The Senate Appropriations Committee voted to spend a token $100 million on high-speed rail after its own transportation subcommittee had zeroed out funding for the program. The purpose, said a rail advocate with US PIRG, is “to keep things on life support until Congress comes to its senses.”
The only way Congress will “come to its senses” and support high-speed rail is if the Democrats take control of both the House and Senate. Does anything think that is going to happen soon? It doesn’t seem so inside the beltway, but to the Antiplanner, $100 million is a lot of money. To just casually throw that around to keep a rightfully defunct program on life support is ridiculous.
Generally, the common cause of impotence is no longer being an issue of buy pfizer viagra concern but if the problem persists for half or more times weekly. One is required to simply consume 1 pill at a time in buy viagra sale a day as having multiple or more than 1 is highly not recommended due to health reasons and concern.6) The product is made available at all leading online and other drug stores for the convenience of common man. They are a combination of electricity viagra pill for woman created by voltage and a magnetic field created by the current. There are other side effects but these are not really in the form of a pill? Half of the time consumed, in a typical cheap tadalafil no prescription, is spent talking about the side-effects of taking the drug.
Interesting that US PIRG gets described as a “consumer advocacy group.” The PIRGs were consumer advocates when they were challenging bait-and-switch marketing or promoting auto safety. But promoting a huge construction program whose product few consumers were use is not consumer advocacy; it is corporate advocacy. the Antiplanner wonders how long it will take before progressives come to their senses and figure that out.
There is only one way to keep it from rising from the grave, you must destroy the brain.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nla64rE5oV4
This micromanaging transportation “segments” and modalities has to stop if anything needs to happen is that airlines, and railroads need to be able merge, and/or form partnerships. Airports, Railway, Transit and Bus stations must be allowed to combine so consumers can make the choice that benefits their individual needs. If rail is important – there is no reason I can’t fly to Chicago, and hop on a train leaving directly from the airport, to Milwaukee and/or Green Bay, or Indianapolis – it could be faster than flying. The problem is that the hardware, and rail capacity doesn’t exist, and it may be cost prohibitive.
If passenger rail service is profitable the airlines would embrace it. They wouldn’t be airlines, they would be transportation providers whether it be land (train,bus), sea (ferries,ocean liners), or air. Is there any legislation or bureaucracy that limits how airlines can operate or if they’re allowed to operate as multi-functional providers of transportation.
In the past, the government was even worse than it is now in enforcing stupid rules that keep transportation modes separate. Shortly after WW2, the ATSF railroad started an air freight subsidiary called “Santa Fe Skyway.” After a brief period of time, the federal government ruled that a railroad can’t be in the air freight business and the airline got shut down. This arbitrary “micromanaging transportation “segments†and modalities” has been going on a long time and much of it is government’s fault.
So a few Nader fans get together and claim they are representing the “public interest.” That is sickly similar to the “Peoples’ Republic” of ….
You can easily make fun of Congress, but at least they have to stand for election. Groups that claim to be representing the public only have to convince rich people to give them money.
Sandy Teal says: “Groups that claim to be representing the public only have to convince rich people to give them money.”
How is this different than politicians again??? 😉
Sandy, O’Toole gets funds from the Koch brothers.
Good point, bennett!
But we do know that Ralph Nader, founder of the self-appointed Public Interest groups, was selected by 3% of the public in 2000, and by 0.3% in 2004, and 0.56% in 2008.
At least other politicians have to get a majority vote before they can pretend to be acting in the public interest.
The Antiplanner wrote:
The only way Congress will “come to its senses†and support high-speed rail is if the Democrats take control of both the House and Senate. Does anything think that is going to happen soon? It doesn’t seem so inside the beltway, but to the Antiplanner, $100 million is a lot of money. To just casually throw that around to keep a rightfully defunct program on life support is ridiculous.
I usually vote Democratic, even though I disagree strongly with many Democrats when it comes to taxpayer funding of passenger rail projects of all kinds.
My main reason for voting Democratic is that most Democrats are not interested in turning the United States into a taxpayer-funded Christian theocracy of some sort, but many Republicans are guilty of supporting such nonsense, even though it clearly violates the letter and spirit of the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment. For reasons not clear to me, Libertarians don’t usually seem to push back against Republican efforts to erode the First Amendment.
But on the other hand, there’s at least a touch of theocratic thinking on the part of many Democrats (and some Republicans as well) that support spending tax dollars on passenger rail projects is somehow a good thing, even though I have yet to see much information proving that we should build and subsidize passenger rail. And perversely, some anti-highway groups and people are only in favor of passenger rail precisely because such projects are generally funded by taxes paid by users of other modes of transportation, so they feel that more spending on rail means less spending on the highway network that they dislike so much.
LazyReader wrote:
If passenger rail service is profitable the airlines would embrace it. They wouldn’t be airlines, they would be transportation providers whether it be land (train,bus), sea (ferries,ocean liners), or air. Is there any legislation or bureaucracy that limits how airlines can operate or if they’re allowed to operate as multi-functional providers of transportation.
I’m not so sure that’s going to happen, for the following reasons:
1. While many airlines have lost money and gone bankrupt, I don’t think passenger air service has lost nearly as much on a per-passenger-kilometer basis as passenger rail has managed to do, perhaps because most passenger rail in the U.S. has been busy losing taxpayer dollars, not the dollars belonging to its owners (but then you already knew this).
