HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #761  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2011, 7:54 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: 4,349
skyscraperfan23::
Quote:
Cut Foreign aid and use that money for transportation.
You do realize you have no idea what you're talking about. The US foreign aid budget is less than one percent of the total federal budget. The FY2011 US DOT budget was $75B. The entire FY2011 foreign aid budget was less than $35B (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...ince-1977.html). Again, we have a $2.2 trillion infrastructure deficit. We can eliminate our entire foreign aid and it would make almost no impact on transportation.

skyscraperfan23:
Quote:
But federal government intervention is not the answer either, end the income tax, that is why I Like ron paul's ecomonic plan.
How do you propose paying for transportation? You do realize that the highway trust fund has required bailouts of $7B -$8B each year for the past four years--- this is paid for by income taxes. Should we raise the gas tax? Vehicle miles traveled fee? Create a national infrastructure bank that would encourage much greater private sector investment but that Rep. John Mica (R-FL) declared "dead on arrival." The invisible hand is not going to pave roads. The generosity of Goldmann Sachs or Bank of America isn't going to repair our bridges.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #762  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2011, 8:45 PM
s.p.hansen's Avatar
s.p.hansen s.p.hansen is offline
Urban Planning Proselyte
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 2,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyscraperfan23 View Post
But federal government intervention is not the answer either, end the income tax, that is why I Like ron paul's ecomonic plan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pG7guBRY7-g

I'm assuming that you're just trolling, but hey, let me throw a basic question your way.

In a developing country like China who is using their taxes to build solid new systems of infrastructure and in a Tea Party Fantasy of the United States where cities must rely on the private sector to fund infrastructure, which place is more likely to attract small and large businesses?

Hint: It's the same place that is currently attracting more small and large businesses.

Last edited by s.p.hansen; Nov 5, 2011 at 9:35 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #763  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2011, 2:26 PM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 47,061
California rail agency requests billions to start construction


Read More: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...,1321051.story

Quote:
California's bullet train agency on Thursday formally requested a multibillion-dollar appropriation to start construction next year, after dozens of people from across the state attacked the $98-billion project's cost, rationale and effects on communities. The California High Speed Rail Authority board adopted a funding plan, which seeks to tap $3.3 billion in federal grants and $2.7 billion in state bonds to begin building an initial 140-mile segment of track through the Central Valley. That non-operational segment would run mostly through farmland from Chowchilla to Bakersfield.

The request now goes to Gov. Jerry Brown's administration and then the Legislature, where it will face tough scrutiny by lawmakers concerned about where they will find more than $90 billion to finish the system — described as the largest infrastructure project in the nation. In a new business plan announced Tuesday, the authority said it hopes to get billions in private investments, additional federal funding and proceeds from a new U.S. bond program that will require congressional approval. Critics note that the Republican-controlled House of Representatives has vowed to stop all federal funding for the project.

.....



__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #764  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2011, 2:30 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: 4,349
Once again, as has been pointed out numerous times but is still often ignored by the Ayn Rand-disciples and neo-Hoovers, the cost of not building high speed rail is not zero. We know we're going to (or at least should be if we want to remain an economically competitive country) need to build hundreds of billions of dollars of infrastructure in the coming decades. We should be investing in modes of transportation that do not encourage sprawl (with the wasteful traffic that results), that does something to reduce the US consuming 1/4 of the world's oil, and that encourages much greater productivity.

Alarming state report predicts $294 billion shortfall for transportation over next decade

San Jose Mercury
11/5/2011
http://www.mercurynews.com/traffic/c...015?source=rss

The suggestion made above that we can take care of our national $2.2 trillion infrastructure shortfall if we just spent a few billion dollars less on AIDS drugs for Africa or not helping to provide clean drinking water for a couple of impoverished countries is laughable.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #765  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2011, 6:00 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by s.p.hansen View Post
I'm assuming that you're just trolling, but hey, let me throw a basic question your way.

In a developing country like China who is using their taxes to build solid new systems of infrastructure and in a Tea Party Fantasy of the United States where cities must rely on the private sector to fund infrastructure, which place is more likely to attract small and large businesses?

Hint: It's the same place that is currently attracting more small and large businesses.
An interesting way of expressing it. How about instead: the country where the govt. is over-taxing and over-regulating businesses to meet short-term political ends to stay in power vs. the country where the govt. has told the people: stay out of business's way or you will be swiftly dealt with without discussion or recourse.

An unhappy choice for each country; but it's clear that business would prefer the latter.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #766  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2011, 6:21 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist View Post
Once again, as has been pointed out numerous times but is still often ignored by the Ayn Rand-disciples and neo-Hoovers, the cost of not building high speed rail is not zero. We know we're going to (or at least should be if we want to remain an economically competitive country) need to build hundreds of billions of dollars of infrastructure in the coming decades. We should be investing in modes of transportation that do not encourage sprawl (with the wasteful traffic that results), that does something to reduce the US consuming 1/4 of the world's oil, and that encourages much greater productivity.

