do we really need highspeed rail

[elite7]

seems good but expensive.

 

[Maxtro]

As somebody who has family in the Bay Area and lives in SoCal, I would love it.

Flying is a pain and expensive.

Driving takes forever and if gas doesn't go down, will also be expensive.

I think how it's really odd that America was the first country to have a railroad, and somehow we've fallen way behind the other countries.

 

[Alle_Gory]

No. Traffic jams build character and patience. And then there's the ridiculous cost of fuel and time for most people. Why commute? It's better to spend more money and time to drive everyday in a slow to barely moving highway while trying to keep a grip on sanity.

It's the American way!

 

[user43770]

No. Traffic jams build character and patience. And then there's the ridiculous cost of fuel and time for most people. Why commute? It's better to spend more money and time to drive everyday in a slow to barely moving highway while trying to keep a grip on sanity.

It's the American way!

Right on, man. High-speed rails are extremely cost-efficient, no matter where they're built. It's pretty much guaranteed that these rails are going to generate revenue. I mean, just look at the rails that are already in use - they're never a huge waste of taxpayer funds. You would have to be a stupid, American, uninformed idiot to not want one built. Not to mention the time you save by taking the train; all you have to do is drive to the station, walk to the train, wait for the train, take a fast ass ride and then find a way to get to your desired destination. What's so bad about that? Why doesn't everybody want to do it? Maybe we should be condescending about it and force it on the general population. They don't know what's good for them anyway.

Do you see what I did there? I agreed with you in a sarcastic manner. Sarcasm is always productive, just like high-speed rails.

 

[Maxtro]

Uh, the rail system in this country is pretty bad. At least in California.

And no, you wouldn't drive your car to the train, you would take the bus. Then take the bus to your destination or have somebody pick you up.

 

[user43770]

This link is a pretty good example of politicians trying to tell the general population what's good for them. Their excuse was that it was federal money. We should just go ahead and take it! Forget about the future burden it will put on the Florida taxpayer. Forget about the fact that not many people would actually ride the damn thing. It's free money!

Thank you, Rick Scott.

 

[Bible_Belt]

I worked for the law firm of a company in the 90's that was supposed to develop a high-speed rail train for Florida. The project got killed because the governor said that even if people took the train, there was still no other public transport to take you from the train station. Shortly after that, the city of Tampa had a voter referendum choosing between upgrading the city bus system and building a new football stadium to keep the Bucs from moving. It wasn't even close; the football stadium won by a landslide.

 

[Drdeee]

Did Rome really need a colosseum?

 

[comic_relief]

No. Traffic jams build character and patience. And then there's the ridiculous cost of fuel and time for most people. Why commute? It's better to spend more money and time to drive everyday in a slow to barely moving highway while trying to keep a grip on sanity.

It's the American way!

HAHAHAHA :rockon: That made me happy

- comic_relief

 

[Julius_Seizeher]

The high price of gas at the pump is a problem ENTIRELY created by the government and is just another symptom of the anti-industrial revolution.
The price of gas is not skyrocketing due to lack of supply-it is due to the artificial supply restrictions placed upon oil by western governments and the litany of taxes and regulations levied against oil and oil producers.

The earth is not running out of oil. There is an estimated resource of 13 trillion barrels in this planet, of which we have used nearly 1 trillion barrels in the last 150 years. By the time we get anywhere near to actually running low on oil, technologies we can barely comprehend will have evolved to take its place. Mini nuclear reactor, a motor powered by the static electricity of the earth, etc.

So it boils down to a classic False Dilemma. The government creates a problem, then offers its aim as the means to fix it. I think highspeed rail is a novel idea, but it's not going to save the economy, and it also reeks of nobama's europeanization campaign.

Here's the truth-if highspeed rail, wind energy, solar energy, etc. all these "social investments" were worth a ****, the private sector would have already made it happen. In some cases, the science just hasn't evolved as far as it needs to, but in all cases they do not make dollars and sense, and uncle sam wants YOU to foot the bill for his bullsh!t.

 

[f283000]

The dollar is going to collapse within 5 years. People should worry about what they're going to do to survive once we become the new Yugoslavia rather than building high speed rail.

 

[Alle_Gory]

I mean, just look at the rails that are already in use - they're never a huge waste of taxpayer funds.

Damn straight. Every year, trillions of dollars have been spent on this pointless and wide reaching rail system that only transports tonnes of goods and people.

A better use of those funds would be to bomb brown people in foreign countries. That's how you make friends too.

Not to mention the time you save by taking the train; all you have to do is drive to the station, walk to the train, wait for the train, take a fast ass ride and then find a way to get to your desired destination.

And you forgot, you have to check your watch to make sure you're catching the right train and then you have to walk!You have to buy a ticket which is ridiculous and then you have to wait there for 5 minutes like an idiot while the train arrives.

