Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 78

Thread: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

  1. #26
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    There you go again, making things up. Bombardier designed and built the Acela trainsets. Now it's true that GE and EMD certainly have the technical ability to build high speed locomotives. They build the vast majority of the locomotives worldwide. GE in Erie, PA and EMD in LaGrange, IL London Ontario and Muncie, IN. Always helps to have a few facts thrown in the discussion.
    Then one very pertinent fact ( which I mistakenly assumed was common knowledge ) is that last year's 'shovel ready' stimulus projects already ran afoul of the 'US Content' rules attached to the federal stimulus money when they attempted to utilize Canadian build components ...



    ... there is no reason to believe that such 'US Content' rule being attached to federal stimulus money would be changed for an HSR project. This is even less likely given the 'cozy' relationship between the White House, Jeff Immelt, GE, the NBC division of GE, GE's union workers, union political contributions, etc.


    Again, how is anyone being "controlled" with HSR? How does it prevent anyone from getting where they want to go?
    funny you should ask ...




    Also, one premise of this thread ... i.e. that HSR will indeed wind up being tomorrow's lowest cost / only 'affordable' means of long distance transportation ( due to the price of gasoline and jet fuel reaching $35 per gallon ) is being explored in the soon to be released movie version of 'Atlas Shrugged'

    see

    ~
    Last edited by Melonie; 03-10-2011 at 01:21 AM.

  2. #27
    Curious Guest Anon76's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    4
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    If the proposed money for HSR were spent in big cities for mass rail transit, I think it would be better spent than inter-city travel within states. The problem with a HSR system here in the U.S. is that our cities and states and people have grown around the automobile and airplanes. It may work well in the east where cities are closer together, but not so good in the west. Also we have a society of wanting everything as fast as possible. I don't see too many people giving up airplanes over railroads for that reason. It's a great idea in theory, but I don't think society would embrace it enough to warrant the cost.

  3. #28
    Banned Eric Stoner's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 1,430 Times in 888 Posts

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    Quote Originally Posted by eagle2 View Post
    And what makes you an expert on Constitutional law? Congress has the power to provide for the general welfare of the US. This is a standard conservative argument against any policy they don't like. "It's not constitutional".


    and you think that is better than requiring them to buy insurance for themselves?



    You can very easily get where you want to go from the train station by cab or rental car. Again, how is anyone being "controlled" with HSR? How does it prevent anyone from getting where they want to go?
    Rather than continue to quibble and go any further off topic, you and I have differing views of the Constitution and the proper role of government. One question I will raise because it is the most troubling : If Congress DOES have the power under The Commerce Clause ( and that's where it HAS to be found ) to mandate that Americans purchase health insurance, what is to stop them from mandating that every able bodied male citizen, hopefully without a criminal record, purchase a gun ? Or buy a Volt ? Or mandate that every home with a child have a computer ? Ridiculous ? Far fetched ? Perhaps, but once you expand government power it NEVER contracts. The same expansive reading of the Commerce Clause that permits a liberal Congress to mandate health insurance,could be used by a conservative one to further other goals that are much less to your and other liberals' liking.

    The "control" issue grew out of my musings as to why liberals love HSR so much when it is clearly a boondoggle and a black hole for revenues better used elsewhere. Maybe YOU don't think that way, but many Congressional Libs. LOVE to try and control as much of our lives as they can.
    Last edited by Eric Stoner; 03-11-2011 at 07:52 AM.

  4. #29
    Banned Eric Stoner's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 1,430 Times in 888 Posts

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    Quote Originally Posted by eagle2 View Post
    How do you know they will have to pay MORE money to arrive LATER?




    In the US, the Acela is gaining market share from the airlines.

    http://www.wired.com/autopia/2008/03/would-people-av/




    You don't know that. HSR is far more efficient than air travel. There is no reason why it couldn't be run for less money.
    Excuse me ? Have you compared airfares vs. train fares lately ? Which do you think travels faster ? A train or a plane ?

