Say it ain't so...

[Minotaur]

America is too old....too far behind the times to build a high speed rail system...Too many right wing naysayers that would rather give the money to the defense dept.....Now is the time for China-Japan-Asia along with Europe to build these projects....They will lead the way into the 21st century for rail travel

We did miss that train a long time ago. I've been on the 200++ MPH bullet train and could not believe how great they are. China is now building 300 mph trains. City to city is an absolute breeze. If any city can do it successfully it would be either SF or NY imo. If either do it, the cities they pick will be important.

 

[Minotaur]

Mr. Minotaur,

we are talking about high speed rail. They are already expanding Caltrain from SF to San Jose, Bart from Fremont to Warm Springs, and the there is a commuter rail line already from the central valley to down town San Jose. High Speed rail doesn't get up to speed in urban areas, or did you even know that? The only way it can run full speed in open areas like the central valley.

There are rural areas between SF and Sacramento (I-80), San Jose (up I-5) and even Livermore and Concord so that is a non-issue imo. It may shock you to know that many commute from Sacramento to work in SF. When you ride the bullet trains they are perfectly capable of going the speed they need for the topography they are addressing. They reach the top speed at the rural runs not the city.

 

[ya-ta-hey]

We did miss that train a long time ago. I've been on the 200++ MPH bullet train and could not believe how great they are. China is now building 300 mph trains. City to city is an absolute breeze. If any city can do it successfully it would be either SF or NY imo. If either do it, the cities they pick will be important.

Mr. Minotaur,

LOL, you mean this China?

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a9337b06-fe20-11e0-a1eb-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1iWCzmoxO

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-28/china-says-design-failure-mismanagement-caused-july-high-speed-rail-crash.html

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/bizchina/2011-07/15/content_12909730.htm

And you do know that if the Chinese government wants a right of way, they just go in, move the people out of their houses, and take it, don't you?

Care to try another analogy that I can shoot down so easily?

 

[Minotaur]

I'll add a question for you: How do you decide when to say Ms, Mrs, or Mr on line? How often are you correct?

Bet you judged by my manly legs and goat like, bull head!

 

[Jen]

Jobs are not top consideration for Democrats.

 

[Minotaur]

Mr. Minotaur,

LOL, you mean this China?

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a9337b06-fe20-11e0-a1eb-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1iWCzmoxO

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-28/china-says-design-failure-mismanagement-caused-july-high-speed-rail-crash.html

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/bizchina/2011-07/15/content_12909730.htm

And you do know that if the Chinese government wants a right of way, they just go in, move the people out of their houses, and take it, don't you?

Care to try another analogy that I can shoot down so easily?

Not really Maam. Perhaps you should look up the latest headline on the 300 mph rail. The news story was late last week so it should be easy to find. Is your goal to discuss this or argue without knowing what the person you are speaking to is talking about?

 

[ya-ta-hey]

I'll add a question for you: How do you decide when to say Ms, Mrs, or Mr on line? How often are you correct?

Bet you judged by my manly legs and goat like, bull head!

Mr. Minotaur,

You are correct, the Minotaur, a creature of Minoan mythology, is the head of a bull on the body of a man. If the Minotaur was a women, the myth, instead of instilling fear of those Minoans who inadvisedly ventured into the laberyth, would have made mention of the nice bazoongas on that two bagger woman.

 

[UPNYA2]

My perspective is based more around the lowered cost fare, comfort and ease as well as knowing the commuter habits in those larger cities not politics. The panel may be accurate for a SF to LA run as this will be strating from scratch. I think connecting the Bay Area to SF may be a better first project and they can over time do the commections much as they did BART when it began. Try to discuss this without being rude as it is an interesting subject.

What about my post was rude?

The way I questioned the manner in which you made an assertation as if you were viewing this in a manner that a commission hired to specificly study this subject did NOT?

