California High Speed Rail Thread

[drifting sun]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

Yawn. Please spare us the trite diatribe.

Regardless of political persuasion, most polls indicate that most Californians no longer support building a high speed rail system.

The sock-it-to-the-right mentality by exteme left-wingers on this issue(just like Neocons on the flip side) will eventually be their undoing as cooler heads always prevail in the end. The only problem with that is that these colossal policy blunders cost us tons of money. So I hope the Central Valley enjoys their new Disneyland-like Monorail, because that is how this is all going to end.

Brown thinks that just because we've starting spending money will obligate us to spend whatever else is necessary. Such thinking is foolish, at best.

Ok, so you believe that the cost mark-up had nothing whatsoever to do with all the little delays and reworkings and route adjustments of the overall plan, much of it to try to cater to every local NIMBY type, who were no doubt getting spoon-fed fear-driven "your taxes will go up, oh no!!" propaganda. You know that the planners of large projects like this don't work for free, so whenever more time has to be invested to try to work around the concerns of the locals (and deal with the established railroad entities), the bill is going to run up, no way around that.

But, I guess your saying that none of that was a contributing factor, and that the cost increases are due solely to the incompetence of the public agency, or that they take a perverse delight in quoting the public one number, then arbitrarily jacking it up just for grins.

Fair enough.

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by drifting sun

Ok, so you believe that the cost mark-up had nothing whatsoever to do with all the little delays and reworkings and route adjustments of the overall plan, much of it to try to cater to every local NIMBY type, who were no doubt getting spoon-fed fear-driven "your taxes will go up, oh no!!" propaganda.

I happen to believe that we are undertaxed, fyi.

This project is so poorly planned before a single shovel of dirt has been moved--can you blame me for having ZERO confidence now?

I mean, for someone whom I guessing despises lack of oversight and transparency, this single project is the most smoke and mirrors Ive seen outside of a magic show.

Yet there you all are, cheering away.

But, I guess your saying that none of that was a contributing factor, and that the cost increases are due solely to the incompetence of the public agency, or that they take a perverse delight in quoting the public one number, then arbitrarily jacking it up just for grins.

Fair enough.

Yawn.

You take perverse delight in the governor threatening social services, schools and health care.....so long as a stupid train from Hanford to Bakersfield gets built?

Someone needs to look in the mirror before pointing out what you perceive to be moral failings in others.

[drifting sun]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

I happen to believe that we are undertaxed, fyi.

This project is so poorly planned before a single shovel of dirt has been moved--can you blame me for having ZERO confidence now?

I mean, for someone whom I guessing despises lack of oversight and transparency, this single project is the most smoke and mirrors Ive seen outside of a magic show.

Yet there you all are, cheering away.



Yawn.

You take perverse delight in the governor threatening social services, schools and health care.....so long as a stupid train from Hanford to Bakersfield gets built?

Someone needs to look in the mirror before pointing out what you perceive to be moral failings in others.

"Yawn"....who said anything about morals or lack thereof? I just wanted to get a clearer sense of what you believe or do not believe about the circumstances surrounding this project. That's all. Why all the defensive posturing?

Anyway, you didn't engage my previous question - that of the possible "link" between the Caltrain depot and the Transbay Terminal.

[Foley Santamaria]

Even if nothing else is spent, it will be money well spent.

Improvements to Metrolink, significant CalTrain work, and improvements in the SD area - very positive.

Big improvements on the 5th busiest train line in the US?

Not to mention, at least the SF - LA line will get built. Hooking up that huge ridership won't happen? I don't believe it. And it will be a large success, though ticket prices will definitely be higher than what was quoted. Still reasonable. And I definitely think the project isn't perfect, but if it had been defeated there would have been a decade long, at least, delay.

The MidWest is about to roll out a lot of 110 to 125mph improved rail. Florida should have some impressive similar runs between Miami and Orlando soon. Acela makes 60 to 70 million dollars a year. What is the issue again?

[drifting sun]

Originally Posted by Foley Santamaria

Even if nothing else is spent, it will be money well spent.

Improvements to Metrolink, significant CalTrain work, and improvements in the SD area - very positive.

Big improvements on the 5th busiest train line in the US?

Not to mention, at least the SF - LA line will get built. Hooking up that huge ridership won't happen? I don't believe it. And it will be a large success, though ticket prices will definitely be higher than what was quoted. Still reasonable. And I definitely think the project isn't perfect, but if it had been defeated there would have been a decade long, at least, delay.

