Di Atribe: rev. dave: Money should not get in the way of doing what is right.

With conservatives, it all comes back to money. That's all that matters to them.

While I despise making everything a partisan issue, the author of the article fired the first shot.

Money doesn't grow on trees. We don't live in Jerry Jones world.

doyner: WorldCitizen: So which one would give the US the best return over time? Several times this amount of money spent on Iraq or high speed rail infrastructure in the US?

Yes, we chose so wisely.

Yes we did!.  The Iraq war paid for itself and, conversely, people would ride the train for free!

Yes, too bad we can't do Iraq all over again.

/ That is neither here nor there. It's done. It's history. We can't save money on that now to build train tracks.

ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha: muck4doo: Di Atribe: rev. dave: Money should not get in the way of doing what is right.

With conservatives, it all comes back to money. That's all that matters to them.

While I despise making everything a partisan issue, the author of the article fired the first shot.

Money doesn't grow on trees. We don't live in Jerry Jones world.

DoD spends over 500 every year, with far less to show for it.

DoD employs too many people. The money isn't going to come from there.

thamike: muck4doo: Money doesn't grow on trees.

Exactly.  Money is technically a fungus.

LOL!

WorldCitizen: muck4doo: ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha: muck4doo: Di Atribe: rev. dave: Money should not get in the way of doing what is right.

With conservatives, it all comes back to money. That's all that matters to them.

While I despise making everything a partisan issue, the author of the article fired the first shot.

Money doesn't grow on trees. We don't live in Jerry Jones world.

DoD spends over 500 every year, with far less to show for it.
n
DoD employs too many people. The money isn't going to come from there.

We just need to sell it is a military/industrial necessity as Eisenhower did with the interstate system. Then have the military/industrial complex build it. Problem solved.

We already have a railway system. What you mean to say is that we need to sell a "high speed" railway system as a necessity to the military. They won't buy that. They already have planes to do the high speed stuff.

DamnYankees: muck4doo: Money doesn't grow on trees.

Money is paper. It literally does grow on trees. I've never understood this expression.

That is why you vote Democrat.

BTW Japan would gladly sell the US it's latest shinkansen trains, Germany would gladly sell ICE trains, the French would gladly sell the TGV. So as far as rolling stock goes, there's no need to spend money on R&D and such. Which actually greatly simplifies things. Just have to decide which rolling stock to go with and place an order.

ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha: muck4doo: ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha: muck4doo: Di Atribe: rev. dave: Money should not get in the way of doing what is right.

With conservatives, it all comes back to money. That's all that matters to them.

While I despise making everything a partisan issue, the author of the article fired the first shot.

Money doesn't grow on trees. We don't live in Jerry Jones world.

DoD spends over 500 every year, with far less to show for it.

DoD employs too many people. The money isn't going to come from there.

Trust me, I'm aware of how many people the DoD employs, but let's not pretend that this just about how much money it will cost.

It is about money. They say 200 billion now, how much do you think it will really cost(cough cough Boston Big Dig)? How many riders per year for how many years would it take to make up for that? You're not even counting now how much it would cost to keep it operating once it starts.

DamnYankees: muck4doo: DamnYankees: muck4doo: Money doesn't grow on trees.

Money is paper. It literally does grow on trees. I've never understood this expression.

That is why you vote Democrat.

I vote for Democrats because I understand monetary economics, yes. That is one reason why I tend to vote for them.

Or was that supposed to be an insult or something?

You dug that insult yourself. I just helped you along with it. :p

flucto: This thread will be wasted on the geek tab.

If going to main this would be filled with penis jokes.

muck4doo: cough cough Boston Big Dig)

The Big Dig would've cost less if it hadn't been awarded to the lowest bidder. The price was so low that there was no way the contractor could've met the budget even if everything was how they were expecting and they got away with cutting corners. That last thing by itself added a bunch to the final cost. Then there was the matter of things not going how they planned because of things they found they weren't expecting. Get someone who isn't out to cut corners and sure the initial price might look higher, but you're not going to run into cost overruns when the corner cutting catches up with them, which it always does. Also part of the issue was waiting so long, it should've been done ages ago, when just by virtue of inflation it would've cost less. Sitting around waiting to do something for 20 years is now way to keep costs down.

