Do You Support Federal Funding For California's High-Speed Rail?

[ConservaDerrps]

Of course not, federal tax dollars should only be used to fund projects in YOUR state.

Republican governors had the opportunity to take federal funding for high speed rail but they turned it down, MORON.

They turned down the funding because they were responsible governers who knew better, and not idiots who want to be popular to the point of the nations destruction amongst the crowds.

They turned down the funding because they're ideologues with no practical common sense clinging desperately to a decades old model of transportation.

100% accurate and on-point. They'll have NO argument for this, so just get ready for more insults.

 

[freedombecki]

Poor short-sighted Conservatives. Always standing in the way of Progress. Always making it so easy for history to look back and laugh and point.

All the Democrats in California who have been working for years to get high speed rail yet still voted against this are short sighted conservatives standing in the way of progress?

Personally, I think you have your head up your ass.

Sometimes a no vote = tough love.

The sweet & cute little Libbies need a lot of it.

 

[The T]

Poor short-sighted Conservatives. Always standing in the way of Progress. Always making it so easy for history to look back and laugh and point.

All the Democrats in California who have been working for years to get high speed rail yet still voted against this are short sighted conservatives standing in the way of progress?

Personally, I think you have your head up your ass.

Sometimes a no vote = tough love.

The sweet & cute little Libbies need a lot of it.

Sometimes they need a swift kick in the ass to wake them up to Realville.

 

[flacaltenn]

There are plenty of public transportation schemes that have utterly failed to pay for themselves. Of course, the term "massive dividends in the long run" probably does not mean "is not funded by the taxpayer for its entire existence". For progressives, if he government does it, it's worth the cost....

Oh...I see, so you don't think we have an obligation to keep our infrastructure solid, in good repair and functioning? I see.

So who's going to pay for the roads? The ports? The data networks backbones? The private sector right? The same people who don't want to pay for it in their taxes will magically want to pay for it out of their own pockets?

What's that you say? Private enterprise can do it? Oh that's a great idea, make interstate commerce's success tied to the whims of a corporate conglomeration that could decide that regular maintenance is just too expensive.

This, once again, shows the utter shortsightedness of you people.

A bullet train has nothing to do with our current infrastructure, and in fact it may just make some vital infrastructure repairs get put on hold, then what?

In fact -- the money wouldn't exist from the Feds unless it was jammed into a "Stimulus to Nowhere". When they run out of money to complete it -- how is it gonna get paid for?

Out of the bankrupt General Fund.. There's NO revenue stream back to the states or Feds from this project. Unless you wave your hands and declare it will ENHANCE trade and commerce. By 2030 when the trains are running, it's gonna look pretty silly to have a High Speed rail to Gilroy. Because they'll have no money to pay for the fuel..

 

[hjmick]

Oh...I see, so you don't think we have an obligation to keep our infrastructure solid, in good repair and functioning? I see.

So who's going to pay for the roads? The ports? The data networks backbones? The private sector right? The same people who don't want to pay for it in their taxes will magically want to pay for it out of their own pockets?

What's that you say? Private enterprise can do it? Oh that's a great idea, make interstate commerce's success tied to the whims of a corporate conglomeration that could decide that regular maintenance is just too expensive.

This, once again, shows the utter shortsightedness of you people.

A bullet train has nothing to do with our current infrastructure, and in fact it may just make some vital infrastructure repairs get put on hold, then what?

In fact -- the money wouldn't exist from the Feds unless it was jammed into a "Stimulus to Nowhere". When they run out of money to complete it -- how is it gonna get paid for?

Out of the bankrupt General Fund.. There's NO revenue stream back to the states or Feds from this project. Unless you wave your hands and declare it will ENHANCE trade and commerce. By 2030 when the trains are running, it's gonna look pretty silly to have a High Speed rail to Gilroy. Because they'll have no money to pay for the fuel..

But you could get to the Garlic Festival much more quickly...

 

[Too Tall]

Conservaderrps has watched field of dreams too many times. She thinks that if you just build it (regardless of the cost and who is footing the bill) they will come (in large enough numbers to pay for the construction and upkeep). What a dope.

Can you point to ONE time in history that spending on infrastructure hasn't paid MASSIVE dividends in the long run?

Even with sales tax subsidies the Atlanta rapid transit system can't even break even.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

With service cuts going into effect Saturday, MARTA riders -- and their employers -- must come to terms with significant changes in routes and schedules.

-- Many MARTA bus stops -- 2,700 of 11,500 -- are plastered with notices that they will soon serve no buses.

-- Passengers who ride the train before 6 a.m. on weekends have done that for the last time, according to MARTA.

-- Customer service offices, bathrooms, information booths, lost and found and a host of other services on Friday are seeing their last day of longer hours.

Across the metro area, people who depend on MARTA are bracing, as the agency lifts the knife on 10 percent of bus service and 14 percent of rail service. Pass fare increases and the final phase-out of tokens happen at the beginning of October. Of MARTA's 142,000 daily passengers, the agency estimates 14 percent won't be in easy walking distance anymore.