    Please define "efficiency" ? Will HSR cost less than driving or air travel ? Not in most cases ? Will it be more fuel efficient ? In some cases , it probably will but in most cases the difference will be negligible. Now before you have one of your hissy fits and accuse me of "making things up " based on my ideology, why don't you read Mr. O'Toole's analysis of HSR here and in other countries and read the
    studies he relied on ? Just go to the Cato Institute's website. I don't know how many times I have to say it : I find this disappointing. As a train buff and someone who likes traveling by train, I WAS a HSR advocate. Not anymore. The numbers just don't add up.

    Lol. Have you ever taken the Acela ? I have. A number of times. To call it "high speed rail" is a joke ! The increase in its top speed from 90 to 120 mph ( which it can achieve for only limited stretches ) has shaved a whopping 40 minutes off the N.Y.C. to D.C. run. It still stops in Philly and Baltimore. It takes a long time to slow down and a long time to hit top speed. The Acela costs $133 and you can fly for as little as $49.
    Last edited by Eric Stoner; 03-10-2011 at 08:20 AM.

  5. #30
    God/dess
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,964
    Thanks
    6,155
    Thanked 10,183 Times in 4,602 Posts

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Stoner View Post
    Rather than continue to quibble and go any further off topic, you and I have differing views of the Constitution and the proper role of government. One question I will raise because it is the most troubling : If Congress DOES have the power under The Commerce Clause ( and that's where it HAS to be found ) to mandate that Americans purchase health insurance, what is to stop them from mandating that every able bodied male citizen, hopefully without a criminal record, purchase a gun ? Or buy a Volt ? Or mandate that every home with a child have a computer ? Ridiculous ? Far fetched ? Perhaps but once you expand government power it NEVER contracts. The same expansive reading of the Commerce Clause that permits a liberal Congress to mandate health insurance could be used by a conservative one to further other goals that are much less to your and other liberals' liking.
    Congress already did pass a law mandating that every able-bodied white male purchase a gun, back in 1792. At the time this law was passed, the people who wrote the Constitution were still alive, so they would have know for sure whether or not it was constitutional to mandate citizens buy a certain product.

    From:
    http://www.constitution.org/mil/mil_act_1792.htm

    That every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Stoner View Post
    The "control" issue grew out of my musings as to why liberals love HSR so much when it is clearly a boondoggle and a black hole for revenues better used elsewhere. maybe YOU don't think that way but many Congressional Libs. LOVE to try and control as much of our lives as they can.
    That's just your opinion. You don't know whether or not it's going to be a boondoggle. You probably would have said the same thing about the Acela before it went into service.

    How do libs try to control our lives? They don't have much impact on my life.

    I see conservatives as being the ones who want to control other peoples' lives. Conservatives are the ones who want to decide for two adults of the same sex, that no matter how much they love each other, they're not allowed to marry. Conservatives are the ones who want to tell any woman who becomes pregnant, that she cannot make the decision to end the pregnancy without their approval, or perhaps not at all. Conservatives want to control the sex lives of teenagers. They've decided that teenagers shouldn't be having sex, so they do their best to prevent them from learning how to have sex safely. Conservatives want to impose their religious beliefs on everyone else without regard to the First Amendment.
    Last edited by eagle2; 03-10-2011 at 08:12 PM.

  6. #31
    God/dess Zofia's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Durham, North Carolina
    Posts
    2,417
    Thanks
    2,964
    Thanked 2,374 Times in 935 Posts

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    ... there is no reason to believe that such 'US Content' rule being attached to federal stimulus money would be changed for an HSR project.
    There you go again, making things up. There has been no suggestion of applying a domestic content rule to HSR. Also, the domestic content rule was dropped when it became apparent that it violated our trade treaties.

    This is even less likely given the 'cozy' relationship between the White House, Jeff Immelt, GE, the NBC division of GE, GE's union workers, union political contributions, etc.
    There you go again making things up. GE sold NBC to Cox Cable last year.

    Z

  7. #32
    God/dess Zofia's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Durham, North Carolina
    Posts
    2,417
    Thanks
    2,964
    Thanked 2,374 Times in 935 Posts

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Stoner View Post
    Excuse me ? Have you compared airfares vs. train fares lately ? Which do you think travels faster ? A train or a plane
    I have. For tomorrow, Friday March 11, Raleigh to Charlotte. Round trip airfare on USAirways is $597. The shortest non-stop trip only takes forty-five minutes in the air, but parking and security adds about an hour and a half each way so figure an 2:15 each way. And no internet service for the forty-five minutes in the air.

