Posted on 08/15/2010 2:37:07 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
For the next minute, imagine yourself at a car dealership. You're strapped for cash but find a sleek new ride and ask the salesman for a deal.
He quotes you a number that's four times what you have in the bank. And, he warns, even that price isn't fixed -- there's no guarantee you won't pay more in the end.
What do you do?
For California, the lure of its new ride -- a bullet train system capable of whisking passengers between the Bay Area and Los Angeles -- has proved so enticing that the state jumped at the deal, even though it has only a quarter of the money needed.
That's leading some critics to ask whether the state's largest project ever could also prove to be its most financially disastrous.
California is less than two years from the planned start of construction on the nation's first high-speed rail line, which would open in 2020. The trains will zip along the Caltrain corridor from San Francisco to San Jose and then on to Anaheim, a three-hour journey end to end.
It has the potential to create jobs while offering a cheaper, greener and faster form of travel. It could also be another nail in the state's financial coffin.
The California High-Speed Rail Authority, created to carry out the project, told voters in 2008 that the rail line would cost $33.6 billion. The price has since jumped 27 percent, to $42.6 billion.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
Who pays?
clang clang clang went the bell
toot tooot toot went the horn
bye bye bye went your dollar
down down dowwwwn .. the drain
who will pay for it? obviously, the taxpayers...
all over the country
the 10% of the country that will be paying everything starting jan 1
taking their money... and giving it to other people
We’re the host and the choo choo leeches are the parasite.
I feel a bailout a comin’
Do you remember when private tycoons paid for rail lines? now it is a burden on everyone.
Ask Willie Green; he’ll pay, and be more than happy to use your dollars to do so.
Not to worry, its going to be built by stoners who won’t even remember if they have been paid or not.
MARIJUANA!
Posted on Thursday, September 03, 2009 11:07:25 AM by NormsRevenge
Reporting from Sacramento - California's high-speed rail commission, dominated by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's appointees, is set to award a $9-million contract today to a company led by the governor's top political advisor and his former campaign manager.
The three commission staff members charged with recommending a public relations firm have advised the board to give the contract to Mercury Public Affairs at its meeting today. Schwarzenegger strategist Adam Mendelsohn is a partner at Mercury, as is Steve Schmidt, who managed the governor's 2006 reelection effort.
Two members of the staff panel are former Mendelsohn colleagues.
Allll aBoarrrd!! 8-}
Somebody was tootin’ something at the ol’ station when thye boondoggled this oe on the ballot.... I’m for solar powered buses and trains myself.. The power just comes from the sky.. It’s FRee!!
shades of All in the Family II
I say make Willie pay.
>It has the potential to create jobs while offering a cheaper, greener and faster form of travel
In every possible expansion of government spending, they always quote that “it will create jobs” when the only jobs created are government union jobs that have to be endlessly paid for by non government workers, who seem to have become the slaves to the civil servants and their unions.
I’m sure there is a disclaimer on your ticket that the system has safeguards to maximize safety but ‘stuff happens’ and they ain’t liable.... Of course, stopping a train like that quickly is gonna mean a lot of tossed around folks.
And what in the hell do you do when you get to your destination? Rent a car that the communists will take over the rental firms.
The only thing high speed rail is faster at is a faster way to lose money.
Unreal.. no really unreal. California the land of each house has at least 3 cars parked in each driveway. Nobody does mass transit. More money going to special interests!
We all pay with the money that we all save by not importing as much oil.
This train should be built between AZ and Los Angeles. CA taxpayers will gladly pay a reasonable fare to wisk them out of CA and AZ would gladly pay a reasonable fare to ship illeglas back to CA.
If people don’t have jobs, why would they want to go from LA to the Bay Area. Where will they get the money to board the train? Politicians timing is about the worst there is.
California is going to solve the problem of too many cars and too much pollution by buying all of their electricity from other states and making laws that the only car you can buy is the Volt which only goes 40- miles on a charge. Just enough to get you to the High speed rail line.
It’s all a part of the plan.
Except for the fact Arnie has so many friends and acquaintances on the commission; he would do far better to hire a 9th grade math class as commissioners. When the initial cost, plus operating costs, is considered, there is not enough demand for travel between L.A. and the bay area, or intermediate cities to even come close to paying for this boondoggle. I like trains as well as the next guy, but this is not a train that any of us can afford, especially Californians. But the fact is, there isn’t a public transportation system operating that would even operate without taxpayer subsidies. If it was practical, and profitable, the railroads would do it. If it’s a serious looser, the taxpayers will do it.
A monthly commuter pass on the Long Island RR to and from Penn Station sets you back over $300.00 month. Just like NY wait until those Unions in Ca. get their greedy paws on the deal. That Kookiforneea RR ride will cost one a whole bunch of bushels in pistacchios and walnuts.
Like at airports, coffee chains such as Starbucks or Seattles Best, for instance, would make excellent vendors; also, booksellers, convenience stores, and restaurants are also strong contenders.
I would recommend that California (and Florida, for that matter) also strongly consider allowing vendors on the platforms (or maybe even on the trains); in Japan, platforms are a very good place indeed for sales.
Also, they should be considering inviting retailers to put up larger establishments just outside the gates. Tokyo Station, for instance, has a very large underground and above ground area around the gates with everything from access to department stores to even shoe repair and at least one locksmith.
