California High Speed Rail Thread

[drifting sun]

Originally Posted by pesto

Been tried: check out UK and Sweden (1950's to 1980); Soviet Union and Eastern block; most of Latin America in the 1930's to 1980). Also note France, Spain, Italy, etc., who found that govt. direction, fat social programs and needless spending and borrowing lead to bankruptcy and pretty much disappearance from economic relevancy in the world. For a different perspective, check what happened to Singapore, India and China when they only partially unravelled the regulatory restrictions and gave the free market half a chance.

If you're seriously interested, take a look at Elinor Ostrom's work (Nobel Prize winner). She takes some basic ideas from Coase and others and shows that governmental attempts to eliminate (or maximize) externalities are almost always less efficient than letting the market settle the issues. Some of her stuff is pretty hairy mathematically, but much of it is quite accessible.

I'm always interested in learning new ideas, but I suspect your Ms. Ostrom's work is very much theory driven, with little real-world evidence to support it. Funny you threw a Scandinavian country in there.....Taking a look at some real-time statistical evidence (you can look that up for yourself, I am too lazy at the moment), and not just relying on "theory", I am pretty sure that all of the Nordic countries have for quite some time enjoyed high standards of living, higher level of contentment among their citizens, higher levels of education, healthier population, innovative/entrepreneur driven economies (due in large part to that state-subsidized education and health care), and they still have plenty of wealthy individuals. I'm pretty sure as well that the recently-elected president of Denmark ran, and won, on a platform of increased public investment.

[drifting sun]

Originally Posted by pesto

Been tried: check out UK and Sweden (1950's to 1980); Soviet Union and Eastern block; most of Latin America in the 1930's to 1980). Also note France, Spain, Italy, etc., who found that govt. direction, fat social programs and needless spending and borrowing lead to bankruptcy and pretty much disappearance from economic relevancy in the world.

Soviet Union was Communism (started out as Stalinism), not mixed, regulated markets; Latin America suffered from the U.S. constantly propping up brutal dictators to force open their markets and let wealthy corporations rape and pillage with impunity. France, Spain and Italy: current economic woes are not just due to their overzealous spending on public programs, they were hit the same way we were with the housing bubble, and other financial sector shenanigans.

Well, how about Ireland? What about that country that was renowned for being a low tax haven, one that was supposed to attract and spur on all this great corporate investment, and then trickle down economics would come into play, tweaking everybody's happiness meter, etc. etc. Why are they on the brink of economic collapse and ownership by the IMF and global financiers?

[drifting sun]

Originally Posted by pesto

If you're seriously interested, take a look at Elinor Ostrom's work (Nobel Prize winner). She takes some basic ideas from Coase and others and shows that governmental attempts to eliminate (or maximize) externalities are almost always less efficient than letting the market settle the issues. Some of her stuff is pretty hairy mathematically, but much of it is quite accessible.

This is getting even more off the topic of CAHSR, but sparing a cursory glance at Elinor Ostrum's recent nobel-prize winning research lends the impression that she eschews both government regulation and privatization of resource management and environmental protection.

[fflint]

Oh, look--the thousandth time Pesto has hijacked this thread into another baldly political discussion about his conservatism and why it's the bestest evarrr.

Please get back on topic. For the thousandth time.

[pesto]

Originally Posted by drifting sun

I'm always interested in learning new ideas, but I suspect your Ms. Ostrom's work is very much theory driven, with little real-world evidence to support it. Funny you threw a Scandinavian country in there.....Taking a look at some real-time statistical evidence (you can look that up for yourself, I am too lazy at the moment), and not just relying on "theory", I am pretty sure that all of the Nordic countries have for quite some time enjoyed high standards of living, higher level of contentment among their citizens, higher levels of education, healthier population, innovative/entrepreneur driven economies (due in large part to that state-subsidized education and health care), and they still have plenty of wealthy individuals. I'm pretty sure as well that the recently-elected president of Denmark ran, and won, on a platform of increased public investment.

Just the opposite; 100 percent case studies. She's not a theorist at all. She observed a wide variety of situations in which the govt. had imposed their theories and they had failed. Subsequent negotiations among local parties reached superior solutions. This had been predicted by some theories and rejected by others and she showed very clear results, with an intelligent analysis of why. That's why she got the Nobel Prize.

Sorry to hear about Denmark. But fortunately it's only 5M people and they tend to be very friendly.

[pesto]

Originally Posted by drifting sun

Soviet Union was Communism (started out as Stalinism), not mixed, regulated markets; Latin America suffered from the U.S. constantly propping up brutal dictators to force open their markets and let wealthy corporations rape and pillage with impunity. France, Spain and Italy: current economic woes are not just due to their overzealous spending on public programs, they were hit the same way we were with the housing bubble, and other financial sector shenanigans.

Well, how about Ireland? What about that country that was renowned for being a low tax haven, one that was supposed to attract and spur on all this great corporate investment, and then trickle down economics would come into play, tweaking everybody's happiness meter, etc. etc. Why are they on the brink of economic collapse and ownership by the IMF and global financiers?

First of all, your comments are just ludicrous.

But let's focus on your example. In 1960 Ireland was the poorest country in the EU. It decided to try lowering taxes and encouraging high-tech to come to their country and train their people. In spite of the rest of Europe doing their damnedest to outlaw the low taxes, they managed to become BY FAR the most tech savvy and literate populace in the EU, outgrow every economy in the EU by a mile and cause Dublin to become one of the economic and nightlife centers of all Europe. All in a country that shouldn't have ANY economic activity (terrible weather year round, few people, short growing season, on the periphery of Europe, competing with the German juggernaut, British finance, French culture, Spanish weather and Greek low prices).