    Amtrak is $52 round trip, I get a $5.00 discount for being a member of NARP. Time is 3:25 each way, but it's an easy trip and I can work the whole way. No standing in line for insane security check, no getting groped by a government agent, no open your laptop crap. Just walk on the train first thing tomorrow morning and the conductor just scans my ticket. Oh, and the internet works the whole way. Sweet deal.

    Driving 170 miles on the interstate, 2:20 each way if I don't get stuck in traffic. Cost, $.51 per mile, 340 miles total (170 each way) $173.40. Can't work at all in the car unless I hire a driver. (Which I would consider if Amtrak wasn't available.)

    My pick, even NC's slow old Amtrak trains. They are slow, but they're cheap and work as a rolling office. Double bonus, I can get a latte in the cafe` car. Triple bonus, no groping in the security line.

    Really, it's hard to beat Amtrak.

    Z

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Zofia For This Useful Post:


  9. #33
    God/dess
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,964
    Thanks
    6,155
    Thanked 10,183 Times in 4,602 Posts

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Stoner View Post
    Excuse me ? Have you compared airfares vs. train fares lately ? Which do you think travels faster ? A train or a plane ?
    Which do you think uses less fuel and cost less to build, a train or an airliner? If trains cost more, it's because people are willing to pay more to travel by train. The Acela makes a profit of about $41 per passenger. How many airlines can do that?

    http://www.businessinsider.com/repor...senger-2009-10

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Stoner View Post
    Please define "efficiency" ? Will HSR cost less than driving or air travel ? Not in most cases ? Will it be more fuel efficient ? In some cases , it probably will but in most cases the difference will be negligible. Now before you have one of your hissy fits and accuse me of "making things up " based on my ideology, why don't you read Mr. O'Toole's analysis of HSR here and in other countries and read the
    studies he relied on ? Just go to the Cato Institute's website. I don't know how many times I have to say it : I find this disappointing. As a train buff and someone who likes traveling by train, I WAS a HSR advocate. Not anymore. The numbers just don't add up.
    It's common sense that trains cost much less to run than an airliner. How is pointing out that someone is making something up, when they are making something up, "having a hissy fit"? Of course Mr. O'Toole is going to portray high speed rail in a negative way. He's a conservative ideologue. I doubt that he's even capable of saying anything positive about any program where the government is involved. In most countries that have built high-speed rail, they've been very successful.

    From:
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009...eed-rail-japan
    More than 150 million people a year use the bullet train service between Tokyo and Osaka – the most popular route – while Japan Airlines (JAL) flew 3.9 million people from Tokyo to Osaka, Kobe and nearby Kansai International airports in the same period.

    From:
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009...nes?intcmp=239
    Once, there were hundreds of flights a day transferring tens of thousands of passengers between Berlin and Hamburg, Frankfurt and Cologne, Frankfurt and Stuttgart, Bremen and Cologne. All have been closed down due to cheaper and faster rail travel.

    From:
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009...vel?intcmp=239
    High-speed trains pulled by aerodynamic engines with noses shaped like a duck-billed platypus are grounding aircraft across Spain. The year-old Barcelona-Madrid line has already taken 46% of the traffic – stealing most of it from fuel-guzzling, carbon-emitting aircraft. As the high-speed rail network spreads a web of tracks across Spain over the next decade, it threatens to relegate domestic air travel to a distant second place.

    Of course a conservative ideologue will not mention any of these successes.


    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Stoner View Post
    Lol. Have you ever taken the Acela ? I have. A number of times. To call it "high speed rail" is a joke ! The increase in its top speed from 90 to 120 mph ( which it can achieve for only limited stretches ) has shaved a whopping 40 minutes off the N.Y.C. to D.C. run. It still stops in Philly and Baltimore. It takes a long time to slow down and a long time to hit top speed. The Acela costs $133 and you can fly for as little as $49.
    The Acela does travel at high speeds for parts of it's trips. It's the closest thing we have to high-speed rail in this country and it is doing very well. Do you really think if we spent the money to make it as fast as other HSR's, it would somehow become less popular?

