Quote:
Furthermore, would an airline employ this strategy? |
Quote:
|
Regardless of lease or own, you know the point I'm trying to make.
|
At least the maglev project is obtaining the FEIR and searching for funding for their WHOLE project (despite the fact that it, too, will be built in sections), while DesertXpress has considered the initial Victorville-Las Vegas leg and the Palmdale extension 2 separate projects.
|
Most Californians want bullet trains, state poll finds
Quote:
|
The rest of the article notes that this was a loaded, for-hire poll that played up the advantages of HSR before the respondents answered. It is part of an $8.5M PR campaign funded by HSR.
The opponents noted this is shockingly low for a "push poll" which is intended to give overwhelming support for a proposal. Nice to see where our HSR money is really going. |
California will ask feds for up to $1 billion for high-speed rail (SJ Mercury)
I thought there would be a high speed rail station directly at SFO, not requiring a transfer on BART, as mentioned below.
By opposing high speed rail, eMeg would rather have the state pass up this much-needed money that would create thousands of good jobs, improve mobility for CA residents, and reduce emissions. Meg Whitman can spend a $100M to try to buy the election this November but she is wrong on the issues. Hopefully voters will not be fooled. California will ask feds for up to $1 billion for high-speed rail By Mike Rosenberg San Mateo County Times Posted: 07/30/2010 10:18:02 PM PDT "The state will ask the federal government for $700 million to $1 billion to help build a California high-speed railroad, including cash for projects in the Bay Area. The California High-Speed Rail Authority said Friday the application will include funds to electrify the planned railroad from San Francisco to San Jose along the Caltrain corridor. It also requests money to build a high-speed train station in Millbrae, where passengers could transfer to BART to reach San Francisco International Airport. The application also includes projects in the Central Valley and Los Angeles. The Obama administration made $2.3 billion available in the budget this year for states to plan and construct high-speed train systems. The rail authority and Caltrans will finalize the amount of the state's request before Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger submits an application to the U.S. Department of Transportation next week... http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-...nclick_check=1 |
I'm all for the Federal government helping California build it's planned HSR network, but I'm not necessarily for California consuming half the Federal rail capital building budget every year.....
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Here's a chart showing spending from the Recovery Act: http://projects.nytimes.com/44th_president/stimulus |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Electricron, as long as we have unfinished systems, it will be considered "wasteful spending" by a certain political party.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Some pretty interesting points. A couple of comments:
The stimulus package was an almost complete waste of money. Essentially no effect since the public (quite rightly) is too scared of what the government might do next to start spending any money they earn. The biggest US companies and I have one thing in common: we are hanging on to our cash until the next election restores some fiscal rationality and a consistent economic policy. That's just about all a government needs to do. Having said that, large projects would have made even less sense since the idea of the stimulus (erroneous as it was) was to pump money into many places very quickly so as to stimulate current spending. Large localized projects don't accomplish that. Tax cuts tend to go to a mixture of reduction of debt (which is net saving) and spending. This is likely to translate in stronger long-term growth. One could argue that this was a last ditch effort to bring the US back to world competitiveness instead of encouraging spending and paying for it with debt, which certainly hurts the long-term economic welfare. |
Quote:
Leaving aside Obama vs. the Republicans, I seriously doubt you can cite a single example of tax cuts reducing debt (unless other taxes have also been raised). I also seriously doubt that U.S. companies are going to hold onto cash for years rather than make investments now soley due to an Administration. Lack of investment now has been primarily due to 1) lack of lending liquidity brought on by the collapse of the financial system brought on by excessive liquidity and a lack of oversight, all of which was brought on by BOTH Bush and Clinton policies and 2) a complete lack of certainty over if and when the economy will recover, a question that is still up in the air not because of Obama, whose policies as they are in effect currently aren't materially different from Bush's, but because of item 1) and, partly, the national debt which will REQUIRE either an increase in taxes to balance or a default (real or virtual). Of the two, a tax increase is - by far - the better choice. The debt is no more Obama's than it is Bush's or Clinton's. It is cumulative and responsiblity for it is shared by every Administration and Congress since at least Nixon. Any party that attempts to pin the responsibility on the other instead of facing the music and doing what needs to be done is appallingly irresponsible. When debt hits 120% of GDP sometime this decade, we would no only have to stop adding to it, but to "grow" out of it back to a 40% level, we would have to not add to it and grow at 5% annually for about 15 years. Could that happen? Maybe, but it's highly unlikely that we could BOTH grow that fast AND keep our hands off the deficit button, no matter which party is in power. If we also ratchet down immigration at the same time (which, at times, both sides seem to favor), the chances of that sort of growth is even lower. So quit supporting blowhards who try and blame all the evils on this administration or the last one, and start supporting people who actually support realistic policy. Which will, unfortunately, include tax hikes. |
pesto:
Quote:
As noted this morning by Fareed Zakaria in today's (Monday) Washington Post, Clinton raised taxes on the wealthiest households in the early 1990s and this was followed by a decade of very robust growth. Bush enacted massive tax cuts the last decade and we had sluggish growth, at best. Far more effective for stimulating economic growth is aid to state/local govts so they don't have to lay off employees (police, firefighters, teachers), extending assistance for the unemployed (who will spend nearly all of the assistance they receive, putting this money back into the economy, and yes, public works/infrastructure projects. |
Cities, residents voicing concerns about possible high speed route line along 10 Free
Cities, residents voicing concerns about possible high speed route line along 10 Freeway
By Dan Abendschein Staff Writer Posted: 08/04/2010 Pasadena Star-News http://extras.mnginteractive.com/liv...5-RAIl_500.jpg Rosemead council member, Sandra Armenta, center, with neighbors and a map of the affected area at Olney street and Lashbrook Ave. along the 10 Freeway corridor where commercial businesses and residential homes could be torn down due to the construction of the California High Speed Rail project on Wednesday, August 4, 2010 in Rosemead. (SGVN/Staff Photo by Keith Birmingham/SXCITY) "Some cities in the path of a proposed high speed rail line through the San Gabriel Valley are lining up against the project's potential to displace homes and businesses. Rosemead earlier this year passed a resolution opposing any route that would displace property owners, while Alhambra city officials are scheduled to meet Monday to discuss the project. Officials will consider a resolution opposing a route along surface streets. Covina City Manager Daryl Parrish said he also has concerns about the proposed routes. The San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments, meanwhile, is set to vote next Wednesday on a motion to oppose a surface route for the project. "The bottom line is that everybody needs to be informed," said Rosemead City Councilwoman Sandra Armenta, whose home is in one of the areas under consideration for the proposed route. Armenta, who has lived in her home for 32 years, said most of her neighbors no nothing about the rail project. "They are painting this picture that everybody is in support of this. But people don't even know it could affect them," she said..." http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/news/ci_15678540 |
All times are GMT. The time now is 3:08 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.