Really an unparalleled success story. Check out what Dublin looked like in 1950 and today. Or call your local Irish Development representative and ask what he thinks of their development program. An insane success.

[pesto]

Originally Posted by fflint

Oh, look--the thousandth time Pesto has hijacked this thread into another baldly political discussion about his conservatism and why it's the bestest evarrr.

Please get back on topic. For the thousandth time.

I don't start these. Someone usually says "the governmeht has to spend big to get the economy going and get jobs" as one of the motivations for building HSR. I point out that the economics of HSR makes no sense and the economics of spending on worthless projects to stimulate the economy is bad economics. Instead of addressing why every auditor who has ever looked at HSR has issues (including the democratic legislature), someone claims I am libertarian or crazy or that Europe and China are a lot smarter than we are.

I am more than happy to stay on topic. I see enough bad economics the rest of my day.

[202_Cyclist]

The House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee will be holding a hearing on California's investment in improved mobility next week. The House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee also had a hearing earlier this week on high speed rail.

"California’s High-Speed Rail Plan: Skyrocketing Costs & Project Concerns"

December 15, 2011
10 AM EST

http://transportation.house.gov/hear...px?NewsID=1475

[waltlantz]

Sufferin Succotash and Holy Hogwash

AN ACTUALLY RELEVANT POST!

(I think I may cry)

[DJM19]

Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist

The House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee will be holding a hearing on California's investment in improved mobility next week. The House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee also had a hearing earlier this week on high speed rail.

"California’s High-Speed Rail Plan: Skyrocketing Costs & Project Concerns"

December 15, 2011
10 AM EST

http://transportation.house.gov/hear...px?NewsID=1475

What a diplomatic title for the hearing.

[202_Cyclist]

DJM19:

What a diplomatic title for the hearing.

Exactly-- no partisanship in Congress these days.

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist

The House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee will be holding a hearing on California's investment in improved mobility next week. The House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee also had a hearing earlier this week on high speed rail.

"California’s High-Speed Rail Plan: Skyrocketing Costs & Project Concerns"

December 15, 2011
10 AM EST

http://transportation.house.gov/hear...px?NewsID=1475

Im no longer a fan of the project but that title for a public 'hearing' is just horrendous.

But dont worry, Im sure the Senate will then have a hearing called something like High Speed Rail: California and America's only solution for future transit needs.

[dimondpark]

Anyone know anything about this?

San Diego, USA

General Atomics has a 120-meter test facility in San Diego, which is being used as the basis of Union Pacific's 8 km (5.0 mi) freight shuttle in Los Angeles. The technology is "passive" (or "permanent"), using permanent magnets in a halbach array for lift, and requiring no electromagnets for either levitation or propulsion. General Atomics has received US$90 million in research funding from the federal government. They are also looking to apply their technology to high-speed passenger services.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maglev

General Atomics is a member of the American Magline Group, a consortium chartered to build a maglev system from Anaheim, CA to Las Vegas, NV. As presently envisioned, The Anaheim - Las Vegas trains will be similar in design to the vehicles successfully demonstrated by Transrapid on its 19.5 mile track in Elmsland, Germany and on a fully operational 18.5 mile system in Shanghai, China, which have achieved speeds of greater than 300 miles per hour. GA will be responsible for providing the power and propulsion technology for the Anaheim-Vegas system.

The public-private partnership between the California-Nevada Super Speed Train Commission and American Magline Group is the entity recognized under federal law to design, build, operate and maintain the Anaheim - Las Vegas system. Our public-private partnership has secured cooperative agreements or resolutions and statements of support from all of the cities and regional planning organizations in every jurisdiction along the route.

http://atg.ga.com/EM/transportation/...apid/index.php

I'm almost certain this system would have a more immediate and noticeable impact on traffic than a LA-SF as the drive from LA to Vegas on the 15 is quite bad on weekends.

In fact, Id rather have 2 regional systems like this covering SoCal/Vegas and Greater NorCal and believe that would be far more beneficial at this point in time.

[drifting sun]

Which way do you envision a Northern California route taking? San Francisco up and around to Sacramento, or down to San Jose and on to Fresno?

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by drifting sun

Which way do you envision a Northern California route taking? San Francisco up and around to Sacramento, or down to San Jose and on to Fresno?

I dont know exactly , but that's a great question.

At first glance, I suppose the ideal NorCal coverage area for this map seems most ideal:

[Leo the Dog]

Wow, if the costs are already skyrocketing just imagine what the true costs will be at completion. I can see this entire project getting shelved.

Looks like San Diego won't be seeing any HSR in my lifetime.

[waltlantz]

I'd imagine that costs would go up in some form some time or rather, but yea.

This early in the process wlll lead to the people seriously souring on the whole thing. Kinda understandable though.

[Clevelumbus]

I don't think it's going to happen from what I've been hearing, and even if it does, by the time it's built, 2030+, it will be obsolete.

[JDRCRASH]

I'm telling you, if it really is going to take more than two decades to build, it's time to take the next step and make this HSR line a maglev.

[Yankee]

I say if your timeline for any project is more than 20 years you should just start building the thing that's gonna replace it. Or not even bother, I mean wtf China or 1950s America would have built this in 5 years.