  10. #34
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    I'm still trying to figure out how it's possible for HSR ideologues to continue ignoring the fact that airliners fly OVER privately owned property, while trains must travel THROUGH ( former ) privately owned property. What do you speculate that the costs might be for the gov't to reimburse 1 million ( former ) homeowners whose property the gov't must sieze in order to construct a new HSR right of way between say Philly and New York City that is actually capable of 'high speed' runs ? Of course when using ideologically based 'official' accounting, that cost won't be added to the HSR project cost or ticket price.


    GE sold NBC to Cox Cable last year.
    yeah, yeah ... I'll spell out MSNBC and CNBC ( is Chris Matthews' leg still tingling ? ). The point about 'cozy' relationships remains. This is particularly the case with GE CEO Jeff Immelt, who is already in a position of being the 'rooster' in the White 'hen' House !


    There has been no suggestion of applying a domestic content rule to HSR
    now who's being unrealistic ? Do you seriously think that a foreign train supplier will be awarded billions of dollars worth of US taxpayer funded contracts over the hue and cry of those US taxpayers, US union workers, extremely politically connected US corporations, etc. ?

  11. #35
    Banned Eric Stoner's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 1,430 Times in 888 Posts

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    Quote Originally Posted by Zofia View Post
    I have. For tomorrow, Friday March 11, Raleigh to Charlotte. Round trip airfare on USAirways is $597. The shortest non-stop trip only takes forty-five minutes in the air, but parking and security adds about an hour and a half each way so figure an 2:15 each way. And no internet service for the forty-five minutes in the air.

    Amtrak is $52 round trip, I get a $5.00 discount for being a member of NARP. Time is 3:25 each way, but it's an easy trip and I can work the whole way. No standing in line for insane security check, no getting groped by a government agent, no open your laptop crap. Just walk on the train first thing tomorrow morning and the conductor just scans my ticket. Oh, and the internet works the whole way. Sweet deal.

    Driving 170 miles on the interstate, 2:20 each way if I don't get stuck in traffic. Cost, $.51 per mile, 340 miles total (170 each way) $173.40. Can't work at all in the car unless I hire a driver. (Which I would consider if Amtrak wasn't available.)

    My pick, even NC's slow old Amtrak trains. They are slow, but they're cheap and work as a rolling office. Double bonus, I can get a latte in the cafe` car. Triple bonus, no groping in the security line.

    Really, it's hard to beat Amtrak.

    Z
    Airfares are based, in part, on travel VOLUME. The more passengers, the lower the fare can be. Especially if different airlines are competing for the same business.

    I've always gotten a lot of work done on a plane.

    Here's the problem. You, like me , prefer taking a train compared to most other travel options. Only if there are enough like minded people, does train travel make economic sense. So far, the traveling public prefers planes and cars to trains. The issue is whether hundreds of billions in "investment" is wise compared to other uses for that money. N.Y. has 70% of its roads and bridges in "fair" to "poor" condition. Should it use available funds to repair and maintain them or put that money into HSR projects ?

    What you completely ignore is that the Charlotte to Raleigh line, like every Amtrak line save one ( The Acela ) LOSES money ! It is NOT profitable. It might make economic sense for you to take it. That is NOT the issue. The REAL question is whether it makes sense for the taxpayers to subsidize your preferred mode of travel.

    Btw, one bombing or foiled plot to bomb a train and we'll have metal detectors and frisking for train travel too. Given the British and Spanish examples I'm a bit surprised we don't have it already.
    Last edited by Eric Stoner; 03-11-2011 at 08:30 AM.

  12. #36
    Banned Eric Stoner's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 1,430 Times in 888 Posts

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    Quote Originally Posted by eagle2 View Post
    Congress already did pass a law mandating that every able-bodied white male purchase a gun, back in 1792. At the time this law was passed, the people who wrote the Constitution were still alive, so they would have know for sure whether or not it was constitutional to mandate citizens buy a certain product.

    From:
    http://www.constitution.org/mil/mil_act_1792.htm

    That every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack.



