Calif Train to Nowhere Cost At $77B and

[Thinker101]

God is the Judge, not You. Don't whine about Taxes.

Don't tell me what to do, God is Judge not you, also you judge rightwingers, God is Judge not you. Try practicing what you preach lazy.

Let everyone do what they want and God will judge them!

Then quit asking others to pay for your life choices and let them be.

Capitalism has a Natural rate of unemployment, not me. It is public policy and Institutional.

Sorry bud, I don't believe we should pay for lazy people, if you don't want to work, why should you want to steal from others who work hard?

Or illegal people.

 

[Thinker101]

Government interference does not lower cost or make anything better. Their job is not to design anything to be cost effective, their job is to spend whatever amount they deem necessary to complete a job and they don't care if the cost goes over budget or exceeds the time to complete. If Californians are stupid enough to let their state waste money, more power to them, they are stupid people.

Planning matters. Comprehensive State planning matters even more.

No doubt, and we've seen how well California plans for fires....dumbass.

We had a drought which made prescription burns more high risk.

We had a drought? WTF, we've had a drought for the last 10 years.

That is my thoughts, California goes through this every couple of years and hasn't learned a damn thing about managing or planning fires. Another thing that government has been negligent on.

Don't we do this every year? Seasons in CA are fire season followed by mud slide season.

 

[danielpalos]

Rich guys wanting to do something with their gold, is what got us into this mess.

A State Corps of Engineers would be engineering more optimum solutions and lowering our cost.

Government interference does not lower cost or make anything better. Their job is not to design anything to be cost effective, their job is to spend whatever amount they deem necessary to complete a job and they don't care if the cost goes over budget or exceeds the time to complete. If Californians are stupid enough to let their state waste money, more power to them, they are stupid people.

Planning matters. Comprehensive State planning matters even more.

No doubt, and we've seen how well California plans for fires....dumbass.

We had a drought which made prescription burns more high risk.

We had a drought? WTF, we've had a drought for the last 10 years.

we have rain, now.

 

[danielpalos]

God is the Judge, not You. Don't whine about Taxes.

Don't tell me what to do, God is Judge not you, also you judge rightwingers, God is Judge not you. Try practicing what you preach lazy.

Let everyone do what they want and God will judge them!

Then quit asking others to pay for your life choices and let them be.

Capitalism has a Natural rate of unemployment, not me. It is public policy and Institutional.

Sorry bud, I don't believe we should pay for lazy people, if you don't want to work, why should you want to steal from others who work hard?

so what; your alleged morals are of no concern. we have a First Amendment. The law is the law. Only illegals are illegal to the law.

 

[Thinker101]

Government interference does not lower cost or make anything better. Their job is not to design anything to be cost effective, their job is to spend whatever amount they deem necessary to complete a job and they don't care if the cost goes over budget or exceeds the time to complete. If Californians are stupid enough to let their state waste money, more power to them, they are stupid people.

Planning matters. Comprehensive State planning matters even more.

No doubt, and we've seen how well California plans for fires....dumbass.

We had a drought which made prescription burns more high risk.

We had a drought? WTF, we've had a drought for the last 10 years.

we have rain, now.

That is good news, although those in the burn areas can now fill sand bags.

 

[Papageorgio]

Don't tell me what to do, God is Judge not you, also you judge rightwingers, God is Judge not you. Try practicing what you preach lazy.

Let everyone do what they want and God will judge them!

Then quit asking others to pay for your life choices and let them be.

Capitalism has a Natural rate of unemployment, not me. It is public policy and Institutional.

Sorry bud, I don't believe we should pay for lazy people, if you don't want to work, why should you want to steal from others who work hard?

so what; your alleged morals are of no concern. we have a First Amendment. The law is the law. Only illegals are illegal to the law.

So then why did YOU bring God into the conversation? You can speak all you like and I can oppose your opinions, that is the First Amendment in action. The First Amendment doesn't give the lazy people, such as yourself the right not to work and get paid for it.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Government interference does not lower cost or make anything better. Their job is not to design anything to be cost effective, their job is to spend whatever amount they deem necessary to complete a job and they don't care if the cost goes over budget or exceeds the time to complete. If Californians are stupid enough to let their state waste money, more power to them, they are stupid people.

Planning matters. Comprehensive State planning matters even more.

No doubt, and we've seen how well California plans for fires....dumbass.

We had a drought which made prescription burns more high risk.

We had a drought? WTF, we've had a drought for the last 10 years.

we have rain, now.

308 of these bad boys could have been bombing away.
But Democrats said no.

 

[danielpalos]

Planning matters. Comprehensive State planning matters even more.

No doubt, and we've seen how well California plans for fires....dumbass.

We had a drought which made prescription burns more high risk.

We had a drought? WTF, we've had a drought for the last 10 years.

we have rain, now.

That is good news, although those in the burn areas can now fill sand bags.

We have a Second Amendment and should have no security problems in our free States.

 

[Thinker101]

No doubt, and we've seen how well California plans for fires....dumbass.

We had a drought which made prescription burns more high risk.

We had a drought? WTF, we've had a drought for the last 10 years.

we have rain, now.

