HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2010, 7:18 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Exhale solutions.
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Spaceship Earth
Posts: 4,685
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwadswor View Post
Agreed. To their credit, I believe they are designing the system to be able to handle 220 mph, but they're saving money by only looking at trainsets capable of 150 mph. Remember that DesertXpress is privately funded at this point and not associated with CAHSR, they have less money to spend.
Yeah but c'mon, look at that freaking station... and they're trying to save money on trainsets? Hmmm.

Furthermore, would an airline employ this strategy?
__________________
You slip me the cash and I'll slip you the wiener.

For me it can be reduced to this: For every personal freedom we gained from the automobile, we lost in social cohesion.

Last edited by Busy Bee; Jul 23, 2010 at 8:57 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2010, 5:55 AM
jamesinclair jamesinclair is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busy Bee View Post
Yeah but c'mon, look at that freaking station... and they're trying to save money on trainsets? Hmmm.

Furthermore, would an airline employ this strategy?
Airlines usually lease their planes. Train companies rarely ever lease their vehicles.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2010, 1:38 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Exhale solutions.
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Spaceship Earth
Posts: 4,685
Regardless of lease or own, you know the point I'm trying to make.
__________________
You slip me the cash and I'll slip you the wiener.

For me it can be reduced to this: For every personal freedom we gained from the automobile, we lost in social cohesion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Jul 24, 2010, 7:37 PM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Skyscraper Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 7,926
At least the maglev project is obtaining the FEIR and searching for funding for their WHOLE project (despite the fact that it, too, will be built in sections), while DesertXpress has considered the initial Victorville-Las Vegas leg and the Palmdale extension 2 separate projects.
__________________
Revelation 21:4
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Jul 28, 2010, 10:49 PM
OhioGuy OhioGuy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: DC
Posts: 7,023
Most Californians want bullet trains, state poll finds

Quote:
Although nearly half of Californians have reservations about paying for the state's high-speed rail line, three-fourths of them want to be able to ride bullet trains between the Bay Area and Southern California, a poll released Tuesday shows.

Pollsters hired by the California High-Speed Rail Authority asked 806 registered voters in May whether the state should continue with the largest project in its history, a $43 billion bullet train line approved during the November 2008 election.

One-third said it should be built as quickly as possible, 13 percent said they don't want it built at all, and 11 percent were unsure.

The most, 42 percent, said they supported the concept of building the high-speed railroad "but have some concerns about the timing and costs of the project," the pollsters said.

The results were even more positive in the Bay Area, where 277 residents were surveyed. Forty percent wanted it built quickly, six percentage points higher than the statewide total. Just 10 percent wanted it derailed, three points lower than the California average.

Pollsters said that may be because 80 percent of Bay Area residents said they knew details of the project, compared to 72 percent statewide.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Jul 28, 2010, 11:42 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
The rest of the article notes that this was a loaded, for-hire poll that played up the advantages of HSR before the respondents answered. It is part of an $8.5M PR campaign funded by HSR.

The opponents noted this is shockingly low for a "push poll" which is intended to give overwhelming support for a proposal.

Nice to see where our HSR money is really going.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Jul 31, 2010, 2:08 PM
202_Cyclist's Avatar
202_Cyclist 202_Cyclist is offline
Trump for Treason.
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: No Trump. No KKK. No racism in the USA.
Posts: 4,023
California will ask feds for up to $1 billion for high-speed rail (SJ Mercury)

I thought there would be a high speed rail station directly at SFO, not requiring a transfer on BART, as mentioned below.

By opposing high speed rail, eMeg would rather have the state pass up this much-needed money that would create thousands of good jobs, improve mobility for CA residents, and reduce emissions. Meg Whitman can spend a $100M to try to buy the election this November but she is wrong on the issues. Hopefully voters will not be fooled.


California will ask feds for up to $1 billion for high-speed rail

By Mike Rosenberg
San Mateo County Times
Posted: 07/30/2010 10:18:02 PM PDT



"The state will ask the federal government for $700 million to $1 billion to help build a California high-speed railroad, including cash for projects in the Bay Area.

