Thinker101
Diamond Member
- Mar 25, 2017
- 24,731
- 14,961
It's not the building that California has an issue with. It's everybody in-between wanting their share. Palmdale for example.Sorry Harry , I was out there after the "World Series" quake. I saw firsthand driving from SF to LA how the infrastructure held up.thats not the point of my comment....tedub said riding a train in earthquake country is kinda dangerous......when you live around earthquakes you learn how to live with them and build better infrastructure with earthquake standards....Except Japan doesn’t spend over a billion dollars for a decade and not even have a few miles of rail running over open flat ground.japan has earthquakes and they have high speed trains...you dont stop living just because you live where earthquakes happen.....Instead of wasting billions on a high speed rail line from LA to SF, over numerous fault lines, why not build desalination plants and pump the water to rebuilt reservoirs? How would you like to ride at 200 mph on a train during a earthquake? What were they thinking? You can get flights for $49.00. They need to stay out of the sun or at least wear a hat.
Yep, by train was one of only two ways to get directly from Oakland to San Francisco after the Bay Bridge collapsed. It was a lifeline for commuters.
And still the "high speed" rail is a lifeline boondoggle for politicians.
I can't think of a better mode of transport between San Francisco and Los Angeles. Works awesome in Japan.
But I was specifically referring to BART which provided commuters a way to avoid a 4 hour daily commute while the Bay Bridge was being repaired.Except Japan actually builds railways thru mountains while California spends billions and decades behind schedule desperately trying to build a few miles of rail over flat open ground.I can't think of a better mode of transport between San Francisco and Los Angeles. Works awesome in Japan.
Great, now you're not for "fair share", or is that only on certain topics?