HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Aug 22, 2014, 9:52 PM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Triptastic Gen X Snoozer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 22,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
If CAHSR were to be cancelled, the fact is that $70 billion could be redirected to other uses. Not directly through the same allocation, but it could be done. The money doesn't "evaporate".
Either you're clueless, or you know that's not how bonds work--but you want to demagogue the issue anyway. Either way, total bullshit. The funding evaporates if it isn't spent on CAHSR.
__________________
"You need both a public and a private position." --Hillary Clinton, speaking behind closed doors to the National Multi-Family Housing Council, 2013
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Aug 22, 2014, 10:46 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by fflint View Post
Either you're clueless, or you know that's not how bonds work--but you want to demagogue the issue anyway. Either way, total bullshit. The funding evaporates if it isn't spent on CAHSR.
No, nothing "evaporates". I never claimed the bond itself can be redirected, but the money obviously can.

The $70 billion doesn't come from the train fairy. If the bond is cancelled, than Californians will have $70 billion to use on whatever else.

If Californians think this is the best use of their money, then fine, but it's obviously funding that could be used for any other need.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Aug 22, 2014, 11:35 PM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Triptastic Gen X Snoozer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 22,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
The $70 billion doesn't come from the train fairy. If the bond is cancelled, than Californians will have $70 billion to use on whatever else.
Again, you are wrong. The money was raised when California voters approved a ballot measure authorizing raising bonds for CAHSR, and because of that, state officials were able to win federal funds (matching, specific transporation programs, one-off stimulus funding). If CAHSR doesn't get built, the bonds and federal funds all get cancelled. All $70B goes back into the ether from whence it came.

Can the people of California again go to the ballot box during a regularly-scheduled election and authorize the state to raise bonds for a particular use, and upon passage of such a proposition can state officials then apply for whatever existing federal funds might be available for such purposes? Sure. But that electoral reality is in no way the same thing as the declaration "cancellation of the bonds means Californians will have $70B to use on whatever else."
__________________
"You need both a public and a private position." --Hillary Clinton, speaking behind closed doors to the National Multi-Family Housing Council, 2013
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Aug 23, 2014, 3:27 PM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Quebec
Posts: 42,021
Quote:
Originally Posted by fflint View Post
All $70B goes back into the ether from whence it came.
That "ether" being, obviously, Californians' and Americans' pockets.

I think that "doesn't get used" is more appropriate wording than "evaporates".
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Aug 23, 2014, 5:33 PM
Leo the Dog Leo the Dog is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The Lower-48
Posts: 4,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by fflint View Post
Let's be clear--if this dedicated money earmarked for CAHSR isn't used for CAHSR, it evaporates. All the idle talk about how this money could fund a whole bunch of other things is pie-in-the-sky dreaming. It cannot legally be used for water treatment, or freeways, or airports, or anything else.

The propaganda piece at the top of this thread was written by a former Chairman of the California Republican Party. Its purpose is to advance the interests of the Republican Party's donors and hacks, at the expense of everyone and everything else. It's not even nominally a "city discussion"--why is it in City Discussions, anyway?
The article was in Forbes. Many articles posted on SSP are from the left/right. That's how our media operates.

It was in the city discussions forum because HSR is being built largely because of two major cities: LA and Bay Area.

Not sure why a mod moved it?? Maybe they could move it back as it seemed like it was a popular discussion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Aug 24, 2014, 1:32 AM
ocman ocman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Burlingame
Posts: 2,687
Quote:
Originally Posted by mello View Post
Can you provide some links that verify that 20 percent figure OCman? That seems very high for only half a billion. Why aren't other municipalities all over the state jumping on that if it is so efficient? So none of that water crosses the county lines of Riverside or LA? Once you hit LB it gets cut off lol

"Operational since January 2008, this state-of-the-art water purification project can produce up to 70 million gallons (265,000 cubic meters) of high-quality water every day. This is enough water to meet the needs of nearly 600,000 residents in north and central Orange County, California."

600,000 residents every day in a population of 3 million is 20%. In 2015 it's going to be 33% with a $140 million expansion. It's not too good to be believed. It's a perfect model execution of this type of system which is why this specific project is getting awards and coverage around the world left and right. But for the rest of California, it's still about the "toilet to tap" fears.

http://www.gwrsystem.com/index.php?o...&id=1&Itemid=2
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted May 21, 2015, 11:42 PM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sacramento California
Posts: 2,270
Consider the source of the article that started this thread. If you understand Thomas Del Beccaro's angle, then depending on your worldview, you'll either agree or disagree with his analysis/premise. Regardless he is not in anyway objective.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:22 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.