Once a supporter, now the Washington Post‘s editorial page says, “Somebody, please, stop this train.”
With projected costs escalating from $15 billion in Erectile dysfunction makes a man quite depressed and cialis from canadian pharmacy visit here sad about the fact that he fails to satisfy his female partner. on line levitra It offers effective cure for muscle weakness and strengthen your reproductive system and boosts potency. The medical science has improved a lot. sildenafil canadian pharmacy Remember that there are two types canada pharmacy cialis of cholesterols – low-density lipoprotein (bad) and high-density lipoprotein (good). 1996 to $98.5 billion fifteen years later, just how bad do things have to get before supporters admit the plan is foolish?
Antiplanner: “just how bad do things have to get before supporters admit the plan is foolish?”
I guess it isn’t enough to get sued by Kings County”
http://www.bakersfield.com/news/local/x357051679/Kings-County-sues-High-Speed-Rail-Authority
“The suit, filed Monday in Sacramento County Superior Court, claims that the authority’s use of funds from Prop 1A, which created the agency and commissioned a high-speed rail line, cannot be used under current plans.”
And in the Sacramento Bee, Dan Walters reports that “Peninsulans still leery about high-speed train.”
Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/11/15/4054855/dan-walters-peninsulans-still.html#ixzz1do31ZACd
And Palo Alto Online announces that “Palo Alto mulls tougher stance on high-speed rail.”
http://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/show_story.php?id=23243
So the answer to the question is “pretty bad.”
Normally, I’d say let them have at it and waste money playing their games, but there’s national taxpayer money at play here, being wasted on rail delusions. Therefore, the faster this boondoggle is killed, the better.
Antiplanner: “…just how bad do things have to get before supporters admit the plan is foolish?”
A lot, lot worse.
Once politicians have spent some time considering and elaborating on a plan, they come to emotionally own the project. The project becomes part of them, and any attack on the project become a personal attack on them.
It would be a lot easier if they came up with a variety of woolly alternatives to explore with the public, and try to get some consensus, before they become attached to the project.
Off-topic, but timely, I wanted to note that the NY City judge who ruled that the city could not change the rules on the Occupy Wall Street protesters after they started occupying the site, thereby also ruled that not land use changes could be made on current occupants. Thus, all zoning in NY City would be invalid against people who owned the land before the zoning.
However, I see that the NY Court of Appeals already overruled the NY City judge.
This whole thing reminds me of the Big Dig.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Dig
irandom wrote:
This whole thing reminds me of the Big Dig.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Dig
Were there Big Dig cost overruns? Yes.
But the Big Dig (in Boston, Mass.) is tiny in terms of total cost (and overruns) when compared to the California High-Speed Choo-Choo Train project.
And the because the Big Dig is not a rail project, the high labor costs associated with running trains in the U.S. will not be as much of a burden on Massachusetts taxpayers.
metrosucks wrote:
Normally, I’d say let them have at it and waste money playing their games, but there’s national taxpayer money at play here, being wasted on rail delusions.
That was certainly part of the Washington Post’s motivation in running that editorial.
Therefore, the faster this boondoggle is killed, the better.
Several people I respect have suggested purchasing model trainsets for the advocates of passenger rail boondoggles as a substitute for the real thing. Especially in this case, that’s a great idea.
FrancisKing wrote:
Once politicians have spent some time considering and elaborating on a plan, they come to emotionally own the project. The project becomes part of them, and any attack on the project become a personal attack on them.
Though remember that California state elected officials are term-limited (a bad idea, in my opinion).
From my point of view, the greater problem relates to the construction of small, short, segments of a proposed rail system. Once that happens, the proponents of the project will assert “we have spent so much money building the one part of the line, so we can’t stop now.”
It would be a lot easier if they came up with a variety of woolly alternatives to explore with the public, and try to get some consensus, before they become attached to the project.
More freeway capacity (if needed). More airport runway and terminal capacity. The private sector can build (and operate, under a long-term concession) both. Or the public sector can build and operate them in the traditional way. Either is fine with me.
Then let the private sector provide cars and buses to run on those freeways, and let the private sector provide aircraft to fly between California’s metropolitan areas.
No need for a new California choo-choo train.
Even if you adjust for inflation that’s 4.7 times more than the 1996 projections in just 15 years! The price tag had quintupled. Then you have to adjust additions and obvious cost overruns into account past 2012 during construction, bad weather, strikes, union protests, more strikes, budget meetings, more strikes…..and more strikes.
This may just by the tip of the iceberg. What happens when the planners submit proposals for a possible West Coast Connector. It was all originally part of Obama’s expanded high-speed rail map to connect the Pacific Northwest to Northern California and if they want the same class and speed of trains trying to push 150-200+ mph, Washington and Oregon will rally to soak up federal cash to build along the Western seaboard. West si-eeeeeeeeeeeeed.
“Several people I respect have suggested purchasing model trainsets for the advocates of passenger rail boondoggles as a substitute for the real thing. Especially in this case, that’s a great idea.”
Seconded. At 00 scale (1:76 scale), a 200 mile route ends up only 3 miles long. Which may also be true of the full size effort.
“Several people I respect have suggested purchasing model trainsets for the advocates of passenger rail boondoggles as a substitute for the real thing. Especially in this case, that’s a great idea.â€
Wouldn’t work. Think “p*nis envy”.
CPZ, why do you think it’s ok to subsidize the trucking industry, but not ok to subsidize freight trains?