev.
.
Vern. Where did you attend public elementary school?
Let’s keep the math simple. $9 billion plus $3.6 billion equals $12.6 billion. Are we OK for far?
$43 billion, or $65 to $80 billion, is the total HSR cost that is being reported.
Let’s stay with the lower number for this discussion. $28.68 billion is 2/3rds of $43 billion.
Let’s go back to my earlier comments. Loretta & Vern. Show me the money?
Me and Loretta both SAID “two-thirds,” Juice Brother. That’s a nice big chunk, this early in the process.
Brother Vern. Two thirds of $43 billion is NOT $12.6
You MUST identify funding BEFORE laying track
Sorry, didn’t follow your first comment the first time. I will look into why they’re saying 2/3. Obviously they are counting some things differently from you.
OK, I see your confusion. The letter stated: “Already armed with $9 billion in state bonds and roughly $3.6 billion from the federal government, receiving funding from the newly proposed investment in infrastructure will place California about two-thirds of the way toward funding the entire project”
That $12.6 WE ALREADY HAD. The new money we are expecting from the Feds should bring us up to 2/3 (according to the letter writers – I’m not sure if or how they know the exact amount that would be allotted to California.) In any case you misread that sentence. Just like I hastily misread your first comment. Just like Geoff and Michelle hastily misread anything about the Dream Act.
OK Vern.
We have gotten into a deep hole because our elected officials play with our credit card of “buy now and pay later.” We agree. To date we have $12.6 billion dollars for HSR.
Some of my friends in the House are working to choke off any future funding for HSR. Therefore, while the president and VP may dream of spending $50 plus billion nationwide Loretta cannot assure us as to how much additional money, if any, we will receive in CA for this nightmare on Fifth Street. And what if the money does not materialize?
Ask yourself the question. 75% of Californians that travel to the Bay area use automobiles, 24% fly and 1% use rail. Try as they may, the government will not be able to drag us out of our cars or pull us off airlines with this latest social engineering effort to change our behavior.
The DOT acknowledges that we have a backlog in the multi billions of dollars of deferred road repairs, the very roads that the majority of us use, which eventually will result in damage to our vehicles. So you will continue to press ahead promoting HSR and neglect the current transportation infrastructure currently used by 99% of all Californians.
How many and how often will residents of Santa Ana, Garden Grove or Mission Viejo travel to Sacramento or San Francisco on the HSR?
I recall when Metrolink offered a “free day” so that we could ride the rails. Let’s not overlook the fact that we currently have multiple forms of public and private transportation to get us from point A to point B.
Some of my friends in the House are working to choke off any future funding for HSR.
Yes, I am aware of that shameful effort. It will fail dismally.
75% of Californians that travel to the Bay area use automobiles, 24% fly and 1% use rail. Try as they may, the government will not be able to drag us out of our cars or pull us off airlines with this latest social engineering effort to change our behavior.
“Social engineering” is a laughable thing to call it, when we the people are the ones who said we wanted HSR two years ago. And I’m sure a LOT of people are going to prefer HSR to the hassle of the airplane with all its waits, expenses, and patdowns.
How many OC residents will take the HSR to San Fransico?
I will! I will!
Vern. “We the people.”
At last count we had over 3 million living in OC.
OC, SD and Riverside counties all said no thanks to HSR.
So you suggest those counties shouldn’t get access to the HSR? Nah, we are ONE STATE. And a hell of a lot of us OC’ers did vote for it.
Larry,
You of all people should not fall into the trap of admitting that they are even close to 2/3 of the way to funding this scam (Vern, I’m sure the trains will all look like the plush Japanese one in the photo and do 200+ mph like the others). You know as well as I that $80 billion is a pie-in-the-sky estimate and that when all is said and done, twice that is likely. Oh, and Vern seems to forget that it is the Congress (the House in particular) that controls the purse strings, so Obama can “propose” all he wants, but that doesn’t mean it ever sees the light of day.
Please keep up the good fight on this Larry.
Newbie.
While I know that the actual cost, IF this HSR ever moves ahead, will be double what they are quoting today.
To avoid debating true cost projections I used their own numbers to show how they can’t even do the math. 2/3rds of $43 billion is not $12.6
At $65 billion, which is a low number, they only have 19.3% of the funding required.
