Join the discussion on the following article:
Congressman pummeled in Twitter ‘town hall’ for opposing high speed rail
Sorry Mr. Guse in your claim of massive operating subsidies in all HSR operations is wrong. JR East for example (operator of the Shinkansen lines north of Tokyo) is one of the most profitable railways in the world. Facts please !
In California they need to find ways to get the price of HSR down further, get it built sooner, and find the funds to build it!
It seems to be a big mess!
Higher speed rail is more realistic than high speed rail. When will advocates admit that the automobile is Amtrak’s biggest competitor and target market?. Take 20% of the motorists off the highway (many of whom don’t want to be there). What if the passenger rail projects fail? Then, you have freight roadbeds which are better able to compete with long haul trucks. Take 20% off the highway and the excessive cost of highway repair is reduced or deferred.
Denham should have had his K Street staff and friends rig the twitter questions to fit his anti-HSR position.
It appears the so-called high speed rail operatives put the word out on the street. Get this guy. Get him hard. Get him fast. But that is no surprise. It has happened before. This is a classic socialist tactic which they do in order to make themselves appear to be the victims and get the sympathy vote from the zombies while taking out the opposition.
It still doesn’t change the reality of this being a train from nowhere to nowhere out in the middle of nowhere. The economic reality is that state is broke. It can’t even afford to maintain what it has due to all the social welfare programs. Now it wants to add one more which it can’t afford. To top it off, maintenance costs over the years will easily outstrip the cost of initially building it. Over in Europe and Japan the roadbed and track are under constant repair just to keep those trains operating.
As for the comments about Peoples Republic of California roads, when was the last time that state built any roads? For that matter, when was the last time it maintained its roads? Most states at least put up signs, such as “Rough Road Next 10 Miles.” In the PRC, the sign at the Nevada line says I-80. The rough road part is assumed because the inmates don’t know of any other kind of road.
The real solution would be to eliminate the social welfare and repair or replace the existing infrastructure. When that is done, then think about so-called high speed rail. But only if the money exists to massively subsidize it. Every one of those systems in any country requires a massive subsidy just to maintain operations.
All the while the good lawmakers will travel in limos and Lear jets…
In the wrong? This is one of the few times I agree with a Republican. The HSR is a wasteful boondoggle.
In the wrong? This is one of the few times I agree with a Republican. The HSR is a wasteful boondoggle.
The Florida HSP project (FEC) already said they plan to seek federal loan money (FRA?). So much for private funding.
I agree with Mr. Erken. I also agree with Mr. Turon that cost and time should be reduced. One way to achieve both is to pursue an I-5 routing where land acquisition cost and lack of interference with other SR-99 path infrastructure (including BNSF and UP) would simplify construction. It’s also slightly shorter route-mile-wise and with fewer station stops would have a lower operating cost.
Always good to see politicians being called to task for being in the wrong.
This project is a total waste of money. It will not be able to compete with air travel. It’s only a payoff by the Democratic Party to the labor unions.
California has an ever increasing capacity and congestion problem that it can’t address with simply building out more highway lanes. The reality is California needs to invest in all three modes of transportation, highway, airlines and rail. The other reality that detractors of HSR fail to mention is that California would be spending more to get the equivalent capacity with highway lane expansion. I have seen estimates as much as +$100 billion. Why do you think China invested so much in HSR between its main metro that are similar in size and distance such as San Fran/Silicon Valley & LA.
Also the Florida project is for 110 mph maximum speed while my understanding of the California project is it is a true high speed line of 180+ mph.
Rep. Jeff Denham wanted to take the money from the HSR and plow it into upgrading hwy. 99. Typical Repub.
There is a lot of people that would rather ride the HSR rather than fly, Robert Ray. With all the hassles and bullshit flyers have to endure HSR would be an attractive alternative than the flying cattle cars.
And of course the real question is market share. For example, the Paris-Lyon TGV caused the disappearance of air service between those two cities. Ditto Madrid-Seville, etc. Closer to home the Acela, despite its flaws, has captured the market and operates at capacity. LA-SF will do the same.
In this discussion ideology belongs on the “rip track.”
“…which would link the Bay Area to Los Angeles.” Don’t you mean Bakersfield to Modesto?
The biggest advanage of HSR as I see it is the can make a short stop at a intermediate point along the line. The airplane you can not just out of the plane on your from SF to LA. The airplane for the time beening can use only jet fuel. The HSR will use electrical power and if is interpretation of oil like 1973 ( fuel embargo) jet fuel will go up. Oil prices will go up any way but electric price will most likely stay more flat. There other forms generating electrical power other the by oil that can be used. The USA has become so dependent on oil I don’t see any easy way around this problem and jets use a great deal of fuel. The train is only one small way to get away from this dependence on oil. I and we will not give up our cars until public transportation becomes better.