Green New Deal! (Air Travel Unnecessary)
02-13-2019, 11:07 AM
#491
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2017
Posts: 90
Originally Posted by Flytolive
And there it is. YOU extrapolated and projected your own right wing conspiracy theory.
If your arguments could stand on their own there would be no need for such fantastical straw man building.
If your arguments could stand on their own there would be no need for such fantastical straw man building.
02-13-2019, 11:08 AM
#492
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Posts: 323
Originally Posted by Flytolive
And there it is. YOU extrapolated and projected your own right wing conspiracy theory.
If your arguments could stand on their own there would be no need for such fantastical straw man building.
If your arguments could stand on their own there would be no need for such fantastical straw man building.
02-13-2019, 11:28 AM
#493
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,785
Originally Posted by Blue Dude
It's quite literally the same old same old.
02-13-2019, 11:32 AM
#494
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: Baja Vermont
Posts: 5,171
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
02-13-2019, 11:45 AM
#495
On Reserve
Joined APC: Feb 2019
Position: Transitioning from RW to FW
Posts: 19
Originally Posted by Excargodog
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.
02-13-2019, 11:50 AM
#496
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,785
02-13-2019, 11:51 AM
#497
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Posts: 323
Originally Posted by Flytolive
And yet we are still nowhere near what the right fringe has been ranting about where we are heading. Much ado about nothing. Sorry that dog don't hunt.
02-13-2019, 11:57 AM
#499
:-)
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Originally Posted by Flytolive
02-13-2019, 12:00 PM
#500
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,785
Originally Posted by Mesabah
Yes, all the wealth is concentrated into the hands of the left wing. I was called a conspiracy theorist for saying that
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
