Green New Deal! (Air Travel Unnecessary)
#491
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2017
Posts: 90
They wrote a well thought out intelligent post on why and how the GND will lead to socialism. It seems your only rebuttal is name calling without actually having any type of intelligent arguments about why you support the GND and why you think the GND is not a centralized government takeover. It seems the case has been made several times over and you have no actual response other than to say “prove it”. You are like an ostrich that hides their head in the sand so you don’t have to face reality.
#492
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Posts: 323
Did you read the document? That's not an extrapolation or projection, it's a basic description. I've already said it's not conspiracy theory, it's just leftist politics. The means and pretexts change, but the goals don't. And they stated the goals quite clearly in the GND, only some of which have anything to do with AGW and none of which have any rational method of measuring success or failure toward meeting the perceived existential threat. I'm not sure how recognition of this decades old pattern translates into "right wing conspiracy theory" and "fantastical straw man building." It's quite literally the same old same old.
#493
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,785
#494
Cali fanboys might read what the state government thinks.
https://lao.ca.gov/laoecontax/article/detail/265
https://lao.ca.gov/laoecontax/article/detail/265
#495
On Reserve
Joined APC: Feb 2019
Position: Transitioning from RW to FW
Posts: 19
Shorter than Merced to Bakersfield?
It was always intended as a nose under the tent sort of thing, get it started and then try to justify additional taxpayer funding with the argument that it HAD to be done, or waste all the money that was already spent. The route chosen was the cheapest and least population dense area they could find, to keep building cost down, not really designed to be useful. The route chosen was not chosen for economic viability. Exactly how many people in Bakersfield does anyone think want to go to Merced every day, and Vice versa? And those 400,000 people are basically the only customers except perhaps Fresno. But you can’t make very frequent stops with high speed rail or it quickly stops being high speed. Or energy efficient. For the same reason you’ll seldom see a 777 servicing an EAS destination.
High speed train economic viability in practice depends greatly on population density. Western Europe has that. Parts of the East Coast have that. Most of the West simply doesn’t. An agricultural area in the Central Valley of California? Nobody could seriously expect that to be economically viable.
It was always intended as a nose under the tent sort of thing, get it started and then try to justify additional taxpayer funding with the argument that it HAD to be done, or waste all the money that was already spent. The route chosen was the cheapest and least population dense area they could find, to keep building cost down, not really designed to be useful. The route chosen was not chosen for economic viability. Exactly how many people in Bakersfield does anyone think want to go to Merced every day, and Vice versa? And those 400,000 people are basically the only customers except perhaps Fresno. But you can’t make very frequent stops with high speed rail or it quickly stops being high speed. Or energy efficient. For the same reason you’ll seldom see a 777 servicing an EAS destination.
High speed train economic viability in practice depends greatly on population density. Western Europe has that. Parts of the East Coast have that. Most of the West simply doesn’t. An agricultural area in the Central Valley of California? Nobody could seriously expect that to be economically viable.
The whole point of conversing about HSR in California is the absurdity of the project. You are absolutely right in population densities and HSR. It works that way in Japan, in Europe, etc.
Again, the whole point of this thread is how a growing number of people in Government think they can do better with "We the People's" money than "We the People" can. I fundamentally disagree with some of the proposals that have recently come out (ie. AOC's GND). The GND should raise tons of red flags. In this instance, it appears more of a guise to advance socialism than it does to actually improve our society at large.
Every year our Government does a poor job with balancing our budgets, and prefer to just pass bills without actually knowing the consequences. Ton's of projects are subsidized with tax payer dollars and end up being bridges to nowhere. As a country, we shouldn't be proponents of "nose under the tent sort of things" unless we know these projects will actually be successful and benefit the public at large.
Wishful thinking on my part, especially in lieu of a large portion of the Freshmen Congressman recently elected.
#496
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,785
#497
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Posts: 323
#499
:-)
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
#500
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,785
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post