Whenever you see a statement like this, political opposition is not only smart, but necessary.
Anytime taxpayer funding (aka government funding) is involved, deep scrutiny is waranted. It may come to pass that a high speed rail is sensible for a given specific situation. But to make a blanket statement that resembles 'any opposition to any high speed rail is stupid' is meant to ridicule those who want responsible government spending.
Willie Green, you ought to be ashamed for posting this garbage on this particular website.
You bet its cleaner...a heck of a lot cleaner than sticking a .45 in my face and cleaning out my wallet the old-fashioned way would be.
Not just the building. Even if the tracks were free, a la GM debt, no passenger train exists anywhere that doesn't receive tax subsidies for OPERATING costs of union employees, featherbedding admin, political hires. ( Think your local county,state hack municipality..whatever )
Ok, Nick, we'll pretend for a moment that you aren't stupid. America is broke. So, where are the federal funds coming from to build a high speed rail line?? China?? I don't think so.
Secondly, who's gonna run it?? UP, SoPac, CSX, or AmTrak?? We know the answer and it ain't pretty.
If America's passenger rail system still had some sort of relevancy outside of the northeast corridor, it MIGHT be worth investigating. But, America doesn't. And, America has vast, wide open spaces out west that will cost a lot of money to develop a high speed rail system for.
I dearly love train travel but, passenger train travel will have to remain part of America's romantic past. It's day has come and gone and there is no likelihood of it coming again unless zero crams it down America's throat, just as he has done with every bill he has pushed through the Congress.
Will you loan us the money Willie?
If it was fiscally feasable the free enterprise system would have already had it in place. Same thing for “green” energy.
Consumers don't want rail. If they did, we'd see Amtrak and urban light rail systems running full. They are not.
The government began to build roads in the early 20th century because it was so obvious that people were snapping up cars as soon as they were built. No activists had to convince us that car travel was good -- it was self-evident.
Rail activists are telling us what they think is good for us. They are a tiny, albeit powerful, minority and we must stop them. Every dollar spent on rail is a dollar that could have been invested in something profitable.
Let’s try this in a calm and reasoned tone....
Transportation is a derived demand. That is, people don’t go out and “buy” transportation like some type of commodity. It is a means to an end - to get to a job, to move something across town or across the country, to reach a friend or family member at a distance too far to walk. Take your pick. The point is that the transportation is secondary to the purpose of the trip.
Why is that important? Never in in our country’s history has transportation emerged without the force and support of government. From the first canals and postal roads to the railroads to the airlines, transportation has been regulated by, funded by, and ultimately controlled by government. Government alone has the power to obtain rights of way, to limit liability, to issue tax-free bonds, and to impose taxes, tariffs, safety regulations, and rate restrictions on transportation providers.
Could a private company go build a high speed rail system, assuming it had the money and desire? Of course not. Property owners would hold the company hostage before a mile of track was laid. Could a private company build a toll road on its own? Nope, same reason.
Even our commercial airports are almost without exception public facilities. Historically, the Federal Aviation Administration has required airlines to serve routes that are not economical for the “public good.” Now those routes are subsidized. General aviation airports both public and private receive massive federal and state support.
Even our navigable waterways (which were our first Interstates) are maintained by government via a series of marine fuel taxes and other fees.
To suggest that airlines, over the road truck companies, taxis, or even Greyhound all somehow operate in some pure capitalist state and that only railroads are somehow socialistic is silly, simplistic, and ignorant on its face.
Before the automobile, railroads provided the bulk of intercity travel in this country, and rail-based trolleys and streetcars provided the mass transit in the urban areas. Ships served the routes that rail could not, but the steamboats along the inland rivers were not competitive with rail. So dominant were railroads that Congress established the Interstate Commerce Commission to regulate them, a disastrous move that could have cost us World War II.
When the automobile came along, roads were not passable. Private road builders had already built toll roads in horse and buggy days, but they failed economically. The same thing happened with the advent of cars. Local governments mandated that every able-bodied male give a certain number of days per year in maintaining the public roads. That also failed.
Only with the Federal Highway Act of 1914 (”get the farmer out of the mud”) and the subsequent Federal Highway Act of 1921, which established federal highways, did the modern road system emerge. It was largely supported by state fuel taxes. (Significant federal fuel taxes only started with the Interstates in 1956.) Using fuel taxes (user fees) we built the greatest highway system in the world.
Meanwhile, the ICC regulations were choking the railroads to death. In World War II the government rationed gas and forced 85 percent of all intercity trips onto the railroads. After Germany sank our oil tankers moving from the Texas coast to the East coast, FDR ordered all the oil moved by rail. The railroads moved the people and the oil, but by the end of the war, the lack of capital investment and maintenance due to low ICC rates meant the railroads were in very poor shape. FDR made sure they did not get a penny, supporting instead the trucking industry and the young airline industry. In 1946, Congress, with no technical research at all, limited passenger train speeds to 79 mph and freight speeds to 60 mph, a limit that stands to this day for trains outside the Northeast Corridor.
In 1980 President Carter signed the Staggers Act which abolished the ICC at long last and allowed the railroads to set their own rates and act like any other American business. Some 60 odd railroads consolidated into seven Class I roads, and now BNSF, CSX, Norfolk Southern, and the others are successful companies, at least according to Warren Buffett.
We need high speed rail to fill a missing gap in the 150 to 500 mile trip in certain congested corridors. There is not room to widen the highways in those corridors without massive land taking and relocation that is politically impossible. The affected airports are already congested, and nearby residents fight more runways and flights. Short-hop air flights (less than 500 miles) are very inefficient and low-margin operations that burn a lot of fuel per passenger-mile.
The airlines support the high speed rail initiative. Commuters will benefit from less congestion if commuter rail service is expanded. Truck company like J.B. Hunt already use rail for critical cross-country shipping.
Railroads are just another form of transportation. It is a form that provides a solution for certain parts of our transportation problem. The alternative, at least in these critical corridors that were identified under the Bush administration, is to spend far more money on highways and airports or do nothing. If you are sitting in traffic in a work zone or behind another accident, or your flight has been delayed again, think about what alternatives are available to address the problem if we summarily discuss rail.
Theresa Heinz Kerry (paraphrased): "You are stupid you disagree with my husband's (John Kerry) health care bill!"
Well done, Willie! You've achieved the debating skill level of Theresa Heinz Kerry! Although you have always argued like a liberal, this is a brand new plateau for you!
It's time to add another entry to Willie's three four basic arguments which he periodically rotates.
1 - Race Card - If you voice resistance to having your tax dollars poured into imbecilic Rail Boondoggles, after the Marxists skim the cream off the top, you are an antirail and antiurbanite bigot.
2 - "Shutup, Newby!" - I've recently (within the last several months) seen Willie use this on members with sign up dates as far back as 2003.
3 - "I've posted more articles than you so there!" - This sounds a lot like the elephant arguing that it is wiser than the dolphin because it produces a greater amount of feces. To be fair, Willie posts a lot of crap.
4 - "If you disagree with High Speed Rail you're stupid!" Willie's exciting new Theresa Heinz Kerry style argument!