JerseyTim: Can we get a 268 mph maglev? Because that would be rad.

A French TGV could do that in theory and so could a Japanese shinkansen. While neither currently runs that fast, both are capable of it.

WhyteRaven74: muck4doo: cough cough Boston Big Dig)

The Big Dig would've cost less if it hadn't been awarded to the lowest bidder. The price was so low that there was no way the contractor could've met the budget even if everything was how they were expecting and they got away with cutting corners. That last thing by itself added a bunch to the final cost. Then there was the matter of things not going how they planned because of things they found they weren't expecting. Get someone who isn't out to cut corners and sure the initial price might look higher, but you're not going to run into cost overruns when the corner cutting catches up with them, which it always does. Also part of the issue was waiting so long, it should've been done ages ago, when just by virtue of inflation it would've cost less. Sitting around waiting to do something for 20 years is now way to keep costs down.

Indeed, and why do you think this time it will be different? Also, how many riders per year are going to be needed to make up the costs, and also pay for costs of running this?

/Look, I like the idea, but think it is not fiscally responsible. Maybe you can prove to me otherwise.

Di Atribe: rev. dave: Money should not get in the way of doing what is right.

With conservatives, it all comes back to money. That's all that matters to them.

While I despise making everything a partisan issue, the author of the article fired the first shot.

People like us don't usually read well balanced and non-partison white papers unless it is part of the job.    But you do make a good point about conservatives seeing through green colored glasses.   I thought the part of religious conservatism was not supposed to be so worldly and selfish.

Trains just shift the costs from the people to the government.   If trains are not making a profit then that means there is no money wasted on middle men.  If people did not buy cars and gas and insurance for those cars, each person may save $10,000 or more per year in driving related costs.  Not to mention all the reduction in traffic deaths which have no monetary value.   Even those who own cars will still save money in the long term.  At some point while our population keeps growing even air travel will become so congested that the ticket price will become so high only the wealthy can fly.

muck4doo: why do you think this time it will be different?

Well if people decide to do it right, and skip on the nonsense of awarding things to lowest bidders, it'll work better. Also we can get help from those who've built high speed rail already.

Also why is it people will go off about how much a high speed train would cost yet aren't going utterly apeshiat about the F-35 program doubling in cost and turning out to be the bad idea many people said it would be? Lockheed-Martin is basically demanding the government pay for its own fark ups and delays saying it's not their fault. Yet don't hear people gnashing their teeth about the program the way they do whenever someone mentions things like expanded public transit, high speed rail and so on.

Dancin_In_Anson: will it be able to be self sufficient?

As long as you can cover operational costs, you've got no problems.

Dancin_In_Anson: Think it can be done without pulling funds from elsewhere to do it?

If we can pull funds from elsewhere to build a new class of ships for the Navy, why not do it for the public good? Either no one does it, period, or everyone gets to, you can't have some people be allowed to do it and others not.

WhyteRaven74: muck4doo: why do you think this time it will be different?

Well if people decide to do it right, and skip on the nonsense of awarding things to lowest bidders, it'll work better. Also we can get help from those who've built high speed rail already.

Also why is it people will go off about how much a high speed train would cost yet aren't going utterly apeshiat about the F-35 program doubling in cost and turning out to be the bad idea many people said it would be? Lockheed-Martin is basically demanding the government pay for its own fark ups and delays saying it's not their fault. Yet don't hear people gnashing their teeth about the program the way they do whenever someone mentions things like expanded public transit, high speed rail and so on.

IF people decide to do it right? I think right there is where you and me disagree, as well as operating costs. I like the idea of better mass transportation. As a matter of fact, I believe when i met you here in Austin 4 or 5 years ago I told you one of my biggest pet peeves was seeing teen age girls wasting gas riding big trucks to haul their hides around to the next party. I'm looking at the big picture here of it all, and wondering if this will work. What are the costs going to be to build this? What will the operations costs be like per year? How many riders will it take per year to make this cost efficient? Why will people use this instead of their own cars or taking a plane ride?

cameroncrazy1984: muck4doo: /Look, I like the idea, but think it is not fiscally responsible. Maybe you can prove to me otherwise.

How is improving our infrastructure, which is crumbling at this point, NOT fiscally responsible?

How was building the bridge to nowhere in Alaska fiscally responsible?