The California High-Speed Rail Authority said Friday the application will include funds to electrify the planned railroad from San Francisco to San Jose along the Caltrain corridor. It also requests money to build a high-speed train station in Millbrae, where passengers could transfer to BART to reach San Francisco International Airport.

The application also includes projects in the Central Valley and Los Angeles.

The Obama administration made $2.3 billion available in the budget this year for states to plan and construct high-speed train systems. The rail authority and Caltrans will finalize the amount of the state's request before Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger submits an application to the U.S. Department of Transportation next week...

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-...nclick_check=1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2010, 11:55 PM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 2,887
Lightbulb

I'm all for the Federal government helping California build it's planned HSR network, but I'm not necessarily for California consuming half the Federal rail capital building budget every year.....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Aug 2, 2010, 12:36 AM
Onn Onn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The United States
Posts: 1,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by electricron View Post
I'm all for the Federal government helping California build it's planned HSR network, but I'm not necessarily for California consuming half the Federal rail capital building budget every year.....
Better to go big than piddle little projects, like what the Stimulus Package was filled with. With the money in the Stimulus Package we could have easily paid for this entire thing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Aug 2, 2010, 2:17 AM
penfold penfold is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onn View Post
Better to go big than piddle little projects, like what the Stimulus Package was filled with. With the money in the Stimulus Package we could have easily paid for this entire thing.
Unfortunately in order to negotiate for Republican support (which disappeared once the vote came) an enormous amount of actual construction ("waste" it was called) was eliminated and replaced by temporary tax cuts (for "growth".) I'd like to think the same mistake won't be made next time, but there most likely won't be a next time.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Aug 2, 2010, 3:02 AM
202_Cyclist's Avatar
202_Cyclist 202_Cyclist is offline
Trump for Treason.
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: No Trump. No KKK. No racism in the USA.
Posts: 4,023
Quote:
Unfortunately in order to negotiate for Republican support (which disappeared once the vote came) an enormous amount of actual construction ("waste" it was called) was eliminated and replaced by temporary tax cuts (for "growth".) I'd like to think the same mistake won't be made next time, but there most likely won't be a next time.
Exactly right-- approximately $200B - $300B of the stimulus was for tax cuts and another $200B - $300B was for aid to state/local govts so they wouldn't have to layoff as many teachers, police, firefighters, etc... The Republicans are so shameless and blatantly hypocritical on this. It is absolutely disgusting. I suppose because this Recovery Act was proposed by and signed into law by Obama, tax cuts are considered socialism now. Equally hypocritical are the GOP members of Congress who bash the stimulus every chance they get and in the very next breath complain that the money isn't being spent fast enough or their district/state isn't getting enough funding. The GO(B)P is rotten to the core.

Here's a chart showing spending from the Recovery Act:

http://projects.nytimes.com/44th_president/stimulus
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Aug 2, 2010, 3:13 AM
DJM19 DJM19 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,446
Quote:
Originally Posted by electricron View Post
I'm all for the Federal government helping California build it's planned HSR network, but I'm not necessarily for California consuming half the Federal rail capital building budget every year.....
I think its better to let one or two states projects get built using most of the available funds (leaving enough for the rest to stay afloat and do some pre-construction) so that when a big rail-investment bill is introduced, there will be no question that HSR is a good investment.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Aug 2, 2010, 6:47 AM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 2,887
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by DJM19 View Post
I think its better to let one or two states projects get built using most of the available funds (leaving enough for the rest to stay afloat and do some pre-construction) so that when a big rail-investment bill is introduced, there will be no question that HSR is a good investment.
There would be no available Federal funds if the allocations aren't distributed nationally. Did the Interstate Highway funds get distributed to one or two states first? No, because if the Highway funds weren't allocated nationally, there would be no Highway Trust Fund.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Aug 2, 2010, 3:05 PM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Skyscraper Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 7,926
Electricron, as long as we have unfinished systems, it will be considered "wasteful spending" by a certain political party.
__________________
Revelation 21:4
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Aug 2, 2010, 3:09 PM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Skyscraper Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 7,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist View Post
Exactly right-- approximately $200B - $300B of the stimulus was for tax cuts and another $200B - $300B was for aid to state/local govts so they wouldn't have to layoff as many teachers, police, firefighters, etc... The Republicans are so shameless and blatantly hypocritical on this. It is absolutely disgusting. I suppose because this Recovery Act was proposed by and signed into law by Obama, tax cuts are considered socialism now. Equally hypocritical are the GOP members of Congress who bash the stimulus every chance they get and in the very next breath complain that the money isn't being spent fast enough or their district/state isn't getting enough funding. The GO(B)P is rotten to the core.