The MidWest is about to roll out a lot of 110 to 125mph improved rail. Florida should have some impressive similar runs between Miami and Orlando soon. Acela makes 60 to 70 million dollars a year. What is the issue again?

The "issue" I gather is that the Central Valley section is thought of as a "train to nowhere", by detractors. As you can see from the previous posts, some here are convinced that the project was mismanaged from the beginning, although what I have seen is cost overruns resulting from not only mismanagement (there has been some of that to be sure), but also from having to deal with constant obstructionism spurred on by groups and agendas that are ideologically set against public infrastructure of this kind, something that happens often to large public projects in this country.

I generally agree that it might have made more sense to come up with an aggressive plan to get HSR going from either end, then work towards the middle. I think that the Federal funding was contingent on building the central segment first though.

By the way, I think whatever Florida is doing is private, not public, as someone here will no doubt point out.

[tech12]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

so long as a stupid train from Hanford to Bakersfield gets built?:

It's a train from San Diego to SF and Sacramento, smart ass. Which I know that you know, so stop playing dumb. This is just the first stage, just because it's not the SD-LA or SF-central valley section getting built first doesn't mean we shouldn't build it.

And what's with you acting like you know what the "will of the people" is? Most people i know want HSR. The majority of opponents are the ones who have been fed all the negative conservative propaganda, and/or who have no understanding of the benefits of a high speed rail system.

I have to say I'm surprised to see you opposing it, dimondpark. Did you honestly expect that it wouldn't be very expensive to build?

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by tech12

I have to say I'm surprised to see you opposing it, dimondpark. Did you honestly expect that it wouldn't be very expensive to build?

I'm seriously disappointed in the overall cost of CAHSR and aggravated that so many liberals seem not to care about the cost. If it were a highway project, they'd be screaming bloody murder.

On the other hand, the orphan segment in the Central Valley will be an impetus to complete the remaining segments, first by building a new line through the Tehachapis and then a new line over the Pacheco Pass.

[JDRCRASH]

Originally Posted by skyscraperfan23

Because it's working well and without taxpayers expense, unlike you big government loving libs.

And I'm neither liberal nor conservative, those terms mean nothing today.

What precisely is considered "working well"? 79 mph at average speed? Dream on.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by ardecila

I'm seriously disappointed in the overall cost of CAHSR and aggravated that so many liberals seem not to care about the cost. If it were a highway project, they'd be screaming bloody murder.

On the other hand, the orphan segment in the Central Valley will be an impetus to complete the remaining segments, first by building a new line through the Tehachapis and then a new line over the Pacheco Pass.

If it were a highway project, it likely would barely hit the news. Imagine the cost to build a brand new I-5 along a parallel route.

[mr1138]

Yeah I have to agree that our 19th century American rail system is absolutely not "working well," at least as far as passenger travel is concerned. And while I'm totally open to "anti big government" arguments in favor of the free market, I think some people take it WAY too far and are borderline anarchists. Infrastructure (in my opinion) is ABSOLUTELY in the realm of what government SHOULD be doing. The complexity of such a project as well as the ultimate ownership of the R.O.W. makes it no different from our road and highway network; the VAST majority of which is publicly owned and maintained.

This isn't the 19th century anymore where everything west of the Mississippi was federally owned and free for the taking. Expecting private companies to assemble the land, navigate the regulations, and build a rail system of this magnitude in this day and age is absolutely ludicrous. I think we could even debate whether doing it this way back in the 1800s really serves us any good anymore, since it is in large part the privately owned R.R. right-of-ways that are vastly complicating not only this, but other mass transit rail systems currently in planning across America (Fastracks in Denver comes to mind). If these original (and oftentimes superior) routes and right-of-ways were under public ownership, they could be upgraded to HSR at a MUCH lower cost than building a whole new system.

By all means, contract out the line to private operators to run the trains (much as private vehicles travel on public roads all the time), but the planning, construction, and ownership of a 21st century HSR system should absolutely be a public effort. To suggest otherwise seems to me a thinly veiled attempt to suggest we shouldn't be building HSR AT ALL, which I think few on this forum would agree with.

[Busy Bee]

Well I for one agree w/ mr... especially concerning the strategic and logistic value of rail right of way held in private hands. I don't think it's anti-American to suggest nationalizing some of these absolutely strategic private ROW's to necessitate intercity HSR that is IMO integral to a robust connected 21st century economy. Especially when considering many of these choice ROW's the Railroads bitch and complain about not only sharing with Amtrak but sharing the ROW at all for new parallel passenger tracks (Steel Interstate...) after receiving the needed right of way essentially for free from the federal government through land grants and acts of congress (Pacific Railway Act..). I say time to return the favor you greedy bastards.

[mr1138]

^ Exactly! Add to that the fact that the original land grants that allowed the Railroads to secure their ROW in the first place allocated a strip of land MUCH wider than was originally needed to build 19th century train tracks. What other reason would there be for such a wide ROW other than the anticipation of future parallel tracks, as Busy Bee alludes to? What's sad is that the powerful Railroad companies now hold this additional ROW hostage for OBSCENE amounts of money, and are exempt from the use of eminent domain to obtain the land.

In retrospect, it probably wasn't wrong to give such land grants, as it was the free land (as well as the valuable free land adjacent to the tracks) that allowed us to settle the west in the first place. But let's not pretend that we're still living in the 19th century. This is no longer a viable, nor is it a desirable method for getting transportation networks constructed.

[mt_climber13]

Originally Posted by mfastx

Anyone who claims that "we" as taxpayers cannot afford HSR needs a reality check. HSR is a drop in the bucket compared to our national budget. Hell, it's even a drop in the bucked compared to the California transportation budget, lol.

It's a pindrop in a haystack compared to the wars.
Money for wars= YES PLEASE!
Money for America= DIRTY COMMIE LIB!!!

End the Afghanistan war today and this will be paid for in a month.

[phoenixboi08]

Originally Posted by wakamesalad

It's a pindrop in a haystack compared to the wars.
Money for wars= YES PLEASE!
Money for America= DIRTY COMMIE LIB!!!

End the Afghanistan war today and this will be paid for in a month.

oh no, you'd have to still pry those funds away from the DoD anyways

[fflint]

Guys, this isn't a thread for statements of broad-ranging political philosophy or culture warmongering. CAHSR is the subject, please stick to it.

[skyscraperfan23]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

I happen to believe that we are undertaxed, fyi.

This project is so poorly planned before a single shovel of dirt has been moved--can you blame me for having ZERO confidence now?

I mean, for someone whom I guessing despises lack of oversight and transparency, this single project is the most smoke and mirrors Ive seen outside of a magic show.

Yet there you all are, cheering away.



Yawn.

You take perverse delight in the governor threatening social services, schools and health care.....so long as a stupid train from Hanford to Bakersfield gets built?

Someone needs to look in the mirror before pointing out what you perceive to be moral failings in others.

I Know that's right.

[mt_climber13]

Originally Posted by fflint

Guys, this isn't a thread for statements of broad-ranging political philosophy or culture warmongering. CAHSR is the subject, please stick to it.

Pointing out that money could be diverted from one part of the budget to another in order to pay for something is not "culture warmongering." After all, it is our tax money, we can talk about it. Loosen up.

[northbay]

Everyone needs to cool their jets. Seriously, how many times do we need to hear the arguments on why it should, or shouldn't be built? A lot of us I think are tired of it.

It IS being built, so let's talk about what's going on. Like how a high-rise construction thread would focus on the building's development, and not whether it should be under-construction in the first place.

Granted, that isn't exactly analogous since we are talking private versus public sector. But remember too folks that Japan is willing to pay for half of the costs and China is willing to contribute a significant amount (was it $10 billion?) if we contract with them.

So how about more discussion and idea-sharing and less arguing.

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by tech12

It's a train from San Diego to SF and Sacramento

The train only has funding in place for the first leg within the central valley--even money for the extenstions to LA and SF at this point is not secure. And NO private investors have been identified even tho that was a major selling point back in 2008---a rush of private monies was supposed to come into play, and until now that has NOT materialized in the least.

Sacramento and San Diego are NOT included in the current financing scheme at all---the soonest those extensions will even be considered is 2032, and we'd have to find totally new money for that.

I suspect too many Californians are woefully unaware of how little planners and politicos care about the fiscal solvency of this project.

smart ass.

This was uncalled for, but whatever.

[northbay]

^Dude, dimondpark, did you not see my post right above yours? Take a breather.

Of course you have a right to your opinion. No one can take that from you. However, you are factually incorrect in saying no private investors have been identified.