Comments on: Taken for a Ride

By: Sandy Teal

Sandy Teal — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 22:19:42 +0000

If the US didn’t have the ability to shoot down missiles, then Iran would already be a glowing glob of jelly.

By: Sandy Teal

Sandy Teal — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 22:17:29 +0000

California receives less federal Social Security money because old people move away when they retire to avoid all the high taxation rates.

California is over represented in Congress because the House of Representatives counts illegal aliens in apportionment. If Congress just counted US citizens then California would have 6 fewer congressmen.

By: Matt Young

Matt Young — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 19:32:50 +0000

I worked on SDI for seven years. In fact, my research resulted in the first successful test case of an ICBM shoot down with decoys. I know about which I speak. SDI has been nothing but a huge waste of money, a defense catastrophe started by the dumbest president of all time, Ronald the Communist.

What is the problem with SDI? For every 10 billion you spend, I can spend .001 billion and outfit my ICBMs with mylar balloons and completely fool the defense in mid orbit. That is why the Chinese love SDI, it is a huge wasteful boondogle of gigantic proportions, and the more we spend on it the less we spen in useful weapons.

By: Matt Young

Matt Young — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 19:28:41 +0000

California pays a 25% premium on taxes relative to what we receive. The pork is almost always from California to DC.
And yes, California does get just 1/5 of the average Senate vote, the main cause of our state being looted by the Fed. So, yes, a little appreciation of no taxation without representation, the bedrock of the nation, a moral authority higher than the Supreme court.

By: Scott

Scott — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 19:14:13 +0000

Matt, What does inefficient, expensive HSR have to do with orbital defense against ICBMs (SDI)?

By: Sandy Teal

Sandy Teal — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 02:07:31 +0000

So California gets a huge amount of pork, and you use that to complain about California not having enough power in DC? Southern California has few US citizens than North Dakota.

By: Matt Young

Matt Young — Sat, 27 Oct 2012 20:33:57 +0000

I didn’t listen to the reports, I know the results, I am from central California where this thing is happening. Frankly, my home town, Fresno, is going to make a mint in the litigation industry as a result of the farce. Lawyers are arriving by the bus load (no train needed).

The whole farce resulted because someone in Chicago wanted a choo choo. DC cannot give Choo Choo to Chicago unless California pays for it. Hence, California has to get a fake choo choo so that our taxes can be sent to Chicago. Think of the Dem version of SDI, a waste which has no apperant purpose other than graft.

Ultimately, this kind of nonsense results from the disparate voting right, California getting 1/5 of the Senate vote it deserves. Absent democracy (fair voting, remember that?) we get back room deals done by the national party oligarchs, an unfolding disaster.

By: Sandy Teal

Sandy Teal — Sat, 27 Oct 2012 20:17:08 +0000

Yes, that is my point. Thank you for providing the citations.

Under NEPA, you can’t justify building the easy/cheap part of a huge transportation system and then later say that the government already sunk money into the project so the rest should be funded or else it is a waste.

By: C. P. Zilliacus

C. P. Zilliacus — Sat, 27 Oct 2012 08:48:01 +0000

Sandy Teal, that is a good question. I don't really understand how an improved segment of track between two small places (in terms of population) in the Central Valley of California has independent utility. The FHWA says the following (from this page) about segmentation: In order to ensure meaningful evaluation of alternatives and to avoid commitments to transportation improvements before they are fully evaluated, the action evaluated in each environmental impact statement (EIS) or finding of no significant impact (FONSI) shall: 1. Connect logical termini and be of sufficient length to address environmental matters on a broad scope; 2. Have independent utility or independent significance, i.e., be usable and be a reasonable expenditure even if no additional transportation improvements in the area are made; and 3. Not restrict consideration of alternatives for other reasonably foreseeable transportation improvements.

By: Sandy Teal

Sandy Teal — Thu, 25 Oct 2012 21:51:20 +0000

Can someone explain to me how they complied with NEPA in this project if they only funded part of it? Doesn’t that violate the NEPA prohibition against segmenting a project?