I have seen reports from multiple sources with cost figures pegged at $80 billion.
Hey Vern, why don’t you bet your editorship on if this POS will ever be built?
You’re on. It’ll take a few years of course. But these things take on a life of their own. (We do need watchdogs like Larry and Tony to keep an eye on the inevitable waste and abuse.)
Hey, is this GoLightly / Dalton / Non-Greenster / Solanzo T / Plaxo / DeForest Tree? I thought you were leaving the blog for good when we put up the Zombie Reagan video.
Hey yeah, that IS you! http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2011/02/zombie-reagan-at-100/comment-page-1/#comment-157917
What do you want to bet that when this gets built you’ll still be hanging out on this blog bitching about everything and calling me “jailbird?”
PS Did you get a chance to see the final version of this story with all 14 photos?
So ALL these nations can do it, but USA can’t, California can’t. Nice to have such patriots as you in our midst.
Vern.
You know that I have used HSR in other countries including China.
Did you vote for Jerry Brown?
Does governor Brown have a $26 billion budget shortfall this year?
Do you agree that any bonded indebtedness MUST be paid every year regardless of how many public school teachers are layed off? The $9.9 billion Bond approved by voters in 2008 will eventually cost us $20 billion after MANDATORY debt service.
I will not rehash the research I have posted in 2 dozen Juice blogs on HSR at this point.
Gasoline is up about 12 cents a gallon here in the last week. Wonder how much the price will have to be to get people to rethink their driveways full of Ford Extinctions and start planning to buy a monthly bus pass?
I’m waitng for the HSR from Anaheim to Las Vegas (or to Palm Springs for us not so big spenders).
John Gulsby
For over a decade an acquaintance of mine has been working on obtaining private funding for a bullet train that initially was to go from Anaheim to Vegas. That would have been a winner before the economy turned south. However while the project is very much alive there are some major issues forcing them to reduce the line from Vegas to terminate in Victorville. From our last conversation, less than a month ago, he agreed to keep me in the loop for the latest report.
While the cost of fuel has increased have you checked the cost of a gallon of milk?
Are you also following the president’s mandate to Detroit to increase fuel economy on future vehicles as well as investing in hybrids?
Why bring up the cost of milk? The cost of milk, like the cost of most things, is driven in great part by the cost of fuel, or however else it’s transported.
“Try as they may, the government will not be able to drag us out of our cars or pull us off airlines with this latest social engineering effort to change our behavior.”
Right. Old fogies won’t use it. Young people will, and we need to think about our crumbling infrastructure in the long term.
anon. While I have family in the bay area, and have visited the capital, its a push for me at 425 miles give or take. I prefer having my own wheels vs flying. Using HSR would require my driving to ARTIC parking my car, getting from a parking lot to the station, waiting for the train and going through the same routine on the other end once I get there.
In my research I have read that traveling at 220 mph is a bogus claim especially when I read that it is unsafe for trains to travel over 150 mph. In addition, how much time will the trains spend making all the stops along the route with passengers getting on and off?
Vern. Perhaps we need to add a survey on the Juice to see what our readers have to say about their plans to use HSR if it ever becomes a reality.
Vern. Perhaps we need to add a survey on the Juice to see what our readers have to say about their plans to use HSR if it ever becomes a reality.
Great idea Larry. I will put a poll together.
Thanks Vern.
Another point for the debate that I have not mentioned previously. When you take the train you must work around their fixed schedule. When I drive to the bay area I can pick up and leave whenever I wish. The same is true for the return trip.
Who knows when Homeland Security will commence having those who ride the rails to pass though some form of screening before boarding that will add time to your trip.
Without pulling the data my sense is that the vast majority of commuters will travel from Anaheim to LA where we already have service via Metrolink and Amtrak. So we spend a few billion dollars to possibly save up to 20 minutes?
Metrolink train #683 departs from Anaheim at 7:28 am and arrives at Union Station in LA at 8:15. That’s 47 minutes.
For those who sleep in Amtrak’s Pacific Sunliner train #563 departs from Anaheim at 8:53 am and arrives in Union Station at 9:33 for a travel time of 40 minutes.