If I somehow offended you by insinuating that the view you reached and presented immediately after reading about this subject on here had the possibly of being based more upon your fairly liberal overall views in life as much as they were based upon an analysis of data, I apologize.

If it was rude for me to insinuate that a commission that was hired specificly to study all of the aspects of this idea might have also thought of what you thought of when you read about it this morning, I apologize.

If it was rude of me to view your comments about others leaving politics out of this as being rude, I apologize.


Better?

 

[Minotaur]

Mr. Minotaur,

You are correct, the Minotaur, a creature of Minoan mythology, is the head of a bull on the body of a man. If the Minotaur was a women, the myth, instead of instilling fear of those Minoans who inadvisedly ventured into the laberyth, would have made mention of the nice bazoongas on that two bagger woman.

Yes Maam

 

[ya-ta-hey]

Not really Maam. Perhaps you should look up the latest headline on the 300 mph rail. The news story was late last week so it should be easy to find. Is your goal to discuss this or argue without knowing what the person you are speaking to is talking about?

Mr. Minotaur,

Exactly, the high speed rail in China is losing money hand over fist, is wrought with corruption, in spite of the fact that the government can steal land, and have a slave labor work force, and yet, they are still going forward with their ill-advised project because it is make work jobs to keep the masses peaceful.

 

[MaryAnne]

Mr. Minotaur,

Exactly, the high speed rail in China is losing money hand over fist, is wrought with corruption, in spite of the fact that the government can steal land, and have a slave labor work force, and yet, they are still going forward with their ill-advised project because it is make work jobs to keep the masses peaceful.

Note,here,Minotaur has told you several times she is a woman!

 

[Minotaur]

Mr. Minotaur,

Exactly, the high speed rail in China is losing money hand over fist, is wrought with corruption, in spite of the fact that the government can steal land, and have a slave labor work force, and yet, they are still going forward with their ill-advised project because it is make work jobs to keep the masses peaceful.

And yet Maam, the question you answered was not about the profit making of China but the building of the 300 MPH line. If you wish to discuss how China may or may not make a profit you picked the wrong answer from me to answer. You interrupted and made a statement from an October news release you found without knowing that last week the announcement was made for the 300 plus MPH train was announced. That is what my answer for you centered around. Don't know how China sees commute profitability. I do know they can charge more. Not really a part of whether America has the ingenuity to make new science for us work. I think we can if we do it wisely.

 

[Minotaur]

Note,here,Minotaur has told you several times she is a woman!

Miss Yatahey is stuck on taa taa's on bulls. LOL I'll let her play. ;-)

 

[fairsheet]

I see two potential advantages for high speed rail, over air travel, especially as it relates to trips of less than 300 miles. One has to do with the fact that rail is already inherently more "green" than air. And going forward, rail offers up a more realistic opportunity for taking advantage of future advances in green alternatives, than does air.

And second - especially on those shorter trips, rail can save us considerable otherwise wasted time. Realistically, from the time we set foot in an airport to the time we leave the airport - subtracting out actual flight time - we spend at least 2 hours (figured very conservatively). This is true of virtually any flight of any length and it's unrealistic to expect that we can do much to reduce that. So, IF we can create a rail system with a "hop on / hop off" regime, the time savings would be enormous and worth $Zillions.

As it stands now, I doubt that either of these cost factors is being considered in these cost comparisons between rail and air.

 

[Lukey]

I see two potential advantages for high speed rail, over air travel, especially as it relates to trips of less than 300 miles. One has to do with the fact that rail is already inherently more "green" than air. And going forward, rail offers up a more realistic opportunity for taking advantage of future advances in green alternatives, than does air.

And second - especially on those shorter trips, rail can save us considerable otherwise wasted time. Realistically, from the time we set foot in an airport to the time we leave the airport - subtracting out actual flight time - we spend at least 2 hours (figured very conservatively). This is true of virtually any flight of any length and it's unrealistic to expect that we can do much to reduce that. So, IF we can create a rail system with a "hop on / hop off" regime, the time savings would be enormous and worth $Zillions.

As it stands now, I doubt that either of these cost factors is being considered in these cost comparisons between rail and air.

So it wasn't a fair analysis because it restricted itself to "real" costs?

 

[Minotaur]

I see two potential advantages for high speed rail, over air travel, especially as it relates to trips of less than 300 miles. One has to do with the fact that rail is already inherently more "green" than air. And going forward, rail offers up a more realistic opportunity for taking advantage of future advances in green alternatives, than does air.

And second - especially on those shorter trips, rail can save us considerable otherwise wasted time. Realistically, from the time we set foot in an airport to the time we leave the airport - subtracting out actual flight time - we spend at least 2 hours (figured very conservatively). This is true of virtually any flight of any length and it's unrealistic to expect that we can do much to reduce that. So, IF we can create a rail system with a "hop on / hop off" regime, the time savings would be enormous and worth $Zillions.

As it stands now, I doubt that either of these cost factors is being considered in these cost comparisons between rail and air.

Having experienced it between Beijing and Tianjin I can say you are 100% correct on the under 200 mile trips. For us it was faster to take the train than to fly out of the airport because of not having to do the airport checkin routine. You board as in any train station and it slowly leaves the station and ups the speed a little through town but when it hits the rural area it really is like a bullet and you don't even feel it. The best commute I have experienced. I think SF hooked up with Sacramento or San Jose would be a natural win/win. One of the greatest assets to me is it would make commute time to distant cities possible without the gas worry or the hours of driving or commute train riding. It really simplifies commutes and potentially expands the workplace choices for those living in one city and wanting to work in higher paying cities.

 

[fairsheet]

So it wasn't a fair analysis because it restricted itself to "real" costs?

Are you suggesting that the environmental costs and efficiency costs I refer to, aren't "real"?

 

[lupehernandezdepedajack]

And yet Maam, the question you answered was not about the profit making of China but the building of the 300 MPH line. If you wish to discuss how China may or may not make a profit you picked the wrong answer from me to answer. You interrupted and made a statement from an October news release you found without knowing that last week the announcement was made for the 300 plus MPH train was announced. That is what my answer for you centered around. Don't know how China sees commute profitability. I do know they can charge more. Not really a part of whether America has the ingenuity to make new science for us work. I think we can if we do it wisely.

As long as those folks buying the tickets are the ones paying for it I am all for the idea....It would be unfair to burden the millions upon millons that will never travel on it with higher gasoline, property, income or even the coming stealth VAT taxes

 

[Minotaur]

As long as those folks buying the tickets are the ones paying for it I am all for the idea....It would be unfair to burden the millions upon millons that will never travel on it with higher gasoline, property, income or even the coming stealth VAT taxes

Have to agree. I think that is the issue for Jerry Brown if he insists on the connection between LA and SF as that one is questionable and the subsidies by taxpayers would likely be as the panel predicted. Surely he can modify it so private, for profit can make the investment and government can subsidize it and not hit taxpayers as hard as it sounds like it will do with the current plan. It would be great to see a less enthusiastic test model for any larger city and near distant community.

 

[fairsheet]

Have to agree. I think that is the issue for Jerry Brown if he insists on the connection between LA and SF as that one is questionable and the subsidies by taxpayers would likely be as the panel predicted. Surely he can modify it so private, for profit can make the investment and government can subsidize it and not hit taxpayers as hard as it sounds like it will do with the current plan. It would be great to see a less enthusiastic test model for any larger city and near distant community.

It's interesting - and a little breathtaking! - if we go back to the beginning of road and air travel in the U.S. and total up the LITERALLY Trillions of dollars we've invested over the last 100 years, in getting those technologies up and running and viable.

I'm not prepared to suggest those investments weren't worthwile. I'm not sure anyone is. But then...to turn around and suggest that new tech like high-speed rail MUST make its own way - entirely at the "ticket booth"?....is silly and disengenuous.