Jump to content

Update: Senate shelves the BBB Act


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, mclumber1 said:

 

It's a boondoggle that is way over budget and will never actually achieve anything close to what voters approved of several years back.

 

They might as well have built two for twice the price and have Jodie Foster be the conductor for the maiden drive. 

Have i got news for you regarding american infrastructure of all types.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Joe said:


So why is there high speed rail in Europe and Asia? Magic?

 

Property rights and NIMBYism kill this type of endeavor in America, and I would argue in Canada as well.  I'm not even sure property rights is really a thing in many asian countries as we know it in America.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

Have i got news for you regarding american infrastructure of all types.

 

That's true.  I'm not necessarily advocating for NEW roads or anything like that.  But since we have existing roads and other infrastructure that are falling apart, it only makes sense to maintain and upgrade them.  That, combined with increased investments in electrical vehicles and charging network, are probably North America's best bets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mclumber1 said:

 

Property rights and NIMBYism kill this type of endeavor in America, and I would argue in Canada as well.  I'm not even sure property rights is really a thing in many asian countries as we know it in America.  

This is patently not true, but major cost overruns are far more pronounced in anglo countries. France and Spain both are relatively inexpensive to produce HSR infrastructure than even the UK or the US

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mclumber1 said:

 

That's true.  I'm not necessarily advocating for NEW roads or anything like that.  But since we have existing roads and other infrastructure that are falling apart, it only makes sense to maintain and upgrade them.  That, combined with increased investments in electrical vehicles and charging network, are probably North America's best bets.

Wrong-o. We need to tear down automobile infrastructure and replace it with, well, not auto infrastructure

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mclumber1 said:

Because it's less convenient, and often times slower, than other modes of transport.  If I wanted to take rail from Las Vegas to San Diego, there will not be a direct, non-stop route.  It's going to probably make stops in Barstow, Victorville, 3 (or more) stops in Los Angeles, and Orange County before actually arriving in San Diego.  Direct flights are offered a dozen times a day between these two cities, and I can drive down to San Diego in about 5 hours if I time it right to not get stuck in Riverside. 

 

Trains go from city center to city center. No TSA line and not having an hourlong slog on both ends of the trip is way better than dealing with flights and it's insane that flying is the best option for a trip like Los Angeles to San Francisco.

 

58 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

The issue with any large-scale project in the US is that landowners have far too many rights to delay things. Some random guy with a shed in the desert could stop a maglev train project for years.

 

This is in fact what the main problem with the California HSR has been, just endless lawsuits over the land acquisition. No shit it costs more to acquire the land now than 5-10 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The CA HSR obviously faces all the normal issues surrounding large projects in the US (NIMBYism, land rights, environmental review, general bloat, etc.), but it also suffered from a huge amount of fatalism from the get go.

 

If you knew that the project would be completed, and you just set out to build the best commuter HSR you could afford for CA, you would not do it the way CA did. All sorts of compromises in the route, the track and train type, and the station locations were selected on the idea that if the project weren't completed at least the rail lines could be used for the cargo trains that already run up and down the state (and the country). I'd source this claim, but I'm feeling pretty lazy right now and I should be working.

 

As a San Diego resident, I'd love to take a European style train to San Fran or Vegas and I'll vote for any infrastructure improvements including HSR, but I'm not hopeful about the existing plans.

 

Of course, I'd love to see better transit options within CA cities as well. San Diego is finally moving in that direction, but LA really needs to do better. As someone who's taken the train to LA hundreds of times, you really are reliant on cars of some type to get where you want to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TwinIon said:

The CA HSR obviously faces all the normal issues surrounding large projects in the US (NIMBYism, land rights, environmental review, general bloat, etc.), but it also suffered from a huge amount of fatalism from the get go.

 

If you knew that the project would be completed, and you just set out to build the best commuter HSR you could afford for CA, you would not do it the way CA did. All sorts of compromises in the route, the track and train type, and the station locations were selected on the idea that if the project weren't completed at least the rail lines could be used for the cargo trains that already run up and down the state (and the country). I'd source this claim, but I'm feeling pretty lazy right now and I should be working.

 

As a San Diego resident, I'd love to take a European style train to San Fran or Vegas and I'll vote for any infrastructure improvements including HSR, but I'm not hopeful about the existing plans.

 

Of course, I'd love to see better transit options within CA cities as well. San Diego is finally moving in that direction, but LA really needs to do better. As someone who's taken the train to LA hundreds of times, you really are reliant on cars of some type to get where you want to be.

 

They should have done San Diego-Los Angeles as the proof of concept segment of the HSR instead of starting in the middle of nowhere in the Central Valley just because the land is cheap out there. Best case it makes it clear why you want the LA-SF segment, worst case SD-LA is still a useful piece of infrastructure even if the rest of it never gets built. Rail travel between LA and SD is slow as fucking shit right now, it would shouldn't be faster to drive that distance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Jason said:

LOL ISPs are fucking mad.

 

getty-michael-powell-760x380.jpg
ARSTECHNICA.COM

Industry says US should favor private ISPs and take no action to lower prices.

 

 

Having to pay $160 a month for JUST high speed internet (with no data cap) from Cox is not "just fine" in my opinion.  It's lunacy.  

  • Shocked 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have $100/month gigabit service from Comcast, and only 25mbps AT&T DSL as an alternate. My cousin lives in a subdivision one mile over where she can get both Comcast and AT&T fiber. The Comcast gig service if $50/month for her.

 

More options, please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...