Here's a chart showing spending from the Recovery Act:

http://projects.nytimes.com/44th_president/stimulus
We don't even need to debate whether the stimulus did it's job and was worth the $787 Billion it cost. The fact that monthly job losses have cratered since it was passed is proof that it was a big help, regardless if the jobs it created were temporary. I've completely had it with Republicans. They do not see the difference between investing in the future and investing in a war. Their party might just be the one that permanantly ends America's leading role in the world.
__________________
Revelation 21:4

Last edited by JDRCRASH; Aug 2, 2010 at 3:21 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2010, 1:47 AM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 2,887
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by JDRCRASH View Post
Electricron, as long as we have unfinished systems, it will be considered "wasteful spending" by a certain political party.
Come on, a LA to SD leg, or a LA to Anaheim leg shouldn't be considered unfinished. The entire CHSR project is made up of individual legs, one doesn't have to finish all of them to finish it. Besides, no rail project should ever be considered finished.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2010, 2:01 AM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
Some pretty interesting points. A couple of comments:

The stimulus package was an almost complete waste of money. Essentially no effect since the public (quite rightly) is too scared of what the government might do next to start spending any money they earn. The biggest US companies and I have one thing in common: we are hanging on to our cash until the next election restores some fiscal rationality and a consistent economic policy. That's just about all a government needs to do.

Having said that, large projects would have made even less sense since the idea of the stimulus (erroneous as it was) was to pump money into many places very quickly so as to stimulate current spending. Large localized projects don't accomplish that.

Tax cuts tend to go to a mixture of reduction of debt (which is net saving) and spending. This is likely to translate in stronger long-term growth. One could argue that this was a last ditch effort to bring the US back to world competitiveness instead of encouraging spending and paying for it with debt, which certainly hurts the long-term economic welfare.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2010, 2:32 AM
emathias's Avatar
emathias emathias is offline
Adoptive Chicagoan
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,416
Quote:
Originally Posted by pesto View Post
...
The stimulus package was an almost complete waste of money. Essentially no effect since the public (quite rightly) is too scared of what the government might do next to start spending any money they earn. The biggest US companies and I have one thing in common: we are hanging on to our cash until the next election restores some fiscal rationality and a consistent economic policy. That's just about all a government needs to do.

Having said that, large projects would have made even less sense since the idea of the stimulus (erroneous as it was) was to pump money into many places very quickly so as to stimulate current spending. Large localized projects don't accomplish that.

Tax cuts tend to go to a mixture of reduction of debt (which is net saving) and spending. This is likely to translate in stronger long-term growth. One could argue that this was a last ditch effort to bring the US back to world competitiveness instead of encouraging spending and paying for it with debt, which certainly hurts the long-term economic welfare.
What on EARTH have you been smoking?

Leaving aside Obama vs. the Republicans, I seriously doubt you can cite a single example of tax cuts reducing debt (unless other taxes have also been raised).