In your first two paragraphs you’re not describing any inconveniences that are any worse than flying, and I’m sure they will be much less inconvenient than flying. And as gasoline prices continue to climb, even old fogies attached to their own four wheels are going to start having second thoughts about how inconvenient all that is.
As far as the Anaheim-to-LA leg, I know you and Tony have both been studying that for a long time, and I’d be surprised if you didn’t have some constructive ideas for saving money there, without slowing down the entire route. Maybe it doesn’t need to cost a few billion there. Pringle be damned!
Vern.
I agree with your closing sentence.
How many homes and business properties will fall under eminent domain police power “takings” if that Anaheim to LA leg is added? I’ve seen some of the data but have no time now to dig it up. I say “if” because I simply will not support CA HSR.
Well, I remember SOMEHWERE reading a statement from Tony’s good friend Supervisor Shawn Nelson, saying something like the existing Amtrak rails could be modified for HSR without spending billions of dollars. If that’s true (and I don’t think Tony is exactly on the same page with Shawn here) then there shouldn’t be much eminent domain takings at all.
Where’s the private sector?
Oh yeah, investing in something that will return a profit.
Larry is right. 2/3 of 50 billion is 33 billion. Where is it? And who the f is going to ride this turkey, especially Pringle’s LA to Anaheim route – the biggest ripoff of the whole enchilada.
Where’s the private sector?
Busy hoarding money, that’s where.
Larry is right. 2/3 of 50 billion is 33 billion. Where is it?
OK. You obviously haven’t had time to read the story yet.
And who the f is going to ride this turkey
Well, shit, me, and half the people I know, to begin with!
especially Pringle’s LA to Anaheim route – the biggest ripoff of the whole enchilada.
Well, I’ll take your word on that one.
*You can push stuff against the tide…all you want. 400 KLM a hour will be a sight to see!
Especially with 85,000 jobs and all the hair and nail folks working…..maybe a few acupunturists and a few chiroprators too! Oh, did we mention the CPA’s and local tax authorities?
rw
The roadway corridors, the freeways and highways etc, has help bring America to its current status as a economic power.
The freeways are crowded to a stand still, even without the addition of future electric cars, high mileage hybrid cars , or exotic fuels cars.
The current system of a government owned and maintain highway system, used by private single occupancy land yacht is at, or near, full capacity.
The auto driver only pays about 6 percent of the cost of these roadway corridors and society as a whole pays the other 94 percent.
It is time to invest in a future transportation model. A new and improved railway corridor that includes high speed rail as one of the components.
The government should own and operate the railway corridor’s just like the government owns and operates the roadway corridor’s and the air the airway corridor’s etc.
Private companies and people would own and operated the vehicles that use the railway corridors in the same manners as the cars, busses, trucks, etc use the roadway corridors. And in the same manner that the airlines and private pilots use the airway corridors and airports.
I think even all of the harbors are government owned and operated for the benefit of private boat owners and shopping corporation.
If our society does not plan for a better future, a better transportation future, then it be our own fault for the downfall of the USA society.
Unfortunately that’s not the bill of goods that was sold to the public when the referendum was voted on.
To bad the government people can not do an honest days work and put forth quality ideas and projects that has current and future benefits for society.
The current model is nothing but a continuation of established fraud and corruption.
Aw Vern, that “poll” sucks.
How about “I won’t use it because I don’t want to go to the Bay Area or Sacramento and if I did it would be cheaper and more efficient to go by car.
I love those first class de Luxe seats you showed. You think they’re going to let the sweaty masses into that car? Ha!
Well, I’d think that reaction would go under the rubric of “refuse to use it.”
You don’t like the word “refuse?”
You got me there. I just wanted to take another shot at the white elephant.
But seriously, Vern do you think they’re gonna let us sit in those cushy leather Lazy Boys with the cup holders? Bet not!
Really don’t know, Tony. It would be nice. Just simply passing along photos of HSR in other countries that have been at it longer than us.
If they would add “Sex Cars” to the mix of rail cars, they would sell out every train.
Vern. While I will not respond to Cook’s suggestion to increase acceptance & ridership, let me suggest Juice readers purchase todays OC Register newspaper and read the Editorial on transportation by syndicated columnuist Robert Samuelson.