Alarming state report predicts $294 billion shortfall for transportation over next decade

San Jose Mercury
11/5/2011
http://www.mercurynews.com/traffic/c...015?source=rss

The suggestion made above that we can take care of our national $2.2 trillion infrastructure shortfall if we just spent a few billion dollars less on AIDS drugs for Africa or not helping to provide clean drinking water for a couple of impoverished countries is laughable.
You have to get over name-calling and especially over oil. I don't believe that there is anyone left who believes that commuter cars will be primarily oil driven in 25 years when HSR is done.

Interestingy, solar is now slipping as a generator of electricity as the technical advances in natural gas recovery have continued. However, the solar advocates are confident that they have innovations coming soon that will push down their cost of production. Ethanol and wind also claim they can be the cost leader. A fascinating field to watch in the near future. This should result in lower costs for rail as well.

Unfortunately, sprawl is now just a fact in California; it can't be undone. The best way to mitigate it is to make rapid rail connections from Union Station to Palmdale, Riverside and Irvine; and Sacto. to SJ. Plus subways within the central LA region.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #767  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2011, 6:33 PM
Gordo's Avatar
Gordo Gordo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Seattle, WA/San Francisco, CA/Jackson Hole, WY
Posts: 4,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by pesto View Post
You have to get over name-calling and especially over oil. I don't believe that there is anyone left who believes that commuter cars will be primarily oil driven in 25 years when HSR is done.
Um, I certainly don't believe that the majority of cars will be non-oil driven is just 25 short years

Given the current political incentives, I think there's just as much a chance that we'll see gasoline directly subsidized to keep prices reasonable as anything else in 25 years.

If we've seen anything from this HSR project, there is a lack of will to use government power to push through big projects without being nickel and dimed by various small stakeholders (call them NIMBYs, whatever) or gouged by contractor cost inflation (a US-specific problem across all projects, not just transit). I don't see why this would be different in developing the new infrastructure needed for large-scale movement to new car types. Easier to just kick the can down the road. We're finishing up a Bay Bridge that was 400%+ over budget, and there were zero political consequences to that...but talk of any type of increase in gas tax is a political third rail. "Market" prices in gasoline will simply not go up enough to make the switch that you're implying in that time period, without some major switch in current geo-political realities.

Now, maybe if we have some type of complete political meltdown (national or state level) and re-writing of the current constitutions and/or political structures, maybe.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #768  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2011, 6:47 PM
Onn Onn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The United States
Posts: 1,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist View Post
Once again, as has been pointed out numerous times but is still often ignored by the Ayn Rand-disciples and neo-Hoovers, the cost of not building high speed rail is not zero. We know we're going to (or at least should be if we want to remain an economically competitive country) need to build hundreds of billions of dollars of infrastructure in the coming decades. We should be investing in modes of transportation that do not encourage sprawl (with the wasteful traffic that results), that does something to reduce the US consuming 1/4 of the world's oil, and that encourages much greater productivity.
California is BANKRUPT. Productivity also DOES NOT equal economic gains. That's exactly what Obama thought when putting togther the stimulus package, he failed miserably with that. The government has no money for such a white elephant. Not saying cars don't need to change, but you have to let the free market come up with a better soultion. I'm not sure high-speed rail will ever catch on in this country.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #769  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2011, 7:48 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: 4,349
Onn:
Quote:
California is BANKRUPT. Productivity also DOES NOT equal economic gains. That's exactly what Obama thought when putting togther the stimulus package, he failed miserably with that. The government has no money for such a white elephant. Not saying cars don't need to change, but you have to let the free market come up with a better soultion. I'm not sure high-speed rail will ever catch on in this country.
Again, 100% pure nonsense. First, the stimulus did not fail miserably. Most economists, including Mark Zandi, an advisor to John McCain's presidential campaign in 2008, agree that the stimulus both created jobs and prevented unemployment from being much worse than it otherwise is. The 'socialist' stimulus had $350B for tax cuts and tax credits. This compares with $48B for transportation. The stimulus had something like eight times more money for tax cuts than infrastructure yet somehow we're to believe its a huge socialist expansion of govt because a Democrat enacted it.

Second, we certainly don't have a free market for transportation right now. Far from it. Automobiles and auto-dependent sprawl is heavily subsidized. The highway trust fund had to be bailed out with $7B-$8B each year for the past four years from the general fund. This is a subsidy for drivers from taxpayers. Pew published a report last year that showed the federal gas tax only pays for about 50% of interstate maintenance and construction. The rest is subsidized. No free market here. It is even worse with state/local roads, which are paid for by sales taxes, property taxes, bonds, and development impact fees, all subsidizing driving and, certainly no free market. Additionally, as Tyler Cowen and others have noted, parking is at least a $100B subsidy per year. Finally, the oil that powers cars is heavily subsidized. RAND published a report a few years ago that estimated the cost of keeping the US 5th Fleet in the Middle East to protect US access to oil is between $29B - $143B every single year. Certainly no free market with this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #770  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2011, 8:01 PM
s.p.hansen's Avatar
s.p.hansen s.p.hansen is offline
Urban Planning Proselyte
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 2,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by pesto View Post
An interesting way of expressing it. How about instead: the country where the govt. is over-taxing and over-regulating businesses to meet short-term political ends to stay in power vs. the country where the govt. has told the people: stay out of business's way or you will be swiftly dealt with without discussion or recourse.

An unhappy choice for each country; but it's clear that business would prefer the latter.
So unless you're already speaking to the converted flock of tea party people, you need to do a lot more than simply state that we are over-taxed and over-regulated. I mean, how do you know that's really the problem? It comes across like you are assuming that there is some kind of non-material external reality in which ideas of everything exist in perfection and that you have access to such a realm which gives you the ability to compare the situation we are all experiencing with your privileged view; surely elitism at its worst.

While you have access to this realm could you also tell us what the perfect dimensions of a brick would be, or better yet, while you have access to this extra-human godlike point of view, can you tell us whose version of history was the correct one? Economic positions and politics aren't mystical experiences that you just know the answer to in your gut, leave that to spiritual and aesthetic matters.

Seriously pesto, either take the time to give us a thought out narrative as to why America's investment in infrastructure didn't precede our most powerful economy in the world status or take your ball and go home. If you come up with a well thought out narrative (one that uses explanations that move beyond appeals to the authority of yourself or your like-minded friends), then try and tie that into the California High Speed Rail project and argue for or against it.

Last edited by s.p.hansen; Nov 6, 2011 at 8:28 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #771  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2011, 8:28 PM
skyscraperfan23 skyscraperfan23 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Fort Lauderdale, Florida
Posts: 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist View Post
Onn:


Again, 100% pure nonsense. First, the stimulus did not fail miserably. Most economists, including Mark Zandi, an advisor to John McCain's presidential campaign in 2008, agree that the stimulus both created jobs and prevented unemployment from being much worse than it otherwise is. The 'socialist' stimulus had $350B for tax cuts and tax credits. This compares with $48B for transportation. The stimulus had something like eight times more money for tax cuts than infrastructure yet somehow we're to believe its a huge socialist expansion of govt because a Democrat enacted it.

Second, we certainly don't have a free market for transportation right now. Far from it. Automobiles and auto-dependent sprawl is heavily subsidized. The highway trust fund had to be bailed out with $7B-$8B each year for the past four years from the general fund. This is a subsidy for drivers from taxpayers. Pew published a report last year that showed the federal gas tax only pays for about 50% of interstate maintenance and construction. The rest is subsidized. No free market here. It is even worse with state/local roads, which are paid for by sales taxes, property taxes, bonds, and development impact fees, all subsidizing driving and, certainly no free market. Additionally, as Tyler Cowen and others have noted, parking is at least a $100B subsidy per year. Finally, the oil that powers cars is heavily subsidized. RAND published a report a few years ago that estimated the cost of keeping the US 5th Fleet in the Middle East to protect US access to oil is between $29B - $143B every single year. Certainly no free market with this.
The Stimulus has failed, there is no recovery, it's all a coverup.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #772  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2011, 8:45 PM
s.p.hansen's Avatar
s.p.hansen s.p.hansen is offline
Urban Planning Proselyte
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 2,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyscraperfan23 View Post
The Stimulus has failed, there is no recovery, it's all a coverup.
Nice rebuttal skyscraperfan23, I'm sure you probably typed this brief and insightful addition to the conversation on one of your brief breaks from either planning rocket trajectories or doing frontal lobe surgeries.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #773  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2011, 8:47 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: 4,349
Skyscraperfan23:
Quote:
The Stimulus has failed, there is no recovery, it's all a coverup.
I think you have your tinfoil hat on a little too tight. It's starting to kill brain cells.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #774  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2011, 8:59 PM
skyscraperfan23 skyscraperfan23 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Fort Lauderdale, Florida
Posts: 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by s.p.hansen View Post
Nice rebuttal skyscraperfan23, I'm sure you probably typed this brief and insightful addition to the conversation on one of your brief breaks from either planning rocket trajectories or doing frontal lobe surgeries.
No wonder liberals are pure sheep especially this one.

The U.S. is broke, because of the federal reserve and you are part of the problem.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #775  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2011, 9:34 PM
LosAngelesSportsFan's Avatar
LosAngelesSportsFan LosAngelesSportsFan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,862
Quote:
Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist View Post
Onn:


Again, 100% pure nonsense. First, the stimulus did not fail miserably. Most economists, including Mark Zandi, an advisor to John McCain's presidential campaign in 2008, agree that the stimulus both created jobs and prevented unemployment from being much worse than it otherwise is. The 'socialist' stimulus had $350B for tax cuts and tax credits. This compares with $48B for transportation. The stimulus had something like eight times more money for tax cuts than infrastructure yet somehow we're to believe its a huge socialist expansion of govt because a Democrat enacted it.

Second, we certainly don't have a free market for transportation right now. Far from it. Automobiles and auto-dependent sprawl is heavily subsidized. The highway trust fund had to be bailed out with $7B-$8B each year for the past four years from the general fund. This is a subsidy for drivers from taxpayers. Pew published a report last year that showed the federal gas tax only pays for about 50% of interstate maintenance and construction. The rest is subsidized. No free market here. It is even worse with state/local roads, which are paid for by sales taxes, property taxes, bonds, and development impact fees, all subsidizing driving and, certainly no free market. Additionally, as Tyler Cowen and others have noted, parking is at least a $100B subsidy per year. Finally, the oil that powers cars is heavily subsidized. RAND published a report a few years ago that estimated the cost of keeping the US 5th Fleet in the Middle East to protect US access to oil is between $29B - $143B every single year. Certainly no free market with this.
edit

Last edited by LosAngelesSportsFan; Nov 7, 2011 at 2:21 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #776  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2011, 9:38 PM
skyscraperfan23 skyscraperfan23 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Fort Lauderdale, Florida
Posts: 301
If any of you think the so-called stimulus bill has worked need to get their a** checked.
this is why nobama is better than the incompetent bush.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #777  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2011, 9:58 PM
s.p.hansen's Avatar
s.p.hansen s.p.hansen is offline
Urban Planning Proselyte
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 2,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyscraperfan23 View Post
If any of you think the so-called stimulus bill has worked need to get their a** checked.
this is why nobama is better than the incompetent bush.
Interesting, I assume this will be part of your dissertation on colon cancer's effects in diminishing stimulus funds. I look forward to reading about it in a scholarly journal.

As much as we enjoy watching you learn how to communicate, do you think you could somehow tie this back into High Speed Rail in California?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #778  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2011, 11:38 PM
bmfarley's Avatar
bmfarley bmfarley is offline
Long-Time Californian
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: California; All Over
Posts: 1,302
I am thinking this site is not being moderated.
__________________
- Think Big, Go Big. Think small, stay small.
- Don't get sucked into a rabbit's hole.
- Freeways build sprawl. Transit builds cities.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #779  
Old Posted Nov 7, 2011, 2:21 AM
LosAngelesSportsFan's Avatar
LosAngelesSportsFan LosAngelesSportsFan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,862
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyscraperfan23 View Post
If any of you think the so-called stimulus bill has worked need to get their a** checked.
this is why nobama is better than the incompetent bush.
you really have zero idea what you are talking about, but ill stop there. lets get back on track.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #780  
Old Posted Nov 7, 2011, 3:03 PM
dimondpark's Avatar
dimondpark dimondpark is offline
Pay it Forward
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Piedmont, California
Posts: 6,913
Wait a sec, that $98 Billion is just for the first phase?

And why is it that China can build things in a few years but the first phase of the CAHSR wont be done till 2033-at the earliest? By then won't the technology be totally outdated?

Quote:
San Diego, Sacramento left out of rail system
By ELLIOT SPAGAT Associated Press
Updated: 11/01/2011 06:05:22 PM PDT

SAN DIEGO—The $98 billion price tag of the first phase of California's high-speed rail system would not be enough to link two key cities—San Diego and Sacramento—to the line.

The initial phase of California's proposed high-speed rail system would stretch from San Francisco to Anaheim, a plan that was put before voters in 2008, when they approved $9 billion in bond funding.

Connections to Sacramento, which draws lobbyists, interest groups and others from throughout the state, and San Diego, California's second most-populous city, are included in a second phase of the planned high-speed rail system.

Just when those connections might be made is anyone's guess. If approved by the Legislature, the first phase would not be completed until 2033, at the earliest.

The situation left some officials in San Diego seething on Tuesday, when the rail system's business plan was released.

The city has 1.3 million people and is a major tourism destination. Interstate 5 is choked daily with motorists going back and forth to Orange County and the Los Angeles area.

"It's like saying you're not going to be part of the state, the second-largest county in the state," San Diego County Supervisor Ron Roberts said...

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_19242344
__________________

"Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference."-Robert Frost
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 8:59 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.