MARTA officials say they don’t have a choice either, as sales tax revenues from Fulton and DeKalb counties that fund much of the agency’s operations have declined. Even with the cuts MARTA is making to address an estimated $109 million deficit, it will still come up $69 million short, and have to pull that from reserves. It projects its reserves will run dry in the fiscal year 2013.

 

[flacaltenn]

www.bizjournals.com/.../amtrak-ridership-up-on-some-california.htm

Coast Starlight trains, which run a long haul route between Los Angeles and Seattle, stopping at Oakland’s station in Jack London Square, saw ridership jump 5.7 percent to 203,845.

I'll give you 1.0 Million riders -- more than 4 times that number.. Assume a $150 buck deal. Give you 10% pure profit (hahahahahahah). That's 15Million a year cleared (in your dreams).

How many years to pay back $60Bill? Sounds like 4000 years doesn't it?? WITHOUT INTEREST.

KnumbKnuts...

 

[flacaltenn]

A bullet train has nothing to do with our current infrastructure, and in fact it may just make some vital infrastructure repairs get put on hold, then what?

In fact -- the money wouldn't exist from the Feds unless it was jammed into a "Stimulus to Nowhere". When they run out of money to complete it -- how is it gonna get paid for?

Out of the bankrupt General Fund.. There's NO revenue stream back to the states or Feds from this project. Unless you wave your hands and declare it will ENHANCE trade and commerce. By 2030 when the trains are running, it's gonna look pretty silly to have a High Speed rail to Gilroy. Because they'll have no money to pay for the fuel..

But you could get to the Garlic Festival much more quickly...

HA! I've taken the train back from the Garlic Festival.. Trust me -- you don't want to be on a crammed train with 100 people who have feasted on Garlic all day.. (Unless you're Italian)

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Conservaderrps has watched field of dreams too many times. She thinks that if you just build it (regardless of the cost and who is footing the bill) they will come (in large enough numbers to pay for the construction and upkeep). What a dope.

Can you point to ONE time in history that spending on infrastructure hasn't paid MASSIVE dividends in the long run?

LACMTA, Dallas Area Rapid Transit Light Rail, BART, wait, you wanted only one, didn't you?

For the record, bullet trains are not infrastructure. Rail lines are infrastructure if they carry freight, but a line devoted exclusively to a single company that runs a few trains on it is corporate welfare.

 

[flacaltenn]

Conservaderrps has watched field of dreams too many times. She thinks that if you just build it (regardless of the cost and who is footing the bill) they will come (in large enough numbers to pay for the construction and upkeep). What a dope.

Can you point to ONE time in history that spending on infrastructure hasn't paid MASSIVE dividends in the long run?

LACMTA, Dallas Area Rapid Transit Light Rail, BART, wait, you wanted only one, didn't you?

For the record, bullet trains are not infrastructure. Rail lines are infrastructure if they carry freight, but a line devoted exclusively to a single company that runs a few trains on it is corporate welfare.

Whoa QW.. Careful there with the corporate welfare guilt trip.. You KNOW that the leftists consider the entire Interstate Highway system as a SUBSIDY to BIG OIL.. Damn convienient to be praising infrastructure one day and calling it a bastard tomorrow.. How many times have they tried to shove that list of oil "subsidies" in our face?

 

[flacaltenn]

Conservaderrps has watched field of dreams too many times. She thinks that if you just build it (regardless of the cost and who is footing the bill) they will come (in large enough numbers to pay for the construction and upkeep). What a dope.

Can you point to ONE time in history that spending on infrastructure hasn't paid MASSIVE dividends in the long run?

LACMTA, Dallas Area Rapid Transit Light Rail, BART, wait, you wanted only one, didn't you?

For the record, bullet trains are not infrastructure. Rail lines are infrastructure if they carry freight, but a line devoted exclusively to a single company that runs a few trains on it is corporate welfare.

Add San Jose Light Rail to that list. Might as well be transporting gerbils in that thing..

 

[freedombecki]

All the Democrats in California who have been working for years to get high speed rail yet still voted against this are short sighted conservatives standing in the way of progress?

Personally, I think you have your head up your ass.

Sometimes a no vote = tough love.

The sweet & cute little Libbies need a lot of it.

Sometimes they need a swift kick in the ass to wake them up to Realville.

"Abuse!?"

I can't tell you how you made my day.

 

[Steelplate]

Poor short-sighted Conservatives. Always standing in the way of Progress. Always making it so easy for history to look back and laugh and point.

Blind partisanship makes you look so stupid.

Oh yeah....and the Conservative extremism that the right portrays makes you guys look like real Einsteins.

 

[hortysir]

Not any more than I supported the same bullshit here in Florida

not at all

 

[Steelplate]

I totally support this project. It's the kind of thing we should be doing on a national level. We're looking at least 4000 new jobs being created. I thought Republicans loved jobs being created? No?

http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/assets/0/152/159/0150b8aa-a61b-4aeb-9c18-6223d8fe429f.pdf

Yeah overpaid union jobs..

If California wants a high speed rail then they can fund it themselves....

How does any of this shit benefit taxpayers in other states, yet they're footing the bill.

