Outrage!!! Socialism!!!!!

[Doug]

How dare they spend our taxpayer dollars on Government sposored projects that should be private industry!!!!

[JayB]

Massively negative ROI no matter what label is put on it.

 

The revenues that these projects generate won't even come close to covering the costs of construction plus operating expenses at 0% interest.

 

Not sure why using government as a mechanism to funnel money to private economic interests that will profit from constructing and operating an enterprise that will lose money year in and year out, and drain resources away from other social priorities is considered "progressive."

 

[j_b]

as if highways on the taxpayer's dime, perennially bankrupt and bailed out airlines, etc .. had ever paid for themselves.

 

At least with rail transit, Americans won't have to buy cars they can't afford.

[tvashtarkatena]

High speed rail is a less expensive and more efficient means of travel between cities 500 miles apart or less than air. In terms of fuel costs, air travel doesn't even come close. Furthermore, such trains can be powered off the grid from renewables. Planes cannot.

 

Still, in an age when collaboration requires very little travel, $60 billion would buy us a modernized, optimized grid. This would increase overall efficiency by 20%, paying itself back well within a year.

[Nitrox]

Seams to me that the issue is paying off our current debt before taking on more, not the merits of high speed trains.

 

 

[Choada_Boy]

You fear change and all that's new

stand in the way of progress

like primitive man afraid of fire

'till he explored it's many uses

 

The power of the atom at our disposal

yet it is called unsafe

nuclear energy so clean and pure

your ignorance is a disgrace

 

Do not resist

it is your destiny

have we not all become

the children of technology

 

Holding your fate in a magnetic grip

of all your irrational fears

the shadow of machinery cast upon the flesh of man

blood, sweat, and gears

 

the robots of dawn offsprings of industry

spot you in the cobalt blue light

one fell swoop and you've become a memory

away with your intrusive life

 

Into the reactor!

 

You worship a dead man hung with nails

only a fool would die for the sins of humanity

on your knees before electronics

lets replace this religious insanity

 

tear down the churches instead on the ground

build there the holy reactors

give us the children science and math

in place of bibles and pastors

 

You bleeding heart liberals

who oppose the Nuclear Regulatory Commission

must be compelled to retire

you serve only as obstacles and should be used

to fuel the nuclear pyre

[tvashtarkatena]

Seams to me that the issue is paying off our current debt before taking on more, not the merits of high speed trains.

 

 

Businesses take on additional debt for a variety of good reasons. Investing in efficiency, which reduces costs and/or increases revenue is one. If eliminating debt was always the best choice, then you should write a big fat check to your mortgage provider today.

[rob]

Seams to me that the issue is paying off our current debt before taking on more

 

Great! Let's start with our biggest expenditure (hint: it's not trains.)

 

[Nitrox]

Seams to me that the issue is paying off our current debt before taking on more

 

Great! Let's start with our biggest expenditure (hint: it's not trains.)

 

Are you expecting me to disagree with you at this point? We coulkd afford all kinds of things if we reduced our spending. I'd be a lot more receptive to a new mass transportation program if we weren't under water from the last ten years of spending.

 

 

[Nitrox]

Seams to me that the issue is paying off our current debt before taking on more, not the merits of high speed trains.

 

 

Businesses take on additional debt for a variety of good reasons. Investing in efficiency, which reduces costs and/or increases revenue is one. If eliminating debt was always the best choice, then you should write a big fat check to your mortgage provider today.

 

And some businesses take on too much debt and become insolvent.

 

As noble as keeping up with the Jones' is (or Chens' in this case), a high speed train isn't a necesity.

 

 

 

[tvashtarkatena]

If the spending project was a new grid, with aforementioned rapid payback, would you support it?

[ZimZam]

Considering America's infatuation with autos what's the likelihood it could sustain itself w/o outrageous fees ala Acela?

[Nitrox]

Name one government program with guaranteed rapid pay back that actually rapidly paid back? The Portland metro train is a shining example of a guaranteed cost savings turning into a black hole of spending.

 

 

[tvashtarkatena]

I'm talking about a hypothetical investment in a new grid, which would almost certainly produce a very rapid payback. Spend 60 billion on a modernized, optimized grid, or draw down the debt? That's my question for youz.

[Nitrox]

Hypothetically if I could turn water into wine would you wash my feet?

 

 

 

[rob]

[rob]

I wish we could find a way to charge single-occupancy vehicles on the bridge an EXTRA toll, and pump that money into supporting non-automobile forms of transportation. The fact that there is no train between Montlake and Redmond boggles my mind. Hundreds, if not thousands, of people all leaving the same place at the same time and travelling to the same destination? Hello!!! TRAIN!!!

 

Single-occupancy driving should be taboo, like parking in a handicapped spot.