“Worse, the high speed rail proponents casts doubt on the (Federal) administrations’s committment to reducing huge budget deficits (its 2012 budget is due Monday). How can it subdue deficits if it keeps proposing big new spending programs?”
“Transportation secretary Ray LaHood has estimated the ultimate goal–bringing high speed rail to 80 percent of the population–could cost $500 billion over 25 years. For this stupendous sum, there would be scant public benefits. Precisely the opposite. Rail subsidies would threaten funding for more pressing public needs: schools, police, defense.”
There are several other nuggets in his editorial that Vern and Co. should take to heart.
I want to be more like Europe……
Vern, you describe 2/3’ds funding as a nice, big chunk. Change the subject to public pensions and use that kind of figure and you have legions of angry taxpayers on the hunt for heads on a stick, scalps, human sacrifice, etc. Suggest you focus on the reality of 100%, fully funded.
I said “a nice big chunk this early in the process.” Hopefully once we’re at that point, some private investment will be forthcoming. It’s only been two years.
Vern. The problem you are having is the actual cost vs the BS we were told when conned into approving the $9.95 bil Prop 1A bond measure in 2008.
This reminds me of the Mission Viejo senior center expansion where we began at $3 million to $5.5 million and 17 change orders later surpassed $16 million. That is why I am monitoring the cost data as closely as possible. Cost being the construction, the operating costs and the price of a one way ticket from SF to LA that immediately jumped from $55 one way to $104-$105 and they haven’t even layed the first mile of track. I will not devote time to subsidies.
Art Leahy, chief executive of the LA County Metro Transit Authority, was quoted in the LA Times last April 4th. Here is part of his commentary:
“We are big time unhappy with the conduct of the high-speed authority.” Leahy told the officials who oversee the LA- to SD train corridor.
“I really can’t understand their approach,” he said. “In many cases they’ve ridden roughshod over the host of cities in Orange County and in LA. They have ignored input and there are assumptions that are just astonishing.”
Among other things, Leahy questioned designing the system to run trains every five minutes. “That’s extraordinary,” he said. And widening the corridor to add dedicated bullet train tracks could require taking of hundreds of homes in Anaheim alone, he noted. “I mean, just crazy stuff,” he said, according to a recording of the session obtained by the Times.
If the plannning process does not become more rational, Leahy warned, “I don’t think there is going to be a project.”
Reading further in the Times article it reads:
“Adding seperate high-speed rail track, and potentially having to take hundreds of pieces of private property, has helped double projections for the LA-Anaheim segment to about $4.5 billion.”
Some critics worry the beginning with the LA-Anaheim segment will duplicate existing Metrolink and Amtrak service, both of which have potential to go 110 mph if improvmeents are made.
It “isn’t practical, ” said Michael McGinley, who previously headed Metrolink’s engineering department and has worked on the local high-speed project as a consultant. “The first $4 billion should not be spent on that little spur. It overlaps and competes with an existing service.”
Brother Vern. Isn’t that the point I made earlier. We already have service from Anaheim to LA. I could write my own book on the flaws of CA HSR. And should they decide to share track with Metrolink or freight, won’t that slow down the bullet?
It was not a slap at Curt Pringle to propose the first leg being in the central valley. We are over the horizon and won’t realize the drawback until it is too late. It was a strategic move that was made out of desperation. The “train to nowhere” or should I say Borden to Corcoran, with a combined population of 25,000 was so poorly selected that they added Bakersfield to the mix.
Almost every indicator leads to our being misled including the Business Plan that was not made public until AFTER the 2008 vote.
I have worked with several Fortune 100 firms on complex state-of-the-art new product development. None of them undertook a project without seeing all the data including pulling the plug before going deeper in the red if that is what the future indicates.
Brother Vern.
While I suggested adding a HSR poll this is the first time I checked to see the choices you offered our readers.
Q 1 “Refuse to use it” is not the brightest question. Perhaps you might add “did you vote for or against Prop 1 A” which created this nightmare on Elm Street
“Use it once a month or more?” 9 votes. For business people perhaps once a week is more appropriate and could be a 4th question.
Let’s recap. How much is the Anaheim to LA leg. Over $4 billion when we already have regularly scheduled service?