Furthermore your argument is stupid considering California could ask for federal taxpayer money to buy everyone in California a Chevy Volt then say "well it will create jobs."

Sure it will create jobs but at what expense????

You wouldn't pay 10 dollars for a loaf of bread would you?? so why the fuck should we as a nation fund a 70 billion dollar program that only helps one state???

I love the way you threw the union thing in. You guys just won't be fucking satisfied until every working person in America is dirt poor and living in shacks....more money in the pockets of the "job creators"....because NO ONE deserves a decent life if you work for someone else. Only businessmen should be allowed that privilege.

 

[Pho_King]

I totally support this project. It's the kind of thing we should be doing on a national level. We're looking at least 4000 new jobs being created. I thought Republicans loved jobs being created? No?

http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/assets/0/152/159/0150b8aa-a61b-4aeb-9c18-6223d8fe429f.pdf

Yeah overpaid union jobs..

If California wants a high speed rail then they can fund it themselves....

How does any of this shit benefit taxpayers in other states, yet they're footing the bill.

Furthermore your argument is stupid considering California could ask for federal taxpayer money to buy everyone in California a Chevy Volt then say "well it will create jobs."

Sure it will create jobs but at what expense????

You wouldn't pay 10 dollars for a loaf of bread would you?? so why the fuck should we as a nation fund a 70 billion dollar program that only helps one state???

I love the way you threw the union thing in. You guys just won't be fucking satisfied until every working person in America is dirt poor and living in shacks....more money in the pockets of the "job creators"....because NO ONE deserves a decent life if you work for someone else. Only businessmen should be allowed that privilege.

Millions upon millions of non-union workers make great livings. Without gouging taxpayers and sending entire municipalities into bankruptcy.

 

[Pho_King]

Can you point to ONE time in history that spending on infrastructure hasn't paid MASSIVE dividends in the long run?

There are plenty of public transportation schemes that have utterly failed to pay for themselves. Of course, the term "massive dividends in the long run" probably does not mean "is not funded by the taxpayer for its entire existence". For progressives, if he government does it, it's worth the cost....

Oh...I see, so you don't think we have an obligation to keep our infrastructure solid, in good repair and functioning? I see.

So who's going to pay for the roads? The ports? The data networks backbones? The private sector right? The same people who don't want to pay for it in their taxes will magically want to pay for it out of their own pockets?

What's that you say? Private enterprise can do it? Oh that's a great idea, make interstate commerce's success tied to the whims of a corporate conglomeration that could decide that regular maintenance is just too expensive.

This, once again, shows the utter shortsightedness of you people.

. What it shows is how incapable you are of staying on topic.

 

[Steelplate]

$17,000 a living wage? In California?

In all fairness, my original math was wrong. I used 68 million in stead of 68 BILLION. That would work out to 17 million per job.
When you consider the cost of property for the right of way will be in the billions, rolling stock, more billions, material for the rail bed more billions, California will be very lucky to have 68 million left to pay 4000 workers 17 grand a year.

And in what universe does a typical union employee make 17,000 a year?

More like 50-70k a year....

When progressives pull their heads out their asses and do the math they'll start discussing eminent domain - either that or beg for more federal funding...

Seriously, you're a fucking douchebag. You have not a fucking clue what a typical union employee makes. Do they pay better than the private sector? Perhaps...but when you are talking the 50-70k range, you are talking about professionals.....my wife is an RN with 25 years of experience....and she right smack dab in the middle of that range.

And don't give me the "average" of public employees....that whole thing pisses me off too. They take the salaries from the governor on down to the janitor making $10/hr and come up with some ridiculous number and make it seem that all public SERVANTS make that artificially inflated wage.

That would be lik adding all the executive pay of wal-mart and lumping it in with "Carrie Cashier" and saying that walmart employees are making 50k+.

 

[flacaltenn]

See the problem here is that the progressive left have their little revolution going and they are TRYING to channel FDR with the WPA and all that glorious crap that COULDN'T be done today with massive regulations and OSHA. So you look at the Hoover Dam and say (like Rachael Maddow in those funny MSNBC commercials) -- "why can't we do this today? " After all the Hoover Dam turned out to be a great investment didn't it?

Largely because you couldn't have bands of desparate migrant workers, thousands of miles from home, sitting on a Sierra Pass in the wintertime trying to build a train tunnel. How romantic was that? The EPA, OSHA, and DofLabor would crap their pants.

Also the example I gave above of a 4000 year PAYBACK on this Cali train -- IF it ran a decent profit --- is WHY this boondoogle is NOT like the Hoover Dam..

You want projects? Complete Yucca Mtn. Make it better. Get a jump on recycling TONS of batteries that are gonna come off of Electric Vehicles. Link Hydrogen production to solar and wind.. ALL -- very GREEN projects that would stand the test of time.. Nothing Green or timely about a train to nowhere.

 

[Desperado]

They ought to be building it from L.A. to Las Vegas...

Now there is a thought. That might even be a profitable venture.
Gov. Scott in Florida nixed a similar proposed rail system because it would not be profitable in the foreseeable future.
Great move on his part.