114
   

Where is the US economy headed?

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Dec, 2010 08:14 pm
@realjohnboy,
California is now in the process of developing a high speed rail system from Sacramento to Los Angeles. I think the time is way past due, and the longer we wait, the more difficult it gets to build it. What surprises me is that the major cities that have implemented high speed/subway systems into their well developed cities such as Athens have proven to be well worth the cost.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Dec, 2010 08:56 pm
@cicerone imposter,
If we are going to go all out should we consider the 4,000 mph train ?
Maybe one day but I think it is a bit to early for me to jump on board!

http://www.youtube.com/user/TZMSocialEvolution#p/u/24/UkD0uNQDoo4
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Dec, 2010 09:04 pm
@reasoning logic,
Some trains in Japan and Europe are pretty fast today, but I'm not sure about 4,000mph. Rolling Eyes
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Dec, 2010 09:12 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Yes I do agree with what you say about the train I was just curious if I was the only one who may be a bit uncomfortable about boarding a 4,000 mph train like the one in the video!
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  0  
Reply Tue 28 Dec, 2010 10:06 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:
California is now in the process of developing a high speed rail system from Sacramento to Los Angeles. I think the time is way past due, and the longer we wait, the more difficult it gets to build it. What surprises me is that the major cities that have implemented high speed/subway systems into their well developed cities such as Athens have proven to be well worth the cost.
I am curious, just how on earth can any sane Californian support such a boondoggle when your state is already broke?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Dec, 2010 10:10 pm
@okie,
Federal funds comes to mind.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Dec, 2010 10:11 pm
@okie,
Quote:
I am curious, just how on earth can any sane Californian support such a boondoggle when your state is already broke?
they expect the feds to pay for it, that once it gets built and the bonds can not be paid off and the state cant afford to take over that the feds will decide that it is better to pay them off than to force the bondholders to eat it, as that would destroy the municipal bond market.

It boils down to a game a chicken.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Dec, 2010 10:14 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawk, It's not only that; the USAF spent over 44.4 billion on the B2 bomber. I'm sure the US can well afford to spend some money (most of which comes out of California in the first place) to fund a rapid train system for California.
Rockhead
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Dec, 2010 10:16 pm
@cicerone imposter,
the same folks that run BART...?

Shocked
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Dec, 2010 10:18 pm
@Rockhead,
OUCH! Believe it or not, the California speed rail system has their own committee.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  0  
Reply Tue 28 Dec, 2010 10:19 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:
Federal funds comes to mind.
Big surprise, you would expect the rest of us to pay for your boondoggles, ci. Earth to ci, California is broke, but so is the Federal Government.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Tue 28 Dec, 2010 10:26 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
hawk, It's not only that; the USAF spent over 44.4 billion on the B2 bomber. I'm sure the US can well afford to spend some money (most of which comes out of California in the first place) to fund a rapid train system for California
You obvioulsy have not taken a look at the federal books lately....

I am opposed to budget flim-flammery on princple, if someone wants to build something then they should use real cost and rev numbers...and then find real money to pay for it.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Dec, 2010 10:28 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawk, Do you know of any government in the US that does? That includes the feds, state, and local.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Tue 28 Dec, 2010 10:35 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Do you know of any government in the US that does? That includes the feds, state, and local.
Do you know anyone in the US who thinks that US government works well??

The CA HSR project is the dictionary definition for why this is. It is not only the dishonesty on numbers, but that it takes so many years to get anything done, and that so much of the budget goes to studies and litigation, and that the procurement process discourages quality.

The ca project will take many times as long to build as the Chinese equivalent, cost 6-7 times as much per mile, will not be as good as the Chinese version, and there will be massive back end problems keeping it running and paying off the bills.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Dec, 2010 10:36 pm
@H2O MAN,
Quote:
Wouldn't that make someone a member of the evil rich you liberals hate so much?


Jump! Perhaps you can catch the things flying over your head!
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Dec, 2010 10:38 pm
@H2O MAN,
Quote:
I see you when I do, but this does not explain know why you are such a hate filled individual.


Support your assumption.*

* Note: I did not use the word argument.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Dec, 2010 10:39 pm
@okie,
Quote:
Eisenhower supported Civil Rights only after Brown v. The Board of Education at Topeka. He did so because he feared the negative opinion of Europeans.


If you knew how to research, you could find this and verify it for yourself.
Quote:
Ah, here is the key to plainoldme: she confuses fact with opinion.


How fifth grade of you.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Dec, 2010 10:46 pm
Rail uses less energy the air travel. It's more efficient for the long-distance hauling of freight. We ought to have never dismantled the national rail system.

But, the Republicans have already stymied the renewed rail system bringing about the firing of 400 people who had jobs to build new railroad cars.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Tue 28 Dec, 2010 10:51 pm
@plainoldme,
Quote:
Rail uses less energy the air travel. It's more efficient for the long-distance hauling of freight. We ought to have never dismantled the national rail system
VERY true, and worse we deregulated the rail industry and allow the railroads to scrap much of the system and pocket the proceeds, and then even sell off most of the land so that we could never rebuild it. Now when the economy changed so that more transportation is needed and their are not enough rails the railroads are demanding that the taxpayer pay for all the improvements. It is a version of privatizing profits and socializing loses.

A bit of the land was either bought by government or the railroads were paid to railbank (often turned into trails to get some use out of it) it with the idea that if needed the lines could be rebuilt, however the legal system is hostile to doing this in practice, the litigation costs normally preclude rebuilding.
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Dec, 2010 11:04 pm
@hawkeye10,
There were people who made fortunes from buying railroad property. Possibly, some of the trails were properties no one thought to purchase.

However, there is still imminent domain, which could be used to reconstruct a useful rail system.
 

Related Topics

The States Need Help - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fiscal Cliff - Question by JPB
Let GM go Bankrupt - Discussion by Woiyo9
Sovereign debt - Question by JohnJD
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.11 seconds on 08/17/2025 at 07:38:48