That's 5 minutes that would have been better spent in traffic with those wonderful drivers that yell nice things at you.

 

[Alle_Gory]

The high price of gas at the pump is a problem ENTIRELY created by the government and is just another symptom of the anti-industrial revolution.

The high price of gas is created by OPEC (which is not a government) and speculators. The government doesn't care, they get your tax dollars either way.

The price of gas is not skyrocketing due to lack of supply-it is due to the artificial supply restrictions placed upon oil by western governments and the litany of taxes and regulations levied against oil and oil producers.

The government taxes the finished product. The price of a barrel of crude on the international open market doesn't change because of that. The United States doesn't tax the world. Please learn your tax system.

Here's the truth-if highspeed rail, wind energy, solar energy, etc. all these "social investments" were worth a ****, the private sector would have already made it happen. In some cases, the science just hasn't evolved as far as it needs to, but in all cases they do not make dollars and sense, and uncle sam wants YOU to foot the bill for his bullsh!t.

How can you compete with an industry that is heavily subsidized by the government? The price of oil and gas is much lower than what it should be.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/02/01/us-obama-budget-oil-idUSTRE6103RM20100201

Your private sector would be much more effective if the separation between government and private business was more obvious. Why would people invest and work when they can just vote themselves money?

 

[Poonani Maker]

Perpetual magnets will save us. Um, I'm not spending a penny I don't have to, and preparing for the worst. People think I'm "crazy," my family, my financial adviser, my co-workers, bosses, church members, plates or girls who continue to spend money on things that don't last, etc etc.

My plan is silver, gold (if I can afford it), Swiss francs, Canadian dollars, freeze-dried food (2 yrs worth = $10K; haven't pulled the trigger on that yet), gallons of water (I really, Really want to buy a property with well water, Bad, but for now...). As of 2 weeks ago, I've revamped my garden from the previous owner (who'd planted carrots, onions, garlic, beans, bell peppers, blueberries, etc) and replaced the carrots and sweet bell peppers with squash and dark zuccini, and the onions/garlic with tons of spinach. I'm thinking of digging up the flower bed around closer to the house and planting potatoes, eggplant etc. It might not look as pretty but I'm no longer with my head in the sand and am taking action to prepare for the worst which I think will happen due to the current "leaders" in power. It's looking mighty bleak. These aristocrats are Sooooo far out of touch with reality because they are grown-up BABIES who talk/lie to us like we're children. If they lose 50% of everything they have...what? they're Only worth 10s of millions now?? sooo outta touch. Why vote? The system is rigged. Only those who take our money to give to their friends who graduated Harvard, Princeton, and Yale, are left living the easy life now. I can barely save due to the HOA costs, the utilities (always going up), gas, taxes for grossing more than last year make me contribute to a 401K that I don't want to contribute to because I think the market will crash. I'm able to save, just would like to save more, but can't because they keep printing money and raising taxes. They need to tax the uber rich and leave us under $250Kers alone! but that won't happen because the uber rich are making the rules/laws. They are sucking us dry like vampires who can't get enough of our blood/money. They will Never run out of money.

 

[Julius_Seizeher]

To solve the oil question, at least for the next several decades, all we have to do is open up Alaska and all the other in ground resources we have in our territories. There is soooooooooo much oil up in Alaska, just sitting there because these hippies will not be satisfied until Americans are living in caves.

For allie's benefit, I'll break it down Barney style: For one, I never asserted that the US govt. taxes the international oil markets, what a ridiculous conclusion to reach from anything I have said. The price Americans pay at the pump, though, is a direct result of the government denying permits, placing the biggest oil reserves into "protected" status, and taxing the hell out of the domestic oil supply.

When Anwar and all the rest of America's in-ground resources are opened up for extraction, the domestic price of fuel (and everything else) will plummet. The international markets will reflect the added supply, but no where near to the extent we will see here, domestically, at the pump.

 

[Alle_Gory]

The price Americans pay at the pump, though, is a direct result of the government denying permits, placing the biggest oil reserves into "protected" status, and taxing the hell out of the domestic oil supply.

No. It isn't. The price of a barrel of oil is dictated by international markets and the manipulators who have power over them. The price at the pump is due to the barrel price, manufacturing costs and some taxes. Even if you take the taxes away completely the cost of gasoline is still ridiculous and will continue to increase every year.

When Anwar and all the rest of America's in-ground resources are opened up for extraction, the domestic price of fuel (and everything else) will plummet. The international markets will reflect the added supply, but no where near to the extent we will see here, domestically, at the pump.

No, the price will not plummet because there isn't enough fuel and you can't extract it fast enough. There's 16 billions barrels of oil (optimistic estimate), which is good enough for almost an entire year's supply of crude for the United States (19 billion crude consumption in 2009) .... if you were to extract it all in one year which is impossible because the infrastructure isn't there and equipment doesn't exist which could extract that much oil and deliver that quickly.