Q 1 “Refuse to use it” is not the brightest question. Perhaps you might add did you vote for or against Prop 1 A which created this nightmare on Elm Street
Well, not really. Aren’t you more concerned that it will get built and then not be used? That election is in the past.
I realize you and Tony, and more than half of OCers, voted no on Prop 1A. This poll is not about that.
Vern. Take your pick.
Should we spend any money to fix our transportation infrastructure?
How about retaining our public school teachers?
You can’t do it all, especially with a $26 billion dollar shortfall this year and probably the same deep hole for the rest of Jerry Brown’s first term in office.
Not only do we have a massive deficit in DC the same unhealthy condition exists in CA
While just over 50% of Californians approved the $9.95 billion Prop 1A Ballot Measure the proponents are not fullfilling their obligations. Funding must be identified along with no operating subsidy. Before you start laying track I want to see documentation that addresses these issues.
As to it being used can you be more specific? Someone would obviously use it if only the conductor and the engineer. No, not being sarcastic, but the ridership numbers have fallen faster than the Cleveland Cavaliers.
“The 2008 proposition that more than 100 million riders annually would use the train by the tenth operating year (2030)…” “By 2009, CHSRA was claiming only 39 million riders by 2030 for its LA/Anaheim to SF Phase One.” What are they smoking in their HSR Board meetings anyway?
Vern. I would hope that we can agree that while the election is in the past the requirements of that Ballot Measure are still to be enforced.
I think we need to raise the taxes on automobiles substantially, to cover the cost of building new railway corridors and associate infrastructures for the future.
The private auto has enjoyed many decades of subsidies in the transportation infrastructure cost.
The gas taxes, state and federal and sales tax have never covered the cost of owning, operating and maintaining the roads.
The life we in southern California have enjoyed for decades is due to a prior generation who had the foresight to build the water project and the roadway corridors, etc.
Build for the future, or not.
cook.
Did you vote for the 30 year TEMPORARY extension of Measure M tax?
Where are those funds being spent?
I voted NO
I favor a railway corridor, in the same manner that the roadway corridors and airway corridors have been done.
I do not favor the current model you are against.
10 percent spent on HSR and 90 percent spent on political BS.
The President is spending to much on buying political capital to try and win reelection. I wish he would do a Jimmy Carter, losing his reelection by doing the correct thing 1st.
cook.
Thank you for your opposition to this HSR pipe dream.
I’ve heard that the HSRA has a checkbook with around $9 million to promote HSR while I resort to a beat up old keyboard.
Fantastic article! I have always been a big fan of railroads and how efficient they are at moving people around. Out of all states, California needs a railroad system on par with the Western world more than any other state. Although I love taking Amtrak, it’s just not quite there yet.
The downside is that the federal government will be spending money it doesn’t have. However, at least it’s better than killing innocent people in foreign countries for religion or oil with money it doesn’t have.
As long as it’s economically feasible, California will be better off in the long run with a rail system on par with the western world. Hopefully the jobs it generates will at least get some Americans back to work. Plus, the added efficiency of people being able to work or sleep on a train (two things you shouldn’t do in a car) will help out as well.
JT.
I find two powerful words in your response. ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE
Yes, but if you are going to bust the budget, might as well do it with a rail system. That’s basically what it’s coming down to. Both Republicans and Democrats tend to bust the budget in their own way. A modern rail system will be better for our economy than trying to be the uncompensated police department for the world.
JT.
While I won’t debate our foregin policy decision making in this post, there are elected officials in other states who acknowledged that this is not the time to be blowing billions of dollars on HSR when we have such a huge deficit and crumbling transportation infrastructure. My point is that everyone cannot be bought.
It took courage for two Republican governors to refuse huge buckets of HSR stimulus funds. I refer to Ohio and Wisconsin where that money may have been transferred to CA.
Let me express myself in a different way. It’s called priorities and moral obligations.
“One of the GOP leaders on cutting spending, Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas, said in the debate on the House floor Tuesday, “If we want to have jobs today, if we want to protect our children from bankruptcy tomorrow, we’ve got to quit spending money we don’t have. There is a debt crisis in America and it is spending-driven, being led by the president and our friends from the other side of the aisle. ”
I am not up to speed on the economic details of HSR, but the times I have used Trains/HSR in Europe (England to France); Hong Kong; Japan and other countries I have found this to be very convenient and economical.