    That's just your opinion. You don't know whether or not it's going to be a boondoggle. You probably would have said the same thing about the Acela before it went into service.

    How do libs try to control our lives? They don't have much impact on my life.

    I see conservatives as being the ones who want to control other peoples' lives. Conservatives are the ones who want to decide for two adults of the same sex, that no matter how much they love each other, they're not allowed to marry. Conservatives are the ones who want to tell any woman who becomes pregnant, that she cannot make the decision to end the pregnancy without their approval, or perhaps not at all. Conservatives want to control the sex lives of teenagers. They've decided that teenagers shouldn't be having sex, so they do their best to prevent them from learning how to have sex safely. Conservatives want to impose their religious beliefs on everyone else without regard to the First Amendment.
    Apples and oranges. The law you cite is clearly denoted a "Militia Act". I DO wish you'd start READING your own links ! The authority for such legislation is clearly spelled out in The Constitution. The Act itself says it is intended to promote preparedness to oppose a foreign invasion, not promote Interstate Commerce or provide for the "general welfare".

    It is MY opinion based on facts. Read the studies O'Toole relied on and then tell me the numbers add up. His ideology is irrelevant. The math is what it is and history teaches all too well that NO Federal project comes in on time and within budget i.e. HSR will actually cost MUCH more than current projections.

    For the umpteenth time, I AGREE with you about some conservatives. Sadly, some conservatives like a "nanny state" just as much a Libs do. If my prescriptions are followed and the Constitution is read according to how the Founders WROTE it, neither conservatives nor libs would get the authority they need to make mischief.
    If we limit Congress to its limited and enumerated powers, strictly construed, ALL of us would have our liberty preserved.

    Are you serious that your life is not affected by Liberal policy ? Read your pay stub lately ? Who do you think came up with all those deductions from your paycheck ?
    Bought gas lately ? Liberal policy has limited drilling , weakened the dollar, subsidized ethanol while blocking imports and prevented refinery expansion. Plus all the taxes added to a gallon of gas. Use electricity ? Read your bill and check out ALL the taxes your electric company gets to pass on to you. Bought food lately ? See above and add in the cost of Federal subsidies, price supports and quotas . Do you buy clothes ? Same thing.

  13. #37
    Banned Eric Stoner's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 1,430 Times in 888 Posts

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    Quote Originally Posted by eagle2 View Post
    Which do you think uses less fuel and cost less to build, a train or an airliner? If trains cost more, it's because people are willing to pay more to travel by train. The Acela makes a profit of about $41 per passenger. How many airlines can do that?

    http://www.businessinsider.com/repor...senger-2009-10


    It's common sense that trains cost much less to run than an airliner. How is pointing out that someone is making something up, when they are making something up, "having a hissy fit"? Of course Mr. O'Toole is going to portray high speed rail in a negative way. He's a conservative ideologue. I doubt that he's even capable of saying anything positive about any program where the government is involved. In most countries that have built high-speed rail, they've been very successful.

    From:
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009...eed-rail-japan
    More than 150 million people a year use the bullet train service between Tokyo and Osaka – the most popular route – while Japan Airlines (JAL) flew 3.9 million people from Tokyo to Osaka, Kobe and nearby Kansai International airports in the same period.

    From:
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009...nes?intcmp=239
    Once, there were hundreds of flights a day transferring tens of thousands of passengers between Berlin and Hamburg, Frankfurt and Cologne, Frankfurt and Stuttgart, Bremen and Cologne. All have been closed down due to cheaper and faster rail travel.

    From:
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009...vel?intcmp=239
    High-speed trains pulled by aerodynamic engines with noses shaped like a duck-billed platypus are grounding aircraft across Spain. The year-old Barcelona-Madrid line has already taken 46% of the traffic – stealing most of it from fuel-guzzling, carbon-emitting aircraft. As the high-speed rail network spreads a web of tracks across Spain over the next decade, it threatens to relegate domestic air travel to a distant second place.

    Of course a conservative ideologue will not mention any of these successes.