That is good news, although those in the burn areas can now fill sand bags.

We have a Second Amendment and should have no security problems in our free States.

….dumbass.

 

[danielpalos]

Let everyone do what they want and God will judge them!

Then quit asking others to pay for your life choices and let them be.

Capitalism has a Natural rate of unemployment, not me. It is public policy and Institutional.

Sorry bud, I don't believe we should pay for lazy people, if you don't want to work, why should you want to steal from others who work hard?

so what; your alleged morals are of no concern. we have a First Amendment. The law is the law. Only illegals are illegal to the law.

So then why did YOU bring God into the conversation? You can speak all you like and I can oppose your opinions, that is the First Amendment in action. The First Amendment doesn't give the lazy people, such as yourself the right not to work and get paid for it.

it isn't a First Amendment issue unless you are going to claim some sort of, subjective value of morals, imperative.

The law is, employment at the will of either party. Equal protection of the law is what it is about.

 

[Papageorgio]

Then quit asking others to pay for your life choices and let them be.

Capitalism has a Natural rate of unemployment, not me. It is public policy and Institutional.

Sorry bud, I don't believe we should pay for lazy people, if you don't want to work, why should you want to steal from others who work hard?

so what; your alleged morals are of no concern. we have a First Amendment. The law is the law. Only illegals are illegal to the law.

So then why did YOU bring God into the conversation? You can speak all you like and I can oppose your opinions, that is the First Amendment in action. The First Amendment doesn't give the lazy people, such as yourself the right not to work and get paid for it.

it isn't a First Amendment issue unless you are going to claim some sort of, subjective value of morals, imperative.

The law is, employment at the will of either party. Equal protection of the law is what it is about.

You brought up the First Amendment, not I. You brought up God also. If it has nothing to do with your blabber, maybe you shouldn't bring it up. Protecting a person from working doesn't fall under the Constitution, the lazy people will try to steal from the industrious people, where is their protection?

 

[danielpalos]

Capitalism has a Natural rate of unemployment, not me. It is public policy and Institutional.

Sorry bud, I don't believe we should pay for lazy people, if you don't want to work, why should you want to steal from others who work hard?

so what; your alleged morals are of no concern. we have a First Amendment. The law is the law. Only illegals are illegal to the law.

So then why did YOU bring God into the conversation? You can speak all you like and I can oppose your opinions, that is the First Amendment in action. The First Amendment doesn't give the lazy people, such as yourself the right not to work and get paid for it.

it isn't a First Amendment issue unless you are going to claim some sort of, subjective value of morals, imperative.

The law is, employment at the will of either party. Equal protection of the law is what it is about.

You brought up the First Amendment, not I. You brought up God also. If it has nothing to do with your blabber, maybe you shouldn't bring it up. Protecting a person from working doesn't fall under the Constitution, the lazy people will try to steal from the industrious people, where is their protection?

The law is, employment at the will of either party. Equal protection of the law is what it is about.

We are merely discussing an economic concept for solving simple poverty due to capitalism's natural rate of unemployment.

 

[Papageorgio]

Sorry bud, I don't believe we should pay for lazy people, if you don't want to work, why should you want to steal from others who work hard?

so what; your alleged morals are of no concern. we have a First Amendment. The law is the law. Only illegals are illegal to the law.

So then why did YOU bring God into the conversation? You can speak all you like and I can oppose your opinions, that is the First Amendment in action. The First Amendment doesn't give the lazy people, such as yourself the right not to work and get paid for it.

it isn't a First Amendment issue unless you are going to claim some sort of, subjective value of morals, imperative.

The law is, employment at the will of either party. Equal protection of the law is what it is about.

You brought up the First Amendment, not I. You brought up God also. If it has nothing to do with your blabber, maybe you shouldn't bring it up. Protecting a person from working doesn't fall under the Constitution, the lazy people will try to steal from the industrious people, where is their protection?

The law is, employment at the will of either party. Equal protection of the law is what it is about.

We are merely discussing an economic concept for solving simple poverty due to capitalism's natural rate of unemployment.

Sorry, there is no law, "at will" means that you can quit or be let go with no recourse. It does not mean equal protection, the employer and employee don't need protection in an at will employment.

 

[Polishprince]

High speed rail is the future, no wonder the Reactionaries seek to regress .

No, rail and train travel is the past.

Just like street cars.

The reason why is clear if you think.

Railroads have fixed routes and fixed stations. They don't allow for easy flexibility as the world changes. If new employers and new destinations become popular and old ones lose their cachet, new tracks have to be laid and old ones picked back up.

Further, when trains break down, it backs up all of the trains behind them on the same track.


Both buses and airplanes offer a lot more flexibility and usefulness for travelers. Its a lot easier to start serving new destinations.

 

[danielpalos]

so what; your alleged morals are of no concern. we have a First Amendment. The law is the law. Only illegals are illegal to the law.

So then why did YOU bring God into the conversation? You can speak all you like and I can oppose your opinions, that is the First Amendment in action. The First Amendment doesn't give the lazy people, such as yourself the right not to work and get paid for it.

it isn't a First Amendment issue unless you are going to claim some sort of, subjective value of morals, imperative.

The law is, employment at the will of either party. Equal protection of the law is what it is about.

You brought up the First Amendment, not I. You brought up God also. If it has nothing to do with your blabber, maybe you shouldn't bring it up. Protecting a person from working doesn't fall under the Constitution, the lazy people will try to steal from the industrious people, where is their protection?

The law is, employment at the will of either party. Equal protection of the law is what it is about.

We are merely discussing an economic concept for solving simple poverty due to capitalism's natural rate of unemployment.

Sorry, there is no law, "at will" means that you can quit or be let go with no recourse. It does not mean equal protection, the employer and employee don't need protection in an at will employment.

The law really is employment at the will of either party, not just for unemployment compensation purposes.

A federal doctrine supports my position and gainsays Your position.

 

[Papageorgio]

So then why did YOU bring God into the conversation? You can speak all you like and I can oppose your opinions, that is the First Amendment in action. The First Amendment doesn't give the lazy people, such as yourself the right not to work and get paid for it.

it isn't a First Amendment issue unless you are going to claim some sort of, subjective value of morals, imperative.

The law is, employment at the will of either party. Equal protection of the law is what it is about.

You brought up the First Amendment, not I. You brought up God also. If it has nothing to do with your blabber, maybe you shouldn't bring it up. Protecting a person from working doesn't fall under the Constitution, the lazy people will try to steal from the industrious people, where is their protection?

The law is, employment at the will of either party. Equal protection of the law is what it is about.

We are merely discussing an economic concept for solving simple poverty due to capitalism's natural rate of unemployment.

Sorry, there is no law, "at will" means that you can quit or be let go with no recourse. It does not mean equal protection, the employer and employee don't need protection in an at will employment.

The law really is employment at the will of either party, not just for unemployment compensation purposes.

A federal doctrine supports my position and gainsays Your position.

No it doesn't otherwise you would have your idea already passed and it will never pass, as taxing the working people so others can chose to stay at home is ethically wrong.

 

[Leo123]

Frankly we up here in Far No. CA. don't want a direct pipeline spewing LA lefties into our pristine environment. Let them keep busy building rat-tunnels between themselves.

 

[danielpalos]

it isn't a First Amendment issue unless you are going to claim some sort of, subjective value of morals, imperative.

The law is, employment at the will of either party. Equal protection of the law is what it is about.

You brought up the First Amendment, not I. You brought up God also. If it has nothing to do with your blabber, maybe you shouldn't bring it up. Protecting a person from working doesn't fall under the Constitution, the lazy people will try to steal from the industrious people, where is their protection?

The law is, employment at the will of either party. Equal protection of the law is what it is about.

We are merely discussing an economic concept for solving simple poverty due to capitalism's natural rate of unemployment.

Sorry, there is no law, "at will" means that you can quit or be let go with no recourse. It does not mean equal protection, the employer and employee don't need protection in an at will employment.

The law really is employment at the will of either party, not just for unemployment compensation purposes.

A federal doctrine supports my position and gainsays Your position.

No it doesn't otherwise you would have your idea already passed and it will never pass, as taxing the working people so others can chose to stay at home is ethically wrong.

we could have solved simple poverty Yesterday; the right wing doesn't like it simply Because, the Poor may benefit.

 

[Papageorgio]

You brought up the First Amendment, not I. You brought up God also. If it has nothing to do with your blabber, maybe you shouldn't bring it up. Protecting a person from working doesn't fall under the Constitution, the lazy people will try to steal from the industrious people, where is their protection?

The law is, employment at the will of either party. Equal protection of the law is what it is about.

We are merely discussing an economic concept for solving simple poverty due to capitalism's natural rate of unemployment.

Sorry, there is no law, "at will" means that you can quit or be let go with no recourse. It does not mean equal protection, the employer and employee don't need protection in an at will employment.

The law really is employment at the will of either party, not just for unemployment compensation purposes.

A federal doctrine supports my position and gainsays Your position.

No it doesn't otherwise you would have your idea already passed and it will never pass, as taxing the working people so others can chose to stay at home is ethically wrong.

we could have solved simple poverty Yesterday; the right wing doesn't like it simply Because, the Poor may benefit.

Poverty I want to solve, giving lazy people a free ride don't need any help.

 

[danielpalos]

The law is, employment at the will of either party. Equal protection of the law is what it is about.

We are merely discussing an economic concept for solving simple poverty due to capitalism's natural rate of unemployment.

Sorry, there is no law, "at will" means that you can quit or be let go with no recourse. It does not mean equal protection, the employer and employee don't need protection in an at will employment.

The law really is employment at the will of either party, not just for unemployment compensation purposes.

A federal doctrine supports my position and gainsays Your position.

No it doesn't otherwise you would have your idea already passed and it will never pass, as taxing the working people so others can chose to stay at home is ethically wrong.

we could have solved simple poverty Yesterday; the right wing doesn't like it simply Because, the Poor may benefit.

Poverty I want to solve, giving lazy people a free ride don't need any help.

Simply paying people to be market friendly and Good, produces a positive multiplier and profit for capitalists.
that should be worth it under any form of capitalism.