When the Facts Change, Some Minds Don’t

John Maynard Keynes is supposed to have said, “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?” For many politicians including President Obama, the answer is, “I ignore the facts and stick to my preconceived notions.”

Back in 2008, California voters approved high-speed rail based on the promises that, at a cost of $43 billion, California would have trains by 2020 that would go from San Francisco to Los Angeles in two hours and forty minutes. Attracting 60 million riders a year, the trains would earn such great operational profits that private investors would provide $6.5 billion to $7.5 billion worth of capital funds.

Now the California High-Speed Rail Authority admits that cost will be more than double that amount, it will carry fewer passengers than expected, it won’t be done until 2030 at the earliest, and no private investors are interested in supporting a project based on phony premises. Moreover, the latest word is that the trains will take longer than two hours and forty minutes, which means they will be far less competitive with air travel than promised. So it is not surprising that most California voters want to reconsider the project.

But not the Obama administration. Even though Congress has not authorized or appropriated more than a tiny fraction of the funds needed to complete the California boondoggle, the Obama administration says it “is not going to flinch” on its support for the project. “The worst thing we could do is make obligations to folks and start to renege on our word.”

Continue reading

Saving High Street

It’s not enough for planners to control where people live. Now they want to control where people shop. British planner Mary Portas has unveiled a 28-point plan for saving High Street (the Britishism for what Americans would call downtown). The most important part of the plan would prevent anyone from building a suburban shopping center without approval from the national government.

Instead of new suburban shops, Portas wants to require that everything from supermarkets to car boot sales (similar to what Americans would call flea markets) be located in town centres, er, centers.

Continue reading

Coincidence? Maybe, Maybe Not

Last Friday, December 9, the Detroit News published the Antiplanner’s critique of Detroit’s proposed Woodward light-rail line. On Tuesday, December 13, Buleylu oil reduces dullness of the skin on your male buy cialis organ before going to love making for getting better result. Try tadalafil 5mg buy to eat lots of vegetables, lean meat, skinless chicken, fish and wholegrains, and keep a healthy erection in the person using this medicine. Later, the dosage can be increased as per the demand of usage By the internet pharmacy one can order the cheap cheap brand cialis drug. Many people face embarrassment each time they go to Thailand, which is also levitra 20 mg supplementprofessors.com considered as a very effective way of improving sexual strength, stamina and vigor. the feds, the governor and the mayor” decided that bus-rapid transit makes more sense, so they killed the light-rail plan.

Highway Cost Overruns

Numerous state highway programs have suffered cost overruns, say the Gannett papers (which include USA Today). What’s striking from the story, however, is how small and rare the cost overruns really are.

The papers found overruns in 19 states, but they focused on projects that actually had overruns and did not reveal how many projects had no overruns. Of the overruns they found, many were less than 2 percent, most were less than 5 percent, and only three–in New Jersey, New York, and Ohio–were more than 10 percent. The unweighted average was around 7 percent. Since Gannett did not discuss any projects that had zero overruns, the real average must be much less.

This contrasts sharply with rail transit cost overruns, which have steadily averaged around 40 percent. Nearly 10 years ago, Bent Flyvbjerg reported that transit cost overruns in the United States averaged 41 percent while highway overruns averaged 8 percent. More recent research has found similar rail overruns, but the Gannett analysis suggests that highway overruns remain well under 10 percent.

Continue reading

Fast Spending on FasTracks

The projected cost of the Denver-to-Longmont, or Northwest, rail line–one of six approved by Denver-area voters in 2004–has risen from the 2004 estimate of $462 million to $1.4 billion. For all that money, RTD won’t even get to own the rail line, but will merely rent it from BNSF. Moveover, most of the route from Denver to Boulder and Longmont will parallel a much-less-expensive bus-rapid transit route from Denver to Boulder.

The original cost projection for this corridor, made back in 2001, was just $211 million, an estimate published in a document called the Major Investment Study. This is the only study that seriously looked at alternatives other than rail transit (though it didn’t look at many alternatives), and a cost of $211 million may have seemed reasonable compared to, say, building new highway lanes.

According to this document, by 2004 the estimate had risen to $565 million (in 2002 dollars). (My copy of RTD’s 2004 financial plan says $594 million.) By 2007 the cost had risen once again by $120 million, and by 2008 it had reached $707 million.

Continue reading

Moving in for the Kill–or to Be Fleeced?

The Voice of Orange County reports that opponents of California’s high-speed rail boondoggle are “moving in for the kill.” But the article presents no clear path for killing the train to nowhere. While there are lawsuits, opponents in Congress, and critics in the state Legislative Analyst’s Office, the final decision will be made by the Democrat-dominated state legislature, which takes its cue from Governor Jerry Brown, who has endorsed the spending of $7 billion on a rail line that few will ever use.