    The Acela does travel at high speeds for parts of it's trips. It's the closest thing we have to high-speed rail in this country and it is doing very well. Do you really think if we spent the money to make it as fast as other HSR's, it would somehow become less popular?
    Please define "success". What do these trains run on ? Electricity usually. It has to be generated somehow. What is the PROFITABILITY of all the "success stories" you cite. Afaik, ALL those lines run at a deficit. They are SUBSIDIZED.

    Yes, the Acela shows an operating profit. Never said it didn't. It has yet to recoup all the billions invested in it, but presumably it will over time. The Acela is ONE line; the ONLY line in the entire Amtrak system that is profitable. It runs in the most highly populated corridor with the most business travelers in the entire country.

  14. #38
    Banned Eric Stoner's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 1,430 Times in 888 Posts

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    I'm still trying to figure out how it's possible for HSR ideologues to continue ignoring the fact that airliners fly OVER privately owned property, while trains must travel THROUGH ( former ) privately owned property. What do you speculate that the costs might be for the gov't to reimburse 1 million ( former ) homeowners whose property the gov't must sieze in order to construct a new HSR right of way between say Philly and New York City that is actually capable of 'high speed' runs ? Of course when using ideologically based 'official' accounting, that cost won't be added to the HSR project cost or ticket price.




    yeah, yeah ... I'll spell out MSNBC and CNBC ( is Chris Matthews' leg still tingling ? ). The point about 'cozy' relationships remains. This is particularly the case with GE CEO Jeff Immelt, who is already in a position of being the 'rooster' in the White 'hen' House !




    now who's being unrealistic ? Do you seriously think that a foreign train supplier will be awarded billions of dollars worth of US taxpayer funded contracts over the hue and cry of those US taxpayers, US union workers, extremely politically connected US corporations, etc. ?
    1. NBC was sold to Comcast.

    2. GE under Immeldt has made itself dependent on government largesse. Both for its "green" projects AND for all the TARP money GE got to bail out GE Capital.

    3. Immeldt met with the editors, producers and talent at CNBC questioning the "fairness" of their coverage of Obama and Obamanomics. I don't recall any similar concern or solicitude for Bush The Dumber and his policies.

  15. #39
    God/dess
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,964
    Thanks
    6,155
    Thanked 10,183 Times in 4,602 Posts

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Stoner View Post
    Apples and oranges. The law you cite is clearly denoted a "Militia Act". I DO wish you'd start READING your own links ! The authority for such legislation is clearly spelled out in The Constitution. The Act itself says it is intended to promote preparedness to oppose a foreign invasion, not promote Interstate Commerce or provide for the "general welfare".
    I DO wish you would stop twisting and distorting what the links say. Able-bodied males were REQUIRED to buy guns with their own money. It doesn't matter what the reason was.

  16. #40
    Banned Eric Stoner's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 1,430 Times in 888 Posts

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    Quote Originally Posted by eagle2 View Post
    I DO wish you would stop twisting and distorting what the links say. Able-bodied males were REQUIRED to buy guns with their own money. It doesn't matter what the reason was.
    I READ it. What would you think about a similar law today ? Can we agree that your presumed opposition to it would be based ENTIRELY on the wisdom/necessity for such a measure ? Not on the authority of Congress to pass such a law ?

    What about my other hypos ? Do you think Congress has authority to mandate that every licensed driver buy a Volt ? If not, why not ? What if Congress mandated that every parent with a school age child buy a computer ? Or a musical instrument ? Under YOUR interpretation of the Constitution, they could do all those things and a lot more. What if they forbade us from growing our own fruits and vegetables ? Under the Wickard decision they could. Or revoked our right to own gold ?

  17. #41
    God/dess Zofia's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Durham, North Carolina
    Posts
    2,417
    Thanks
    2,964
    Thanked 2,374 Times in 935 Posts

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Stoner View Post
    What you completely ignore is that the Charlotte to Raleigh line, like every Amtrak line save one ( The Acela ) LOSES money ! It is NOT profitable. It might make economic sense for you to take it. That is NOT the issue. The REAL question is whether it makes sense for the taxpayers to subsidize your preferred mode of travel.
    What you ignore is highways and airlines are more heavily subsidized than rail. For that matter transit is far more heavily subsidized than rail.