Edited February 9, 2011 by rob

[tvashtarkatena]

no public transportation system pays for itself. Roads are the worst - unless they are one of the few toll roads in the US (which have their own set of problems).

 

The trouble is, light rail cost benefit analysis typically include buses, but not the cost of autos and roads.

 

Buses always fair better than light rail in a cost/benefit, but buses a) still require road maintenance b) burn way more fuel c) are slow and subject to road closures and d) are crowded and smell like piss. Still, they are obviously more flexible than rail.

 

When one compares ALL transportation alternatives, individual cars and the roads needed for them cost the state, the environment, and consumers far more per passenger mile than any other alternative. People are willing to pay this premium for the freedom to travel (often at a snail's pace through gridlock) wherever whenever. That's a choice, but a more expensive one.

 

Furthermore, most light rail systems in the world have been a fantastic success. Citing Portland's current shortfall of $50 million or so for their new east side extension due to the drying up of federal funds does little to counter the overwhelmingly positive experience most cities, including Portland, have had with their light rail systems.

 

 

 

 

[tvashtarkatena]

I wish we could find a way to charge single-occupancy vehicles on the bridge an EXTRA toll, and pump that money into supporting non-automobile forms of transportation. The fact that there is no train between Montlake and Redmond boggles my mind. Hundreds, if not thousands, of people all leaving the same place at the same time and travelling to the same destination? Hello!!! TRAIN!!!

 

Single-occupancy driving should be taboo, like parking in a handicapped spot.

 

Carpooling per capita has dropped to half of what it was in the '80s. People aren't going for it.

 

Latin America has a system of collectivos - small vans that run around everywhere, basically little buses with flexible routes that respond to changes in demand. Seems like a great way to fill that gap between your single occupancy car and a full size bus.

[rob]

I wish we could find a way to charge single-occupancy vehicles on the bridge an EXTRA toll, and pump that money into supporting non-automobile forms of transportation. The fact that there is no train between Montlake and Redmond boggles my mind. Hundreds, if not thousands, of people all leaving the same place at the same time and travelling to the same destination? Hello!!! TRAIN!!!

 

Single-occupancy driving should be taboo, like parking in a handicapped spot.

 

Carpooling per capita has dropped to half of what it was in the '80s. People aren't going for it.

 

Latin America has a system of collectivos - small vans that run around everywhere, basically little buses with flexible routes that respond to changes in demand. Seems like a great way to fill that gap between your single occupancy car and a full size bus.

 

I'm imagining a bunch of VW vans with "Ass, gas, or grass - nobody rides for free" stickers.

 

How about substantial tax breaks for people who give up their driver's license?

[tvashtarkatena]

Light rail is also intended not just to move people around - it's designed to promote urban density along more efficient corridors, thus reducing the incentives for creating more costly, environmentally disastrous sprawl. Historically, light rail has been very successful at this.

[tvashtarkatena]

Also, kinda waiting on an answer about the grid. If you guys wanna just troll with each other, that's fine, too.

[Hugh Conway]

Massively negative ROI no matter what label is put on it.

 

The revenues that these projects generate won't even come close to covering the costs of construction plus operating expenses at 0% interest.

 

Not sure why using government as a mechanism to funnel money to private economic interests that will profit from constructing and operating an enterprise that will lose money year in and year out, and drain resources away from other social priorities is considered "progressive."

 

yah, public subsidies of rail networks have been retarded. Look how well the Western US developed without them.

 

lulz.

 

Now back to plowing billions into roads with a negative ROI!

[Jim]

Light rail is also intended not just to move people around - it's designed to promote urban density along more efficient corridors, thus reducing the incentives for creating more costly, environmentally disastrous sprawl. Historically, light rail has been very successful at this.

 

Exactly. What a concept - actually PLANNING for infrastructure, business, and community together. The hodge-podge of sprawl that is the result of lack of planning is quite evident on the fringe of most suburbs.

[Nitrox]

Massively negative ROI no matter what label is put on it.

 

The revenues that these projects generate won't even come close to covering the costs of construction plus operating expenses at 0% interest.

 

Not sure why using government as a mechanism to funnel money to private economic interests that will profit from constructing and operating an enterprise that will lose money year in and year out, and drain resources away from other social priorities is considered "progressive."

 

yah, public subsidies of rail networks have been retarded. Look how well the Western US developed without them.

 

lulz.

 

Now back to plowing billions into roads with a negative ROI!

 

The difference being that rail use in the infancy of this country was a private endeavor. I don't think there are any cost neutral commuter train systems in the US, Amtrac being another example.

 

Again, I'm not necessarily opposed to spending the money but I'm not willing to do so under the pretense that we're going make/save money and certainly not if we just have to borrow more from the Chinese.