I also seriously doubt that U.S. companies are going to hold onto cash for years rather than make investments now soley due to an Administration. Lack of investment now has been primarily due to 1) lack of lending liquidity brought on by the collapse of the financial system brought on by excessive liquidity and a lack of oversight, all of which was brought on by BOTH Bush and Clinton policies and 2) a complete lack of certainty over if and when the economy will recover, a question that is still up in the air not because of Obama, whose policies as they are in effect currently aren't materially different from Bush's, but because of item 1) and, partly, the national debt which will REQUIRE either an increase in taxes to balance or a default (real or virtual). Of the two, a tax increase is - by far - the better choice.

The debt is no more Obama's than it is Bush's or Clinton's. It is cumulative and responsiblity for it is shared by every Administration and Congress since at least Nixon. Any party that attempts to pin the responsibility on the other instead of facing the music and doing what needs to be done is appallingly irresponsible.

When debt hits 120% of GDP sometime this decade, we would no only have to stop adding to it, but to "grow" out of it back to a 40% level, we would have to not add to it and grow at 5% annually for about 15 years. Could that happen? Maybe, but it's highly unlikely that we could BOTH grow that fast AND keep our hands off the deficit button, no matter which party is in power. If we also ratchet down immigration at the same time (which, at times, both sides seem to favor), the chances of that sort of growth is even lower.

So quit supporting blowhards who try and blame all the evils on this administration or the last one, and start supporting people who actually support realistic policy. Which will, unfortunately, include tax hikes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2010, 3:53 AM
202_Cyclist's Avatar
202_Cyclist 202_Cyclist is offline
Trump for Treason.
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: No Trump. No KKK. No racism in the USA.
Posts: 4,023
pesto:
Quote:
The biggest US companies and I have one thing in common: we are hanging on to our cash until the next election restores some fiscal rationality and a consistent economic policy.
This discussion is digressing but this is exactly why yet more tax cuts are not an effective way to stimulate the economy. Many people, especially the most affulent save a large percentage of their income and can be expected to save a significant part of any tax cut.

As noted this morning by Fareed Zakaria in today's (Monday) Washington Post, Clinton raised taxes on the wealthiest households in the early 1990s and this was followed by a decade of very robust growth. Bush enacted massive tax cuts the last decade and we had sluggish growth, at best.

Far more effective for stimulating economic growth is aid to state/local govts so they don't have to lay off employees (police, firefighters, teachers), extending assistance for the unemployed (who will spend nearly all of the assistance they receive, putting this money back into the economy, and yes, public works/infrastructure projects.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Aug 5, 2010, 9:39 PM
202_Cyclist's Avatar
202_Cyclist 202_Cyclist is offline
Trump for Treason.
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: No Trump. No KKK. No racism in the USA.
Posts: 4,023
Cities, residents voicing concerns about possible high speed route line along 10 Free

Cities, residents voicing concerns about possible high speed route line along 10 Freeway

By Dan Abendschein Staff Writer
Posted: 08/04/2010
Pasadena Star-News


Rosemead council member, Sandra Armenta, center, with neighbors and a map of the affected area at Olney street and Lashbrook Ave. along the 10 Freeway corridor where commercial businesses and residential homes could be torn down due to the construction of the California High Speed Rail project on Wednesday, August 4, 2010 in Rosemead. (SGVN/Staff Photo by Keith Birmingham/SXCITY)

"Some cities in the path of a proposed high speed rail line through the San Gabriel Valley are lining up against the project's potential to displace homes and businesses.

Rosemead earlier this year passed a resolution opposing any route that would displace property owners, while Alhambra city officials are scheduled to meet Monday to discuss the project. Officials will consider a resolution opposing a route along surface streets.

Covina City Manager Daryl Parrish said he also has concerns about the proposed routes.

The San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments, meanwhile, is set to vote next Wednesday on a motion to oppose a surface route for the project.

"The bottom line is that everybody needs to be informed," said Rosemead City Councilwoman Sandra Armenta, whose home is in one of the areas under consideration for the proposed route.

Armenta, who has lived in her home for 32 years, said most of her neighbors no nothing about the rail project.

"They are painting this picture that everybody is in support of this. But people don't even know it could affect them," she said..."

http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/news/ci_15678540
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:36 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.