    Z

  18. #42
    God/dess Zofia's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Durham, North Carolina
    Posts
    2,417
    Thanks
    2,964
    Thanked 2,374 Times in 935 Posts

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    I'm still trying to figure out how it's possible for HSR ideologues to continue ignoring the fact that airliners fly OVER privately owned property, while trains must travel THROUGH ( former ) privately owned property. What do you speculate that the costs might be for the gov't to reimburse 1 million ( former ) homeowners whose property the gov't must sieze in order to construct a new HSR right of way between say Philly and New York City that is actually capable of 'high speed' runs ? Of course when using ideologically based 'official' accounting, that cost won't be added to the HSR project cost or ticket price.
    There you go again making things up.

    Amtrak owns the line from Washington DC to New York City by virtue of succeeding to the PennCentral's ownership. PennCentral obtained the line by the merger of the Pennsylvania Railroad with New York Central. The NEC north of New York City is owned by various state transit agencies which acquired it from the New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad which had merged into the PennCentral. Those state agencies acquired the line in settlement of the PennCentral bankruptcy. Both the Pennsylvania Railroad and the NY, NH & H acquired the right-of-way for their respective lines over a century ago and have continuously operated some version of HSR since 1935. The main reason that Amtrak cannot operate true HSR over the NEC is not the right-of-way, but the electrical distribution system over the line. True HSR on the NEC is mostly a problem of updating the power system to support HSR, not new right-of-way. (There are some sharp curves on the NEC that could be straightened out, but the property acquisition costs for those few curves would be minimal.) Right-of-Way is just not the issue on the NEC. Elsewhere right-of-way would need to be obtained. However, that would not be nearly as costly as in the NEC.

    Z

  19. #43
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    ^^^ right of way is certainly an issue in the NEC unless one plans to force existing freight train traffic off existing tracks in order to 'clear the decks' for dedicated true HSR use. This was a key issue with the Acela's maximum average speed, since existing track must be shared. I would dare to say that in every major NEC city and suburb, there is no available vacant right of way to allow for the additional construction of dedicated HSR track.

    Of course, dedicating existing track exclusively to upgrading for HSR and thus eliminating shared use with freight train traffic would force an increasing use of diesel truck road freight, with increased consumption of diesel fuel per ton of freight moved, but undoubtedly that fact wouldn't be included in the HSR equation calculations either.


    GE under Immeldt has made itself dependent on government largesse. Both for its "green" projects AND for all the TARP money GE got to bail out GE Capital.
    ... which is precisely the reason that there is zero chance the US gov't is going to allow HSR contracts to be placed with Bombardier or SIG or any other non-American HSR supplier over GE !!! This is going to go down as a huge quid-pro-quo.

    ~
    Last edited by Melonie; 03-12-2011 at 03:10 AM.

  20. #44
    God/dess
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,964
    Thanks
    6,155
    Thanked 10,183 Times in 4,602 Posts

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Stoner View Post
    Please define "success". What do these trains run on ? Electricity usually. It has to be generated somehow. What is the PROFITABILITY of all the "success stories" you cite. Afaik, ALL those lines run at a deficit. They are SUBSIDIZED.
    According to this article from 2003, Spain's Seville line is highly profitable.

    http://www.economist.com/node/1827948

    --snip--
    The Seville line carried 6m passengers last year. The trains are punctual, clean, highly profitable—and safer, to date, than the ordinary old lines.
    --snip--

    Here's another example of a high speed rail line recently built in Russia, that is highly profitable:

    http://www.cahsrblog.com/2010/11/rus...p-big-profits/

  21. #45
    God/dess
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,964
    Thanks
    6,155
    Thanked 10,183 Times in 4,602 Posts

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    yeah, yeah ... I'll spell out MSNBC and CNBC ( is Chris Matthews' leg still tingling ? ). The point about 'cozy' relationships remains. This is particularly the case with GE CEO Jeff Immelt, who is already in a position of being the 'rooster' in the White 'hen' House !
    Again, you're making stuff up. CNBC analyst Rick Santelli obviously didn't have much of a 'cozy' relationship when he was ranting about the bailout and Chicago tea party on CNBC. Neither did MSNBC commentator, Pat Buchanan, when he was drooling over/raving about Sarah Palin throughout the Presidential campaign.

