Calif High Speed Rail project derailed

[Political Junky]

It's about a shitty business decision.

Yes - it might be.

But, we haven't seen any evidence of that posted here yet.

Dood. It's government. Specifically, it's CALIFORNIA government.

California government is notorious for gathering money in big piles, setting it on fire, and dancing naked around it.

Good news, California: Surplus is $2.4 billion - SFGate

Sacramento --

For the first time in nearly a decade, California is collecting more revenue than it is spending and will finish the fiscal year with an extra $2.4 billion, according to a report released Wednesday by the Legislature's nonpartisan budget analyst.

 

[WillReadmore]

It's about a shitty business decision.

Yes - it might be.

But, we haven't seen any evidence of that posted here yet.

Dood. It's government. Specifically, it's CALIFORNIA government.

California government is notorious for gathering money in big piles, setting it on fire, and dancing naked around it.

That's not an excuse for basing the decision on anything besides sound business principles concerning how government SHOULD invest in America.

 

[daveman]

Yes - it might be.

But, we haven't seen any evidence of that posted here yet.

Dood. It's government. Specifically, it's CALIFORNIA government.

California government is notorious for gathering money in big piles, setting it on fire, and dancing naked around it.

Good news, California: Surplus is $2.4 billion - SFGate

Sacramento --

For the first time in nearly a decade, California is collecting more revenue than it is spending and will finish the fiscal year with an extra $2.4 billion, according to a report released Wednesday by the Legislature's nonpartisan budget analyst.

Left something out.

California UnFunded Pension Liability Now $640,000,000,000?Using Accurate Numbers for First Time

This January, for the first time, CalPERS is being forced to give an honest accounting of it books. Thanks to State Budget Solutions, we now know that CalPERS will report an unfunded liability of $640,000,000 ($640 BILLION). It is funded at a rate of 42%. If in the private sector, government would close it down and start a criminal investigation. See here: Promises Made, Promises Broken - The Betrayal of Pensioners and Taxpayers > Publications > State Budget Solutions

Wonder how bad CalSTRS is, they “admit” to an unsustainable $74 billion—do we have to wait till January to get the truth from this government agency?

““With their rejection of an unsatisfactory approach to calculating public pension liabilities, GASB and Moody’s have joined a chorus of financial economists and other observers warning that pension funding practices are dangerous for both taxpayers and public employees alike,” the report said.”​

CA needs to make sure they have money to pay for their employees' pensions before they start playing with trains.

 

[daveman]

Yes - it might be.

But, we haven't seen any evidence of that posted here yet.

Dood. It's government. Specifically, it's CALIFORNIA government.

California government is notorious for gathering money in big piles, setting it on fire, and dancing naked around it.

That's not an excuse for basing the decision on anything besides sound business principles concerning how government SHOULD invest in America.

Ahhh, that's right -- results are meaningless. All that matters are intentions.

That's what got CA $639 billion and the Federal government $14 trillion in the hole. Continuing to do what got us that far in the hole will not get us out.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Yeah, like Mitch McConnell and his bridge. It does happen.

But, it's pretty hard to argue that the federal government should ignore the need for infrastructure that is important to the success of US businesses.

We do have the power to make things happen that otherwise simply would not happen - and thus make American business stronger.

McConnell's dam. Pay attention.

As for CA's toy train, one word for you: Amtrak. Two more words: Money pit.

There is no sane reason to expect a high-speed rail line serving only one state to turn a profit.

Amtrak has lines that run in the black. The line from here in Seattle to Portland, OR is such a line. There are also such lines in the north east.

Plus, the fast rail being designed is competitive with air travel. So, making presumptions based on weak understanding of slow rail travel is a huge mistake.


Also, CA isn't "only one state" - it's the highest GDP state in the union and has distances that are greater than the size of most other states. The fact that you can go that far and not cross a state border certainly makes no difference to the GDP of the USA.

Funny, according to Brookings the only profitable routes are in the Northeast, the Cascade line actually loses about $16 million a year.

U.S. Passenger Rail Ridership | Brookings Institution

Spin it however you want, California is still one sate, and should not be getting federal funds for a pet project of the idiots that insist that 18th century technology is the wave of the future.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I'd bet you'd be opposed to the freeway today if it was being built now.

The Intestate highway System unquestionably benefited interstate commerce, with is within the scope of the eneumerated powers of the Federal Government. This project is for the sole benefit of moving people uneconomically within the confines of a single state. It has no benefit for the people of Kentucky or Alabama or even Connecticut. It is outside of the scope of the commerce clause.

The fact that the Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways benefits interstate commerce was not enough to justify Congress spending money on it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Amtrak has lines that run in the black. The line from here in Seattle to Portland, OR is such a line. There are also such lines in the north east.

Plus, the fast rail being designed is competitive with air travel. So, making presumptions based on weak understanding of slow rail travel is a huge mistake.


Also, CA isn't "only one state" - it's the highest GDP state in the union and has distances that are greater than the size of most other states. The fact that you can go that far and not cross a state border certainly makes no difference to the GDP of the USA.

Wishful thinking is not sufficient reason to spend billions of dollars.

Amtrak is simply never going to turn a profit. Hell, they can't even make money on food.

I just posted to you that Amtrak IS making money on specific routes.

CA is talking about a specific route with known demand that they can fill a route with a business plan for that route.

Posting stuff about Amtrak in general is not an adequate rebuttal.

It does not have known demand. The proof of that is that the California High Speed Rail Authority initially predicted between 65.5 million and 117 million passengers a year by 2035, and now is predicting between 19.5 million and 31.8 million riders by the 2.35. That means that, at best, they expect less than half the ridership their business plan initially projected for them to break even at a price that was a fraction of what they now say they need.

You lose.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Apparently, the Right can't see the advantage of two hours vs fourteen hours for the same trip.

And you would be wrong. I see a great deal of advantage.

I just don't see why I have to pay for it, since I'm never going to take advantage of that advantage.

Because it will help your betters get around, so you should be happy to pay for it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

This thread isn't about our president.

It's about a business decision.

A piss poor one, like most that have come out of Washington in the last 5 years.

I can understand there being arguments along that line. The cost for the full route is certainly huge.

So far, I'm not sure what those arguments are. That is, I haven't seen the figures or the specific assumptions made by their business plan that identify this as a bogus plan.

I do believe they have a real transportation issue. If they want normal economic growth, I don't see how their transportation infrastructure is going to expand to match.

Maybe you should read more.

 

[WillReadmore]

Wishful thinking is not sufficient reason to spend billions of dollars.

Amtrak is simply never going to turn a profit. Hell, they can't even make money on food.

I just posted to you that Amtrak IS making money on specific routes.

CA is talking about a specific route with known demand that they can fill a route with a business plan for that route.

Posting stuff about Amtrak in general is not an adequate rebuttal.

It does not have known demand. The proof of that is that the California High Speed Rail Authority initially predicted between 65.5 million and 117 million passengers a year by 2035, and now is predicting between 19.5 million and 31.8 million riders by the 2.35. That means that, at best, they expect less than half the ridership their business plan initially projected for them to break even at a price that was a fraction of what they now say they need.

You lose.

No, I don't lose at all.

Getting back to discussing actual business decisions is fine by me. And, the answer may well be that the justification theyve put toether isn't sufficient.

I'm here because the total nonsense Party of "NO" nonsense of earlier posts needs to be stopped.


We had people who actually couldn't understand that business investment in a state project needs to be rebutted REGARDLESS of its business case.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Most of the history of exploration would of been seen as wasteful to you people.

Conservatives don't stand for what America is....

 

[thereisnospoon]

I can show you a bridge that was built using private funds that is still run, and maintained, by a private company.

No, the Golden Gate Bridge was built under public management funded by a giant bond measure.

One bank bought the entire bond issue, but it was bonds that they purchased, and they didn't have anything to do with the design or building of the bridge.

And, bond measures are how the public gets much of its work done.

You keep pushing the merits of government spending.
We are pushing back. We're( the general public) have grown tired of watching government blow good money on "hey look what we did!" projects.
Unless California decides to pay for their own choo choo, the project goes nowhere.
And please, stop the nonsense regarding how we should kneel at the government altar.
Because as anyone willing to do the research will discover government wastes far more on garbage than it does spend wisely.
Few people are opposed to government spending. It is the poor stewardship of taxpayer resources which creates anti government spending/expansion backlash.
Implore your Senators and House Members to learn fiscal responsibility and practice it. Then come and talk to us about $100 billion rail projects.
$50 million per mile just doesn't cut it.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Yes - it might be.

But, we haven't seen any evidence of that posted here yet.

Dood. It's government. Specifically, it's CALIFORNIA government.

California government is notorious for gathering money in big piles, setting it on fire, and dancing naked around it.

Good news, California: Surplus is $2.4 billion - SFGate

Sacramento --

For the first time in nearly a decade, California is collecting more revenue than it is spending and will finish the fiscal year with an extra $2.4 billion, according to a report released Wednesday by the Legislature's nonpartisan budget analyst.

Stop it. That's a plant story.
It's nonsense. CA has tens or even hundreds of billions in unfunded obligations.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Oh, yes, I forgot -- the left sees the Treasury as a means of paying back cronies and supporters.

Yeah, like Mitch McConnell and his bridge. It does happen.

But, it's pretty hard to argue that the federal government should ignore the need for infrastructure that is important to the success of US businesses.

We do have the power to make things happen that otherwise simply would not happen - and thus make American business stronger.

Excessive government spending with no hope of ever recouping the expense makes the private sector weaker.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I'd bet you'd be opposed to the freeway today if it was being built now.

"the freeway"? Which one?
BTW, road networks benefit many times more people than other modes of infrastructure.
Air transportation, freight rail, highways....Those are the modes on which our money should be spent. Because there is a positive return on investment.
Government should be run like a business with finite resources. Not like a charity organization which depends on the largess of the few.

 

[thereisnospoon]

You folk in Kentucky aren't reliable Democrat voters. You're on your own.

Oh, yes, I forgot -- the left sees the Treasury as a means of paying back cronies and supporters.

If that were the case, wouldn't it be more likely that Blue states would be the beneficiaries?

Yet, the fact is that blue states are net donor states while red states get more than the contribute.

non sequitur.
Start a thread on donor states then. Tired of this being brought into every discussion when one state wants the tax dollars of the other 49 to pay for something which will benefit only them.
It's whining.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Yeah, like Mitch McConnell and his bridge. It does happen.

But, it's pretty hard to argue that the federal government should ignore the need for infrastructure that is important to the success of US businesses.

We do have the power to make things happen that otherwise simply would not happen - and thus make American business stronger.

McConnell's dam. Pay attention.

As for CA's toy train, one word for you: Amtrak. Two more words: Money pit.

There is no sane reason to expect a high-speed rail line serving only one state to turn a profit.

Amtrak has lines that run in the black. The line from here in Seattle to Portland, OR is such a line. There are also such lines in the north east.

Plus, the fast rail being designed is competitive with air travel. So, making presumptions based on weak understanding of slow rail travel is a huge mistake.


Also, CA isn't "only one state" - it's the highest GDP state in the union and has distances that are greater than the size of most other states. The fact that you can go that far and not cross a state border certainly makes no difference to the GDP of the USA.

You should run for political office. You're full of shit.
For the most part Amtrak SUCKS.....it's inconvenient and slow. For example.To get from Savannah, GA to NYC is takes two trains 6-8 hours worth of layovers and 22 hours to complete the trip.
It's 3-4 hours by air at roughly the same fare as the trains. I can drive it in 12 hours and spend less than $100 on fuel.
Plus many Amtrak stations are in some of the worst crime ridden areas of cities through which is passes. The station near here is not secure. It is in a high crime neighborhood. It is poorly lit. It is not secured by fencing. Anyone at any time can access the property. Including criminals. and there are lots of them living near the station. So to avoid being robbed or shot, many people drive to other stations along the line and catch the train there. Who needs that nonsense.
Now why would I use Amtrak?
I would LOVE to use rail service to get to where I want to go.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Apparently, the Right can't see the advantage of two hours vs fourteen hours for the same trip.

Not when there is no hope of the service ever breaking even and to the benefit so few.
Here it is ....If you wan this so badly, feel free to write a check.
Then, NO subsidies. Let the users pay the entire cost of their trip.
If the cost per passenger from LA to SF is $300, then that should be the fare. Period.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Amtrak has lines that run in the black. The line from here in Seattle to Portland, OR is such a line. There are also such lines in the north east.

Plus, the fast rail being designed is competitive with air travel. So, making presumptions based on weak understanding of slow rail travel is a huge mistake.


Also, CA isn't "only one state" - it's the highest GDP state in the union and has distances that are greater than the size of most other states. The fact that you can go that far and not cross a state border certainly makes no difference to the GDP of the USA.

Wishful thinking is not sufficient reason to spend billions of dollars.

Amtrak is simply never going to turn a profit. Hell, they can't even make money on food.

I just posted to you that Amtrak IS making money on specific routes.

CA is talking about a specific route with known demand that they can fill a route with a business plan for that route.

Posting stuff about Amtrak in general is not an adequate rebuttal.

That's no excuse to pour hundreds of billions into a California only shiny new thingy.
Overall, Amtrak BLEEDS money. It should be defunded and privatized.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Who is benefiting from this project, again?

The USA.

How so?
How does some California resident getting on a train that will go 180 MPH benefit someone on Grand Rapids, Michigan or Caribou, Maine?....Or for that matter new York City
Explain that one to me.