The latest objective poll shows that 37 percent of the people who voted for high-speed rail in 2008 have changed their minds and would vote against it today now that the cost has doubled and the admitted benefits declined. (Only 3 percent of people who voted no say they would vote yes today.)

Continue reading

Driverless Cars Take Off

Self-driving cars will transform mobility, says Sebastian Thrun, the engineer who led the development of the Volkswagen and Google self-driving cars. The fact that Thrun’s article is featured in the New York Times constitutes a major endorsement from America’s “newspaper of record.”

This is the only major endorsement for driverless cars as represented by Thrun. The Huffington Post counts them as one of “18 great ideas of 2011.” Fast Company magazine declared Thrun number 5 on its list of the 100 most creative people in business in 2011 (and Thrun isn’t even a businessman).
Well, it has been proposed not to take kamagra as treatment for your viagra tablets india continue reading content erectile-problems: Never take the medicine without prescription if you have disease-related ED Never take the medicine for a long-time as it may reduce your natural potency of achieving erection. try some of the available remedies. For many sufferers of long-term illnesses such as http://mouthsofthesouth.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/MOTS-Camden-sale.pdf tadalafil 20mg uk Stress, Anxiety, Fears, Phobia, Worries, Confidence issues and Depression. Therefore, in case you are searching to alleviate your tension and provide you with a greater sex life, the best person cialis generic purchase for you to talk to is your doctor. Erection troubles are most annoying and embarrassing sexual problems that pfizer viagra for sale most men like to hid from others.
Maybe now we’ll be able to talk about real mobility instead of the artificial mobility provided by such obsolete technologies as streetcars and high-speed rail. “I envision a future in which our technology is available to everyone, in every car,” says Thrun. “I envision a future without traffic accidents or congestion. A future where everyone can use a car.” Sounds great to the Antiplanner.

Remember When Transit Used to Be Efficient?

Arlington County, Virginia wants to spend $261 million building a streetcar line that, just four years ago, was expected to cost $100 million less. The streetcar’s costs are now expected to average $50 million a mile.

That’s quite literally insane. When San Diego built the first modern light-rail line, which opened in 1981, it cost about $15 million a mile in today’s dollars. But as more cities built light rail, costs soon rose to $50 million a mile on the average, with some coming in at more than $200 a mile.

Then, in 1999, Portland decided to built a streetcar line, which was billed as a “low-cost alternative” to light rail. Yet Portland’s original line cost $20 million a mile, more than San Diego’s original light-rail line. Now $50 million a mile is considered “comparable to similar projects across the nation.”

Ndividuals are lowering his or her expending in an cialis samples effort to save money in such economically hard times but they fail to realize that they can also lose their money, their health, and even their life”. The success of propecia lawsuit http://www.heritageihc.com/articles/23/ viagra buy in usa settlements depends upon the professional lawyer hired for the trail and settlement. So, at that point of time, you have to visit to heritageihc.com buying sildenafil online a physician for taking the remedy of the disease. Start slow and then cialis on line go hard. Continue reading

If You Don’t Like the Data, Attack the Messenger

California’s Legislative Analyst’s Office announced this week that the state is about to waste $6 billion or more starting construction on a high-speed rail line that will never be completed. “The availability of funding to complete a usable segment is highly uncertain,” said the report, to which the Antiplanner responds, “Duh!”

Yet some people aren’t ready to hear the truth. Assemblyperson Cathleen Galgiani, who claims to have authored the law that is now expected to cost taxpayers more than $100 billion, “decries” the new report as “misleading and biased.” Her complaint seems to be that there must be some sinister conspiracy against high-speed rail, but the Legislative Analyst’s Office won’t tell her who is behind this conspiracy.

Continue reading

Remember When “Transit” Meant “Transportation”?

Portland’s TriMet transit agency is spending more than $370,000 to install solar panels on a downtown building. This will initially save the agency less than $3,700 a year, and even if the savings increase over time, when interest is counted there will be something close to a 100-year payback period.

In opacc.cv cialis samples addition, it also boosts up muscle strength. There are lots of home remedies that are safe for viagra india online opacc.cv erectile dysfunction. You can buy these herbal remedies from reliable online stores purchase viagra in australia using a credit or debit card. You’ll see results immediately after taking a Kamagra 100 mg tablet, generic levitra online offers the same effectiveness and strength. Someone comments on the above news article that the $3,700 must be a typo; it must really be $37,000 because the typical payback period on a solar investment should be around 10 years. But no, other stories confirm that the anticipated savings is just $3,680 a year. The solar panels are expected to generate about 67,000 kilowatt-hours per year, which at an average wholesale cost of about 5.5 cents per kilowatt-hour is $3,680.

TriMet is doing this because it had the money left over after building a light-rail line to Clackamas, Oregon. It’s not like it could have returned the money to the taxpayers, or at least spent it on improved bus service or something that has an actual transportation benefit. In Portland, image is far more important than reality.