It seems reasonable to contemplate better modes or alternatives to traveling within our large state, specially considering that we are very mobile society.
I would use HSR if available instead of flying e.g. from SoCal to San Francisco; this might alleviate road congestion, and it might also encourage greater TOURISM and travel to other parts of our state such as Northern California.
The greater benefit is that HSR might join us economically giving us an improved competitive advantage by facilitating the bringing together of productive human capital and entrepreneurial resources.
And depending on how they route it, it may alleviate some of the high-density living we have in some of our cities.
Paco. Let me start with your close. Big brother has an Agenda that is driven to eventually house us in tenements along the railroad where we can live work, shop and play and jump on board to visit relatives. We will be able to live without motor vehicles. They oppose the burbs that we live in today.
Cramming us together in housing eventually will drive up the density to justify future rail. It’s all part of president Obama’s master plan. It’s called creating super dense urban centers like Hong Kong or Singapore.
More to follow.
You can live out the rest of your life in the far-flung suburbs, Brother Larry.
You forget that a majority of us voted for Obama, and his vision (although you exaggerate and caricature it) is not so far from the vision of many of us. I would certainly like to live within walking distance of great public transportation, to “live, work, shop, play, and visit relatives” without having to use a car.
Good thing is, YOU don’t have to!
Brother Vern.
Part of the problem is that readers confuse long distance trains with subways and L’s as found in SF, NYC and Chicago.
Let’s kick around perceptions of urban densities.
“New York ranks head and shoulders above other urbanized areas, with a perceived density of over 33,000 people per square mile. San Francisco comes in second, with a perceived density of over 15,000 people per square mile, while Los Angeles is in third place with a perceived density of about 12,500 people per square mile.” HSR is not a BART alternative.
Vern. I once worked in NYC and took the tubes from New Jersey into Manhatten where I transferred to their vast subway system. I rarely drove into the city except for pleasure trips. The cost for parking would wipe out your entire paycheck.
Don’t confuse HSR at speeds over 150 MPH with a subway or Metrolink that stops every 5, 10 to 20 miles to pick up and discharge passengers. That’s not apples to apples.
And as stated previously we have taken the high speed rail from London to Paris and another HSR from Paris to Switzerland. Our last adventure was a ride on Maglev in China. My point is that as much as we travel the globe we do not ride the rails for hundreds of miles every weekday.
The only way CA HSR could approach its bogus projected ridership would be a “free” travel date. No thank you! We have deficit to deal with that will not disappear overnight
The only way CA HSR could approach its bogus projected ridership would be a “free” travel date.
I dunno, says nothing about “free” in our little OJ poll, and that’s looking pretty good!
I have the solution to creating the jobs, the transportation with independence, reducing or eliminating dependence on foreign oil, increasing safety, decrease pollution and emissions, increase renewable energy investment and utilization.
http://opensourcetransportationproject.com/index.html
Join the Evolution
I hope in Vietnam will have quickly train hight speed. Nơ only rail with the speed 60 – 80 km/h.
i would love to see “metro rail” replace all the carpool lanes maybe do 405 133- LAX first with some bus connect already in place , could work well. would bring lots of construction jobs to jump start the economy too . Be a good tourist route also. also wold allow from lax rail and one bus ride to Disney or Knotts or the beach .
I am sorry to say this but reading these comments, the only thing I can think is “Boy are you guys stupid.”
I moved to China about fifteen years ago to get away from the worthless yuppies who have suborned the US. Getting off the big ol’ 747 was like dropping a 100 lb sandbag off my shoulders. No stinking worthless car ! No cops hassling you every ten minutes ! No retarded planners who build BART, but stop three miles from the airport ! No morons squealing “prooofit ! prooofit ! private sector ! Private sector!” every three second. Do you make a proooofit ! on the sewer system ? Do you make a proooofit ! on the fire department ? Did you make a prooofit on your children ? When grandma can’t pull her weight, do you toss her ? Life is *not* about “making a prooofit !”
High speed trains are *great*. I ride to Nanjing, I ride to Beijing, I can get up at 7:00 a.m., hop on one of our eleven new subways, be at the train station before 8:00, be in Nanjing by 10:00, hop in a taxi for $5 and be wherever I want lickety-split with NO car payments, NO insurance payments, NO ridiculous gasoline prices, NO having to drive myself anywhere, NO repair biills, NO new tires/water pump/heater core, NO cops hassling me for a “dim license plate light” … it is heaven. Absolute heaven. Cars suck.
To take Larry Gilbert’s side now, he’s right. You morons will screw it up. The US couldn’t find its ass with both hands anymore. Look at the Bay Bridge – over 6 billion dollars, 25 years, it’s cracked worthless garbage built by a public-private consortium of idiots. If / when they build the trains they will manage to put the stations somewhere you can’t get to, Homeland Sekurite Sieg Heil will make it just as bad as flying, the tickets will be overpriced, the food will be soggy sandwisches which cost $11 each, and your overall transportation system is so worthtless that once you get somewhere, you’ll be stuck 30 miles from nowhere surrounded by people who would knife you to death for $5.
China is screwed up, no doubt about it but you guys are buffoons. Drooling worthless retarded buffoons. the “cost” of high speed rail is but a bruised toenail on the cancer that is the USA. Just look at the boneheads liars and thieves you elect to office.
I don’t know what to say, beyond “Good luck !”
Thanks for the good wishes there at the end!
And good luck breathing the air.
Don’t you have a labor camp to run?
Thanks for the vote of confidence in HSR, but apart from that, why don’t you go take a short walk on a long pier.
Yes, a short walk, so that you’re stuck there halfway down the pier for months or years, become grizzled and weathered, and are forced to learn to fish and beg for smokes.
You guys don’t like the truth much, do you ? 🙂
But here’s the thing – you can insult me, no biggy. But you can’t deny the facts. Look around you : the United States can’t find its butt with both hands. Twenty-five years to build the Bay Bridge, six billion dollars spent in Shanghai and when it’s finished, it’s junk. And not junk because of the crappy Chinese parts, either. The ten parts you did manage to build failed.
Good luck with that “hi tech” economy based on Tweeter and Facebloop. That’s some important stuff there. And you cetainly have a lot of innovative eponymous iconic diversity. Unfortunately that’s not the same as being competent.
Too bad you can’t build a train. Even more too bad, who is the prime contractor on this thing ? I love trains. They are great … but you guys are giving the job to Nancy Pelosi’s husband, who never even had a Lionel. This is going to work reeeeeeal good, I can tell.
I’ll be watching from my long pier. And laughing. Honest, I’m sorry to say this but you guys are idiots. You prove it daily. Just read your own newspapers.
Seriously, get back to the camp. If you’re away too long, the proletariat might revolt.
Hey Ryan … do you know what the Prison Industry Authority is ? Did you know that the US has more people in prison for nothing than the entire rest of the world ? At least our proletariat might revolt. Your peons just sit in front of the teevee regurgitating Faux News platitudes.
“Economically feasible ‘ … Larry, a train would be more than economically feasible if you quit spending 800 billion a year on your 700 military bases around the world. Germany really needs the US to protect them from the Soviets, you know. We’re not even going to mention the three or four TRILLION you morons pissed away invading Polan … err, Iraq, all based on lies lies and more lies. But Social Secuirty is an “entitlement.” Oh yeah, “economically feasible” is real important to you people. You’ve got your economic house in order for sure. Wall Street fleeces the country to the tune of several trillion, who do you prop up ? Wall Street, of course ! Let the dumb middle class pay for it, they’re just little people saps anyhow.
Yep. A Train to Nowhere (San Francisco and Los Angeles now count as nowhere) would be smart and convenient and save energy and be much less damaging to the world than another twelve lanes on 5. Which is exectly why you won’t do it. Anyone with an IQ over six would understand that you can’t dump hundreds of millions of tons of crap into the air daily without a negative effect. Anyone with an IQ over ten would actually do something about it.
Unfortunately, that leaves Americans out. You are so in love with your stupid destructive worthless “lifestyle” and pointless automobiles that you’d rather go extinct than change. “My caaar ! My caaaar ! I gots to have my beautiful caaar !”
We’d be better off if chimpanzees were running the world. They are smarter.
Indeed, they might. Don’t let that tank roll over your ass on the way out.