Ahhh, so there is a limit to what even California will pay for high speed rail. I am not surprised at this and you could see it comming…
https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article226151030.html
The only surprise I see in this is that it took so long for the powers-that-be to pull the plug, since it’s been obvious for some time that this project had turned into a bottomless money pit with no end in sight.
Merced to Bakersfield? Well that’s just swell!![N]
Actually there’s only a limit to what one Governor is willing to spend…no let me correct that, one one-term Governor is willing to spend. Perhaps we should start a recall notice, he wouldn’t be the first Governor recalled in this state. Also, it’s not like we didn’t have financing available, the states very successful Carbon Cap and Trade program would have convered construction costs for the next 7 years, then the Republicans in the state government could have tried to have the provision removed, but since Democrats have a super majority in both houses that would never have happened, so forget that idea.
The solution to getting into the LA basin would have been to tunnel under the Grapevine, heck, I’d have just hired the Swiss to do it, since they seem to know how to tunnel under mountains at relatively low cost and not take 50 years to do it(see Gotthard Base Tunnel for reference).
Furthermore, we could have had the system built and paid for without using taxpayers money…only some people complained about the Chinese building, operating and keeping the money from the system so that idea was tossed out the window.
Unless he completes the full system it isn’t going to help the state any at all. Yes, the Central Valley has the world air pollution in the state, that’s what happens with all that farming there. They have long commutes, because everyone that lives out there has to drive into either the Los Angeles basin or S.F. Bay Area for work…hence the reason for HSR in the first place(those intermediate travel
Gee - our AREMA tribe goes to tour the thing under construction and 8 days later it gets put on the shelf.
(and boy did we ever have que$tion$ … and then there were the “floating goals”, yet to be determined’s and the locals siphoning off $$$ for projects they couldn’t otherwise afford.)
(the failed 1928 Cincinnati Subway system now has company. This one will be a little harder to hide. )
Kinda feel like the second coming of the plague. Oh boy[:$]
If it were 150 years ago - who would have voted to build the trans-con? At what price?
I read the article. He’s hardly “pulling the plug” at this point, just slowing down building pending some revisions and funding.
I agree with Mr. McFarlane, that they should have taken the direct route, and tunneled under Tejon Pass and thru Grapevine. The state folded when a real estate developement objected to the route, but the alternative over Tehachapi and Saugus canyon put the price tag thru the roof.
Mr McFarlane and others: obviously there is a need for persons with expertise in finance and construction planning so please offer your services. MC and his associates have expertise in construction planning and they apparantly want nothing to do with this one.
Since it was done with little, if any, tax/bond dollars…
…and it went across land that was mostly empty and only sort of slightly owned by Indians, who likely had little input into the decisions…
…and since the recent war to break up the Union was decided in a negative way:
I expect LOTS of people would have voted for a free trans-con. Well, “free” to those who didn’t need/want to travel on it.
And I expect the same concept would hold today for California High Speed Rail, if you replaced the word “Indian” with “Republican Farmer”.
Now, what the fares would be, THAT is the question.
Ed
Another myth. Without government grants and financing, most of the TCs could not have been built except for the GN and late-comers.
How much money did the Feds give UP and/or CP?
Ed
[from Wiki article] The 1862 Pacific Railroad Act authorized extensive land grants in the Western United States and the issuance of 30-year government bonds (at 6 percent) to the Union Pacific Railroad and
“Since it was done with little, if any, tax/bond dollars…”
Then my statement is “sorta” true. The money was a loan, not a gift. A secured loan, as it mentions above. At the completion of the task, or shortly thereafter, the feds were out no money. And there was also a good bit of non-government money invested in the project.
Now. Turning to California High Speed Rail. Does that organization have a plan to pay back all the money that IT has spent and will spend before completion? I assume that money will come from fares, deducting operating expenses and maintenance costs.
How will that work?
And why are there no private investors, as with the transcon? Isn’t it a great business opportunity? Ya build a railroad that people need and want. When done, they pay fares to ride it. After paying expenses, you have a tidy profit from your investment. What’s not to like?
The huge quantities of land were going to be worthless for a goodly long time. The government had a choice: no railroad and no development and a lotta land with nobody on it. Or a railroad. And development. And a lot less land. Of course, the feds STILL own vast quantities of land in the West.
175 million acres is still a lot of land. But you feel the need to minimize that gift for some reason. And given the UP’s bankruptcy less than 30 years before the due date on those bonds, it is not entirely clear that all was repaid. The point is, our federal government saw the wisdom of infrastructure assistance long ago. Lincoln learned about the value of land grants for the Illinois Central. It is unfortunate that we let politics/ideology get in the way of progress as a nation. Our infrastructure (transportation, power grid, etc.) is lagely old, often antiquated and even crumbling, while elsewhere in the world you will find modern infrastructures essential for future economic growth.
This implies that tens of thousands of Native Americans were nobodies, that they and their rights don’t count; that to paraphrase Chief Justice Taney, no rights which whites had to respect.
I’ve always had a problem with the idea that land has to be developed (by a developer who gets enriched by the process) or it’s worthless.
Don’t get me wrong: the Transcons were inevitable and have been a great benefit to our country. But they were built at a staggering cost, not just in dollars but to the people who were the first Americans. They, and we to some extent, are still paying the price for our ancestors thinking Indians were nobodies. Remember what Gen. Sherman said about them?
I agree with Dr. Hebdo: Without lavish public investment and support, free enterprise would have been unable to build the Transcons.
Question: to what extent was the building of the Transcons socialism?
-
The bonds were 30 years to maturity, not on completion of task.
-
How much non-governmental money?
You know what I feel. You know of my needs. But you can’t divine the reason. Two out of three is still very impressive.
My feeling (but you already know that) is that the land grants were made based on the belief that those railroads would not be built, at least in the somewhat near future, otherwise.
And so billions have been spent on California High Speed Rail, instead of repairing and/or replacing the antiquated crumbling infrastructures. Unless, of course, CHSR will replace Highway 5 in the next few years. Then, indeed, there is no reason to mantain the soon-to-be useless roadway.
Ed
I thought that was the common view at the time the transcon was built. If I was in error, I expect they would have been consulted more extensively.
But you are here. Now. I doubt your view would be all that common in 1865.
Funny how things are inevitable after they’ve happened.
Yes. Quite true. And also reaping the benefits.
The loan was paid back, I believe. It was not a gift. How will California High Speed Rail pay back THEIR “loans”?
A quick on-line search comes up with 50 million dollars.
Ed