2. Railroading is very different technology from providing airline service, and the skill sets of the workforces that provide the service and operate the aircraft or rolling stock are mostly incompatible.
3. Many jobs in the airline industry are unionized, but clearly not all. Very close to all hourly jobs representing people that work on or for the railroads are unionized and covered by benefits administered by the U.S. Railroad Retirement Board.
the highwayman said: Sandy, O’Toole gets funds from the Koch brothers.
JK: Thanks for point out that a successful business person, who has created a large business satisfying people’s real needs and wants (instead of planners fantasies) supports Randal.
That is a badge of honor to be supported by a successful person. Sadly you are so depraved so as to miss that.
Thanks
JK
Sandy,
I agree. However, I will point out the very strong correlation between money spent on a campaign and the likelihood to win. I’m also not willing to lend much credibility to anybody just because they were elected. Brittany Spears sold millions of records and G.W. Bush got elected twice. John Coltrane never had a crossover album, and Nader only got 3% of the vote. To quote an artist regarding chart topping hits, “because if you go platinum, it’s got nothing to do with luck, it just means that a million people are stupid as fuck.” I think the same can be said for why some people get elected.
By all accounts Nader is more fiscally conservative than Bush (the only thing worse than a tax and spend liberal is a no-tax and spend republican). Nader has also probably done more for consumer protection, particularly in toy and food safety, than any other American. I suppose some may say that’s not in “American” interest, but those people are likely corporatist.
Let’s face it. We’re commenting on a blog that gets funding from an interest group. Interest groups have their place, and I’m not sure I’m willing to give any more or less credibility to them just because they’re not elected.
bennett wrote:
By all accounts Nader is more fiscally conservative than Bush (the only thing worse than a tax and spend liberal is a no-tax and spend republican).
I strongly agree.
Nader has also probably done more for consumer protection, particularly in toy and food safety, than any other American. I suppose some may say that’s not in “American†interest, but those people are likely corporatist.
I used to be a big fan of Nader, but have not been since he started running for President (well before 2000).
I have also found that Nader’s long-ago criticism of General Motors over the design of the Chevrolet Corvair, which won him so much fame, to be questionable (at least in hindsight), though GM’s response was stupid and ham-handed.
Let’s face it. We’re commenting on a blog that gets funding from an interest group.
I see nothing wrong with the above words. Nothing at all, though I suggest that the word group should perhaps be plural.
Interest groups have their place, and I’m not sure I’m willing to give any more or less credibility to them just because they’re not elected.
I agree with Randal much more than I disagree with him, but more to the point, I always respect him (and I respect most of the people that post comments here as well).
“We’re commenting on a blog that gets funding from an interest group.”
That’s a poor excuse for your lack of argumentative skills.
Craigh,
Despite your lack of reading comprehension skills, you might of noticed that I was defending the likes of Mr. O’Toole with my comment. My point is that the fact that this blog is funded by interest groups doesn’t diminish it’s credibility. In fact, in response to Sandy, if this blog was financed by an elected official, it would likely be much less credible (IMHO).
Though O’Toole isn’t defending the public’s interests, he’s defending the business interests of big oil, auto makers & highway contractors.
Mr. O’Toole is having a conversation, and you’re invited. Yes he has biases, some of which may stem from his financiers (though this may be a chicken and egg scenario), but hell, I’m a professional planner commenting on “The Antiplanner.” Lord knows I have an agenda while commenting here.
Also, from what I can gather, Mr. O’Toole is much more concerned with individual interests as opposed to the “public interest.” At least I’ve never once heard him advocate for public/communitarian/collective interests. These are aspects of American life that I am happy and willing to debate in this forum.
I hate it when Antiplanners hold planners to a higher standard than others (particularly corporations) and I am NOT willing to point the finger at Mr. O’Toole saying “you aren’t blogging on behalf of the public interest,” especially when he has never claimed to be.
It seems my comment was not very clear. I like speech by all sorts of “special interests.” They generate great and weird ideas that makes the US and the world a much better place.
I was just poking fun and criticizing PIRGs because they proclaim themselves to not be a special interests, but instead represent the “public interest.” My other point was that as bad as politicians can be, those who win elections have at least some claim to being representing the public. My evidence was the Nader vote totals.
To me, The Antiplanner is a great example, because it is clearly a special interest and clearly identifies its point of view. There is no hiding that he works for CATO. If only PIRGs would do the same, I would then like PIRGs.
@Bennett, just curious are you just quoting or also an Immortal Technique fan?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wDUbEqqFLg
Anyway, I was sad to see Congress do this. It means projects like the yet-another-pork-barrel-project-for-the-iron range “high speed rail” between the Twin Towns and Duluth Minnesota will continue to limp along so consultants and other politically connected firms can continue to suckle on the taxpayers. It’s even more annoying that a project that for all practical purposes is for Minnesota is getting any federal funding at all. So it goes.
Karlock, the Koch’s got their financial start from Joe Stalin.
Also airlines don’t have any infrastructure, we all own the sky.
Sandy, Cato isn’t telling people that they’re really a mouth piece for big oil & the auto industry. To make a long story short, O’Toole’s a fraud.
So Cato, a supposed mouth piece for the auto industry, has chosen to repeatedly denounce President Obama’s bailouts of Chrysler and GM. That’s the action of a shill for the industry?