Of course, these trains run on unicorn farts.
Well, if the engineering is done by Japanese companies, who have almost 40 years of experience with high-speed trains (the shinkansen) in a land even more plagued with earthquakes than California, I would hope for the same results: no injuries so far.
Even in the only derailment (details can be found here from East Japan Rail) on the Joetsu-sen during the Chuetsu earthquake in 2004, none of the 154 passengers were hurt:
But I wouldn't be surprised to see California choose some cheapo Chinese company, and goodness knows what kind of system they will get.
Whenever a high speed rail project comes along two questions are posed: 1) who pays and 2) will it make a profit?
Here’s third question: who is going to pay for the new highways and airport expansions California will need if it doesn’t build high speed rail? CalTrans did a complete benefit-cost study on this, and it did include the null alternative of doing nothing. Doing nothing meant that CalTrans had to come up with alternative highway and airport projects that were much more expensive.
The construction costs for highways is more than double what it was in 1999, due mainly to rising oil prices. See any new Interstates being built? Have you heard of any new multi-lane arterial highways being announced recently? Any cities building new airports?
And if any state or local government was to propose a series of new roads, would you support an increase in the 18 cent per gallon federal gas tax to support it? After all, the federal gas tax hasn’t been changed since 1996, when the cost per gallon was $1.27. That means the federal tax was 14 percent of the total cost; state taxes vary but were about the same. If the average cost per gallon today is $2.79, shouldn’t the federal tax be raised to $0.39, and the same for state gas taxes, just to keep up with construction costs?
After all, everyone is concerned about transportation facilities paying their own way and making a profit, right? Let’s go further. Let’s put a toll on every Interstate in the country. After all, the states have to maintain them; there are no federal road crews. We can double the toll in urban areas during rush hour and really make a profit! Then we can go build more roads and charge even more for them.
If you don’t want an increase in gas taxes, let’s try something else. Let’s wait for the private sector to take care of the problem. Highways and airports are so popular that I’m sure private companies will just start building them on their own. They can negotiate with land owners to get the property they need. Interest is really low, so the bonds would sell fast. Heck, I bet BP could get a new Interstate built from the Gulf to Chicago in one year flat. Exxon could do the same. Once we have the shale oil and tar sands going, the oil companies will have so much money they will need to put it somewhere. Maybe they will come to your subdivision and tell you and your neighbors to sign on the dotted line.
Finally, let’s just assume that we will always have plenty of oil, easily available, at a low cost, just like when we were kids. We don’t need to ever worry about anything ever changing. After all, home prices are still going up, right?
I’ve always wanted to drive my car on the tracks to avoid the congested roads. Why won’t the gov’t let me? Trains hardly use them at all anymore.
Totally paid for by fares. Only $14,000 per person per ride.
“It’s FRee!!!” — LOL!
I remember 10 years ago noticing a certain land swapping swindler on the California HSR Commission.
It’s purpose is to soak the taxpayer and enrich those in their circle of friends.
Sweet, huh?
Enact a temporary surcharge on gas in California and then once the high speed railroad in system is in place, subsidize it by selling leases on railroad platforms and the like.
Depends on where you live, of course, but many single track railroads are carrying 23-30 trains a day with 100 or more freight cars per train. That's close to operating capacity. CSX is spending many millions adding high-speed sidings to its Chicago-Atlanta route rather than the cost-prohibitive option of double-tracking that route. Overall, railroads are carrying record tonnage since deregulation in 1980.
I assume everyone knows that railroad right of way is private property on which the railroads pay state and local property taxes like everyone else. As with any other private property, entering that railroad right of way, even by walking, is trespassing. The "gov't" does not have the constitutional right (yet) to give you the right to use private property, but give this administration a few more months.
pics and info here..
http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/
maybe they could set up a FRequent Deportee reward program.. heck, they should ride at a discount... they bring so much to our economy,, yaknow.
Are you really Willie Green?
No, but I am a licensed professional engineer in the field of transportation engineering.
How many times does the average American stop off at the shoe repairman or the locksmith on the way home from work? Nothing against the Japanese, but they ain't us.
How many times does the average American stop off at the shoe repairman or the locksmith on the way home from work? Nothing against the Japanese, but they ain't us.
I agree, we aren't the Japanese. We aren't going to network the whole U.S. with high-speed rail, and I doubt that any of the new lines that might actually be built will be self-sustaining.
My point was that given sufficiently dense foot traffic, even obscure businesses can find enough customers to stay afloat.
I don't think any of our high-speed proposals are going to generate the kind of foot traffic that Tokyo and Shinjuku stations do, but ignoring concession/retail possibilities could mean missing an important source of both convenience for travelers and revenue potentials for the rail line.
Your mom.
If oil demand drops, price drops. People drive more. So, the amount of oil used stays about the same.
( Sorry to bring up free people’s behavioral facts. )
I don’t think that is entirely accurate. There were gov subsuidies and gifts of tracts of landas along the route.
Why build more at all? No one forces anyone to live or work in, say, LA. Everyone that is there has done their own tradeoff/ cost/benefit calculus. Many people choose to leave. Many stay. Many come.
So, what’s the problem?
So what if, at some times, some days, in some directions there is slow traffic. Duh. Everyone in the traffic has made a rational decision to travel that route, at that time, under those conditions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.