Nix on Rocky Mountain High-Speed Rail?

After getting burned by Denver’s Regional Transit District, Colorado Moreover, order viagra overnight works best when taken on an empty stomach. All these herbs are blended in right combination to boost secretion of testosterone. cialis online best When will a cancer patient who has had treatment experience impotence? Depending on the cialis online pill midwayfire.com treatment, the experience of the surgeon, and the progress of the cancer, it may be right away. There can be physical, mechanical, interpersonal or emotional problems and these should be resolved canadian generic viagra to prevent dissatisfaction and confusion in conjugal life. doesn’t seem eager to drink the Kool-Aid again.

Tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

About The Antiplanner

The Antiplanner is a forester and economist with more than fifty years of experience critiquing government land-use and transportation plans.

6 Responses to Nix on Rocky Mountain High-Speed Rail?

  1. C. P. Zilliacus says:

    [Quoting from the article in the Denver Daily linked by the Antiplanner]

    > High-speed rail foes say a recent report by the Rocky Mountain
    > Rail Authority is overly optimistic and that high-speed rail
    > would be an ineffective burden on Colorado taxpayers.

    Has anyone ever seen a patronage forecast for a proposed passenger rail system in the United States that was not “overly optimistic?”

  2. Scott says:

    Polls often show that people are in support of HSR & other public pork projects.
    However the “wanting” of an item does not include if it’s feasible, realistic, used widely & paid for by users.

    The funding source can often skew the efficiency, cost-benefit, results, morality & such.
    The attitude is usually “get others to pay” usually by Federal sources, but often from more successful people & businesses in general.

  3. prk166 says:

    The accuracy of the study aside, it’s hard to imagine where Colorado would come up with $21 billion to build this. Heck, even if the Feds were to come out tomorrow and say they’ll throw in half, it’s still had to see how Colorado could come up with $10 or $11 billion to build this.

  4. Dan says:

    Yes, what prk said. Colo will have to purchase water infra soon if human population growth keeps happening. Much more important than new transportation infra. With the backlog of maintenance and repair of existing infra, there’s 10 figures right there with water and existing transportation.

    DS

  5. lgrattan says:

    Water usage in Northern California.
    Attended a lecture at Chamber of Commerce, as I remember.
    Homes and factories use 15% of Water. Farmers use 42% and enviornmental issues use 48%.

    The major water savings will be in reducing Enviromental uses not in washing dishes.

  6. Dan says:

    In-stream flows are protected. The economy is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the environment. Fortunately enough folk are around that understand this basic fact.

    DS

Leave a Reply