The total production from ANWR would be between 0.4 and 1.2 percent of total world oil consumption in 2030. Consequently, ANWR oil production is not projected to have a large impact on world oil prices.[24] Furthermore, the Energy Information Administration does not feel ANWR will affect the global price of oil when past behaviors of the oil market are considered. "The opening of ANWR is projected to have its largest oil price reduction impacts as follows: a reduction in low-sulfur, light crude oil prices of $0.41 per barrel (2006 dollars) in 2026 for the low oil resource case, $0.75 per barrel in 2025 for the mean oil resource case, and $1.44 per barrel in 2027 for the high oil resource case, relative to the reference case."[24] "Assuming that world oil markets continue to work as they do today, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) could neutralize any potential price impact of ANWR oil production by reducing its oil exports by an equal amount."[24]

Julius, economics aren't your strong suit. Stick to what you're good at. You're very knowledgeable when it comes to history and human behavior.

 

[Julius_Seizeher]

Hey kid, you really don't need to be talking to me about money.

As a resource investor, I can tell you, unequivocally, that any government resource report is always skewed to make resources look insignificant and unfeasible. The official DOE estimates for the Alaska oil reserve only include a small fraction of the land that has been officially set aside for development, let alone all the oil beneath the other state and federal lands.

When it comes to resource estimation, the only credible information available, is that of the companies who are putting drills in the ground and spending millions of dollars in the compilation of complete and in-depth geotechnical studies. They have no reason to lie; if they didn't have reason to explore it in the first place, they wouldn't invest there. And when they don't find what they're looking for, they move on.

The bureaucrats who spearhead the anti-industrial revolution have a dire need to downplay and marginalize domestic resource estimates. They do it in oil and they do it in mining, always striving to present seemingly rational evidence for denying every permit that comes across their mahogany desks. They will not be happy until America is a third world country, like any ****hole of europe, with academics pretending they can magically facilitate a nation of funny money that doesn't produce anything.

I recognize your attitude, kid. I went to college too, I learned all about the evil capitalists and the unfair distribution of wealth and the moral superiority of beggars and bums...then I entered the real world, the big boy world, where I only began to get my education. When you're a college kid, nobody expects anything from you and you are perfectly comfortable as an unproductive loafer...but leaving college you are like a newborn colt with four broken legs. A testament to your intelligence will lie in the amount of time it takes you to shrug off the years of utter bullsh!t you have been filling your head with. I was fortunate.

Here's a tip: there is no such thing as "the distribution of wealth." It doesn't exist. It cannot exist, because wealth is not distributed; it is produced, it is created, it is earned. All you, me, or anyone has to do, is create. Your college professors, the rotter kids you went to school with, and the government bureaucrats all have a vested interest in keeping you from seeing the real truth: that you are an individual, that you are responsible for your own life, and you do not need them. They want to bind you in common action and common slavery to any need but your own, and to suppress any notion of real self-esteem you might possess.

I was going to jump into a destruction of keynesian economics, but keynesianism is such utter bullsh!t that I won't waste any headspace contemplating it. A Friedman astronomer tells you that we are 4.2 light years from Proxima Centuri and 2 million light years from Andromeda; a Keynesian astronomer tells you that Sirius the dog star wants you to print more funny money and that you might meet someone special next week.

 

[Alle_Gory]

I have no doubt that I might end up thinking the same as you someday. But it's an ugly world to live in.

I really don't understand this rise of anti-industrialism. If you guys in the States continue on this path, your economy will consist of giving handjobs to one another. There is little in the way of production and exports. You guys have little to sell besides movies and death (war machines). Unfortunately, death is very expensive and that industry looks to be on the way out once the creditors cash in and all those government contracts vanish.

 

[d!ckmojo]

Oil prices right now are actually at RECORD ALL TIME LOWS
don't believe me?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UL9TPFKA-zY&feature=feedlik

 

[Quiksilver]

A lot of things seem good if it's someone else who pays for it ...

I would instinctively resist a government-sponsored high-speed rail, but if a private corporation funded by shareholders comes along to other corporations and individuals and says "I will offer you high-speed rail to replace your aging 19th century tracks if you pay X dollars" then sure why not.

Alternatively, a government-sponsored fundraiser illustrating the economic and social advantages of a high-speed rail. Government runs the numbers to find out how much it will cost, and goes to the public saying "we need X dollars to complete it by Y date." then corporations and individuals can pledge however much money they want in order to complete it. Once the pot has the required amount of money in it, go ahead and build.

There are many things in this world that seem beautiful, but that beauty is only a smokescreen that hides the ugliness of using other people's money against their will (theft).