  22. #46
    God/dess Zofia's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Durham, North Carolina
    Posts
    2,417
    Thanks
    2,964
    Thanked 2,374 Times in 935 Posts

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    ^^^ right of way is certainly an issue in the NEC unless one plans to force existing freight train traffic off existing tracks in order to 'clear the decks' for dedicated true HSR use.
    There you go, making things up again. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own set of facts. I think it's clear that you cannot support an opinion without your own set of fantasies. Further discussion seems pointless.

  23. #47
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    ^^^ you're probably correct. Fortunately for taxpayers, many states are already turning down federal proposals for HSR because, unlike die hard advocates, THEY understand what the probable initial cost overruns plus ongoing cost subsidies are likely to add up to. But undoubtedly a US HSR project will be built somewhere ... thus after US taxpayers investing hundreds of billions of dollars for construction and years worth of operational subsidies we'll finally have a 'factual basis' on which to determine whether the project was a good investment or just pissing taxpayer money down a rathole for the benefit of gov't / union workers.

    The real problem of course is that America is running out of taxpayer money ! Thus the true potential tragedy associated with HSR will be what sort of other developments will NOT occur as a result of HSR sucking up so much money. This is the classic 'seen versus unseen' dilemma which is apparently destined to repeat itself.

  24. #48
    God/dess
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,964
    Thanks
    6,155
    Thanked 10,183 Times in 4,602 Posts

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Stoner View Post
    I READ it. What would you think about a similar law today ? Can we agree that your presumed opposition to it would be based ENTIRELY on the wisdom/necessity for such a measure ? Not on the authority of Congress to pass such a law ?
    Yes


    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Stoner View Post
    What about my other hypos ? Do you think Congress has authority to mandate that every licensed driver buy a Volt ? If not, why not ? What if Congress mandated that every parent with a school age child buy a computer ? Or a musical instrument ? Under YOUR interpretation of the Constitution, they could do all those things and a lot more. What if they forbade us from growing our own fruits and vegetables ? Under the Wickard decision they could. Or revoked our right to own gold ?
    Congress has the power to lay and collect taxes. Congress can place a tax (fine) on all licensed drivers that don't buy a Volt. They could pass a tax on parents with school age children that don't buy a computer or musical instrument. Just because Congress can do something, doesn't mean they are going to. They are still elected by the people and can be voted out of office by the people.

  25. #49
    Veteran Member peachplumpear's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    513
    Thanks
    40
    Thanked 125 Times in 78 Posts

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    I don't think the concept is a lost cause entirely....when you think about how stressful airplane flying can be what with the security and lines and all. Trains may take twice as long but usually cost half as much. Trains really do make sense in some areas. I think they are romantic to us as humans because it IS a step backwards once you've been in the air.

    I have probably traveled about 20,000 miles on trains in the pacific northwest and have had many fond memories from it. And there was good naps to be had.

    I had no idea this was going on and people were so upset about it.

  26. #50
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Caution Signals for High Speed Rail

    Undoubtedly, HSR will quickly wind up with the same sort of security measures as domestic air travel. After all, one key component to HSR is the creation of as many new federal civil service jobs as possible !!!

    As to train fares costing 'half as much' as air fares, this will wind up being a function of the selected level of ongoing taxpayer funded ticket cost subsidies. Yes HSR uses less energy per passenger mile than air travel, but it also involves higher initial capital costs, higher ongoing maintenance costs etc. It remains to be seen what actual ticket price levels would have to be in order to recover capital costs, to pay for ongoing maintenance costs, to pay the salaries of Amtrak and TSA employees associated with HSR etc.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-25-2011, 12:33 AM
  2. High speed pursuit ended by our shop today
    By X Evan X in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-13-2007, 09:20 PM
  3. Weird signals
    By sunnie in forum Stripping (was Stripping General)
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-13-2007, 07:19 AM
  4. i am sending confusing signals about something else
    By monicabi in forum Stripping (was Stripping General)
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 08-27-2005, 08:55 PM
  5. Looking for other high speed internet connections
    By Farrah_Holiday in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-14-2005, 01:25 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •