California Going Ahead With Bullet Train 709
An anonymous reader sends this excerpt from the NY Times:
"[California state leaders] have rallied around a plan to build a 520-mile high-speed rail line from Los Angeles to San Francisco, cutting the trip from a six-hour drive to a train ride of two hours and 38 minutes. And they are doing it in the face of what might seem like insurmountable political and fiscal obstacles. The pro-train constituency has not been derailed by a state report this month that found the cost of the bullet train tripling to $98 billion for a project that would not be finished until 2033, by news that Republicans in Congress are close to eliminating federal high-speed rail financing this year, by opposition from California farmers and landowners upset about tracks tearing through their communities or by questions about how much the state or private businesses will be able to contribute."
The bond measure was for $98 billion (Score:1, Insightful)
Time (Score:5, Insightful)
The first transcontinental railroad took less than 10 years to build -- considerably less. Before doing something like this, figure out why the hell it's going to take 30 years, and fix that first.
The TSA will ruin this. (Score:5, Insightful)
Between the x-ray powered strip searches, the paranoid interrogations, and sexual molestations by abusive, angry pedophile wannabe mall cops, only masochists and boot lickers will want to ride in what could have been a beautiful piece of engineering. I'd rather drive in relative freedom than take a bullet train and be humiliated, brutalized, violated, and treated like an inmate. To quote the Elephant Man, "I am not an animal!".
If the TSA could be kept away, then it would be great. But that isn't going to happen.
Re:Time (Score:5, Insightful)
Land? (Score:5, Insightful)
Can someone explain how it is crowded countries like Japan or Germany can manage to get land for high speed rail, but the US can't?
Especially since Japan seems to have such problems getting land for airports that they have to build artificial islands [wikipedia.org] just to house them.
Re:Time (Score:5, Insightful)
High speed bullet trains probably require a bit more precision than the old steam engines.
Also, where do you get 30 years from?
It's crazy (Score:5, Insightful)
I will certainly ride this train if it actually gets built. But it's a really, really dumb idea, and what we're likely to end up with is a train that goes from nowhere to nowhere because public support evaporated when the bill came due.
And remember, this is the state that cancelled dental insurance for poor people because it ran out of money.
Re:Why are businesses leaving? (Score:5, Insightful)
In twenty years, California will have swollen to perhaps 50million people, many of them taking the I-5 or US101 route from LA to the Bay area. I-5 is pretty much clogged now: imagine what happens if you have to continue to resize Oakland, San Jose, SF, Burbank, LAX, John Wayne, Palm Springs, Sacramento, and all of the other regional airports to accommodate grown-- along with the freeways. Something's going to give. Invest now, and the infrastructure is there. Don't invest, and it's going to get uglier than it is now.... much uglier.
From Women's Prison to Chinese Railworker's Grave (Score:3, Insightful)
That's what they're building. No, we actually don't have the money. But when has reality stopped backers of High Speed Rail?
Re:Land? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What about Los Angeles to Las Vegas? (Score:3, Insightful)
LA to Vegas would make more economic sense. But this whole enterprise isn't about making sense, it's about funneling pork to state politicians and their buddies backing them -- unions and corporations.
Even the unapologetically liberal LA Times is critical of this turkey of a project.
Re:The TSA will ruin this. (Score:5, Insightful)
And exaggeration can ruin anything (Score:5, Insightful)
Blathering about pedophilia, fascism, and interrogations just makes your objections sound like paranoid ravings. Yes, you must be persistent, passionate, and creative in protecting your rights and protesting their violation, but above all you must be rational.
Your words are nothing but a disservice to anyone fighting for the Bill of Rights: it makes their job much harder when their rational objections become conflated with the rampant hyperbole and absurdly loaded language of people like you.
Re:Time (Score:4, Insightful)
The first transcontinental railroad took less than 10 years to build -- considerably less. Before doing something like this, figure out why the hell it's going to take 30 years, and fix that first.
The first railroads were intended as a way to get from place to place, and hence they actually had to be completed in a sensible amount of time in order to operate and recoup their costs (though I believe they struggled to do so?). These new railroads appear to be intended as a jobs program for union workers, so the longer they take, the better.
Why not... (Score:3, Insightful)
California is already over 2 billion short on the budget this year and is long overdue for a serious financial wake-up call.
Hope all the other states are taking notes on "what not to do"... Projects like the "high speed" rail just dump gas on the fire.
Way to go spendthrift voters of California!
Re:Why are businesses leaving? (Score:5, Insightful)
As someone who just moved to California for a tech job, I am getting a kick out of your reply. I don't know why I'd want to leave, unless I didn't want to be employed.
Re:Why are businesses leaving? (Score:5, Insightful)
before I was forced to retire due to ALS I had need to go down to a remote office in LA multiple times per month from the SF Bay area. Airplanes are quick once you leave the ground but the absolute living hell that is air travel made me dread the trip. Having a fast train is something I dreamed about since the month I spent in Europe on business. Totally stress-free "commute". Tie the fast line into municipal light rail like the widely used BART and San Jose light rail and you have a very successful merger of two huge metropolitan economies.
Re:And exaggeration can ruin anything (Score:5, Insightful)
Rare acts of sadism or molestation? You do realize that the molestation is going to apply to everybody, right? They're still phasing it in, but the intention is to send everybody either through the scanners or for an enhanced patdown. Normally if a stranger is using his/her authority to touch children or adults like that it's considered sexual assault.
Re:Land? (Score:5, Insightful)
Can someone explain
The US indulges an enormous collection of elites and their pressure groups that preclude or impede most development rather effectively, and common folk tacitly support this sort of governance (see NIMBY, BANANA, etc.) after they achieve their desired level of comfort. We call this 'environmentalism' and beat each other over the head with it.
Another reason is that US constitution established strong property rights and prescribes specific criteria and obligations for 'takings' by government. Some people believe that strong property rights has led to great prosperity and liberty. Others believe those people are evil capitalist pig-dogs that must skinned alive and slow-roasted in front of their offspring as a lesson to all.
Re:High Speed rail (Score:4, Insightful)
If you do the math, you could GIVE everyone a plane ticket a year on Southwest and come out ahead. Someone needs to put up the reality check of what it actually costs per Resident per year to build and then operate.
Did you expand your analysis to the energy/pollution savings? And how does the cost/benefit stacks up against other ways to reduce energy consumption or pollution.
Re:Say... (Score:5, Insightful)
Right, that's exactly why no one would ever build a high speed rail system somewhere like Japan where they are also prone to earthquakes. Obviously a train getting derailed is the biggest concern in quake prone areas.
Re:Why are businesses leaving? (Score:5, Insightful)
As a Californian transplant, I say you should get the fuck out. You haven't done a fucking thing with this place in decades. Make way for those of us that will, you lazy asshole.
Re:Take $98billion (Score:5, Insightful)
Since when were transportation systems supposed to break even? Did you include all the money saved by:
Only then can you measure its true value to taxpayers.
Re:Time (Score:5, Insightful)
And in the long run, the trans-continental railroad was a good thing for the country. So are you agreeing that in the long term the high speed rail will also be worth it?
Personally, I'm undecided. I would love to have access to high speed rail to SF, I would certainly use it, but Californians in general have a strange love for driving themselves everywhere. One concern is if the TSA gets themselves involved in railroad security, that would ruin the major speed and convenience advantage that rail has over air.
Re:Say... (Score:3, Insightful)
The only problems are directly around SF and LA.
...which happen to be at either end of this little rail line.
Speakin' of which, given the ungodly size of both metro areas, how the hell are they going to avoid having to tack on at least another hour or two at each end just to negotiate the traffic, comply with speed and noise regulations, impositions tacked on by every burg that surrounds SanFran and LA, etc etc etc etc etc. ?
Re:Have to look at the alternatives (Score:5, Insightful)
Were the anti-HSR people asking for ridership studies for the Sepulveda Pass? Were they asking for the expansion to run an operational profit, let alone an overall profit? Of course not; only rail is subjected to such standards.
This is an important point, and one that needs to be repeated over and over. The money the US and state governments spend on rail is a tiny fraction of what we spend on roads and air transportation. I mean, it's pocket change by comparison. And yet there seems to be a visceral negative reaction to rail on the part of a large number of people -- any kind of rail, whether local or long-distance -- that is all out of line with the numbers. It's particularly odd given our country's history, and the fact that the same people who gripe the loudest about any new rail project tend to be the ones who wave the flag at every opportunity.
Re:This is just insane. (Score:5, Insightful)
Various reasons - energy efficiency, trains are more likely to be able to go _right where you want to be_ rather than some flat spot 30 miles out of town, etc. And if we assume that one more transport-class airport would have to be built, that's more land area than the entire rail system required. (Case in point - Dallas/Fort Worth Airport is, IIRC, more acreage than a four-lane freeway from Dallas to Washington DC. Same with the big one in Montreal.) Also trains are more comfortable by at least an order of magnitude.
Re:Time (Score:3, Insightful)
You are comparing apples and oranges.
The type of rail that was laid down was just wooden beams, rivets, and track. Over flat terrain, say Kansas, you could lay something like that down with some pretty good speed. What about the bridges and blasting to put the tracks through difficult terrain?
However, we are talking bullet trains now. Considerably more engineering goes into the same mile of track. We are talking about 500+ mph. The tolerances and requirements don't make it unreasonable to say it takes a lot more effort to lay down the track. There has to be some sort of foundation support, interconnections, etc. Just the evaluation and testing of the track would take considerable effort.
A few miles per month seems to be dragging their feet a little, but 20 miles per day would seem to be beyond awesome.
The California Population (Score:4, Insightful)
The state of California is populated with a bunch of morons who keep trying to vote themselves unicorns and rainbows and the idiots in Sacramento don't have the balls to actually do their jobs so the budget never gets balanced and the taxes keep going up. California has the highest overall taxes in the entire country. One of the highest state income taxes (about 9%), one of the highest sales taxes (about 8%), one of the highest corporate taxes (about 9%), and excessive fees for just about everything. Because so much money is predestined for someone's pet project (because of stupid ballot initiatives), there will NEVER be enough money to pay for the necessities. The train is just par for the course. The initial track will connect two places that no one in their right mind ever wants to go to, and the remainder will probably not be built in our lifetime.
I was born and raised in California. I'm still here because I'm a tech worker and this is where most of the tech jobs are concentrated. I've watched my state get shoved into the waste bucket by the people who live here and am sick of this shit. For years I've lived by a simple rule when it comes to the ballot. I vote no for anything that forcibly allocates money. No exceptions. I also vote no on all bond measures as I do not believe it is moral to pass the big fucking bill to our children. I also vote no on all tax increases because we're already paying too much (see above).
Re:Time (Score:5, Insightful)
We kind of frown upon the slave labor that the Chinese and Irish (and others) that were used to build the railroad.
If modern construction machinery is less efficient and effective than forced labour, then whoever designed such shoddy machinery should be the first in line to receive a shovel.
How that time will be spent... (Score:5, Insightful)
... 25 years in fighting off all the complaints from various parties.
5 years in actual construction work.
To all those who oppose it without thinking: (Score:5, Insightful)
go to Japan, test it on the line Tokyo-Osaka-Kyushu. The lines have to be chosen carefully, but if you connect megacities with it, then it can be a major economic factor. 100 billion dollar may sound a lot, but it actually isnt. it its operated over 30 years, then this is $8 million per day which you have to get in or subsidise. If you hav 500000 people per day using it, then thats $20 per ticket. 500000 Is the number of people riding per day on the Tokaido Shinkansen. $20 means (at my current rate) that the train has to save me 15 Minutes of my time. And hell, yeah, it did that when i liven in Japan. Going to the next airport (always outside the city), onto a previously booked ticket, waiting for a delayed flight with unreasonable security waiting lines, to the destination city and then have restriction when to travel back was a lot more troublesome than just stumbling into the train station whenever i want, catch a train withing the next 20 minutes without booking before, going many times close to the city center, and returning whenever i wanted.
The economic meaning of the shinkansen for the cities between is incredible. Cities which would otherwise suffer a never-ending drain of companies and young people into the two megacity area are sustainable *only* because of a shinkansen stop nearby.
Re:Portland-Seattle-Vancouver would make more sens (Score:5, Insightful)
This doesn't make sense. A rider arriving in LA is going to need a car when they get off the train, unless they fancy spending a lot of time waiting for on Metro (formerly known as the RTD - Rough, Tough, and Dangerous.) Total boondoggle.
That also means that all flights between SF and LA don't make any sense because any airplane traveler arriving in LA is going to need a car when they get off the train, unless they fancy spending a lot of time waiting for on Metro (formerly known as the RTD - Rough, Tough, and Dangerous.) Total boondoggle.
Re:Time (Score:4, Insightful)
The US Government did give the land for the railroad and every other section adjacent to the railroad to the railroad companies - in exchange for reduced cost transport (freight and passenger) for government business. Considering that the land that the government kept was essentially valueless without transport access, it was a pretty good deal for both sides.
A day too late, a dollar too short.. (Score:5, Insightful)
But then again - "Americans, yes they are that stupid".
What would happen if USA neglects building heterogeneous transport networks and stays on the current trend of fossil fuel automobiles and planes? It is not the end of the world after the oil gets too expensive for transportation. If only you can keep the agriculture running you will not starve and private enterprises will built HSR and electric induction roads very fast. The bad thing is that at that time the rest of the world have those and you are late, so very late that I am afraid someone else has the technological and political leadership in this world. As a North European I wouldn't like to see that happen. America(USA) means a lot to me and I want see you leading the world in the future too.
Re:The bond measure was for $98 billion (Score:2, Insightful)
Plus, Californians send a lot more money to Washington in Federal taxes than they get back..
Given the sheer number of representative and electoral votes they represent at the federal level, they certainly do get it back in quite a few other ways, no?
Well, according to these guys, http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/22685.html [taxfoundation.org], California sends a lot of money to Washington and does not get as much back. I find it ironic that Blue States basically subsidize the Red States.
Re:The bond measure was for $98 billion (Score:2, Insightful)
Even so, it's still a lot more sensible than bailing out the banks and auto industries, going to war in Iraq, the war on drugs, militarizing the police force, handing the money to the TSA, etc.
It's a lot cheaper, too, and might actually be useful to somebody if they build it.
Re:Time (Score:2, Insightful)
This "bullet train" won't even go into either LA or San Francisco. It will reach the extended suburbs of both cities, depending on how you term that, but at the moment I haven't seen the plans for this to actually make it into the city centers without a whole monster pile more money being shoved in the direction of this train plan.
As the saying goes, the devil in in the details, and it is in those details that this particular plan seems to fall apart.
Re:Monorail (Score:5, Insightful)
What about us brain-dead slobs?
http://www.tsa.gov/join/index.shtm [tsa.gov]
Re:The bond measure was for $98 billion (Score:5, Insightful)
The original $33 billion estimate was in 2008$. The current estimate of $98.5 billion is in year of expenditure dollars, which is the same as $65.4 billion in 2010$. So the price has only doubled, not tripled. The original submitter made the same mistake.
Meanwhile, the alternative to spending this $98.5 billion (YOE$) is spending $171 billion (YOE$) to build an additional 2,300 lane-miles of highways, 4 runways, and 115 airline gates [ca.gov] just to move the same number of people! So the only thing more expensive than building high speed rail is not building it.
Re:The bond measure was for $98 billion (Score:2, Insightful)
Is it now? Well I agree to a point. Though bailing out some industries can be alright if done correctly. Done wrong, you're just making a mess. Then again, California the bastion of entitlements and the left has been doing this so long, have so many taxes, and have caused so many businesses to flee that they'll probably be the first state to declare bankruptcy.
Re:The bond measure was for $98 billion (Score:2, Insightful)
The whole thing is a giant gift to the TSA... who do you think is going to have to secure the track and molest the riders?