America will suffer because of the budget compromise

[Travis]

The insidious Republicans and their big oil benefactors got their way with the budget compromise. They made sure that no money will be spent by the Federal government in 2011 on high speed rail. America's most important next step in transportation infrastructure was essentially gutted simply so they can keep us dependent on fossil fuel based transportation for a bit longer.

To say that heads need to roll for this is putting it mildly. This comes even as California is getting ready to start construction on the LA to San Francisco line early next year. Hopefully when it is up and running people will see what it actually is. Then they will embrace it instead of the constant FUD* coming from the right that seems determined, more than ever, to make sure the USA turns into a third world country one day. Because, you know, trains mean Communism or something equally absurd.



* FUD = Fear Uncertainty & Doubt a favorite tactic of those that oppose progress because they think 7 mpg SUV's are some sort of symbol of American might.

 

[tyr_13]

Well ****.

 

[theprestige]

The insidious Republicans and their big oil benefactors got their way with the budget compromise. They made sure that no money will be spent by the Federal government in 2011 on high speed rail. America's most important next step in transportation infrastructure was essentially gutted simply so they can keep us dependent on fossil fuel based transportation for a bit longer.

Bolding mine. I propose that this thread be moved to the CT subforum, on the strength of the bolded text.

To say that heads need to roll for this is putting it mildly. This comes even as California is getting ready to start construction on the LA to San Francisco line early next year. Hopefully when it is up and running people will see what it actually is. Then they will embrace it instead of the constant FUD* coming from the right that seems determined, more than ever, to make sure the USA turns into a third world country one day. Because, you know, trains mean Communism or something equally absurd.

Bolding mine. In reality, California is getting ready to start construction on the Nowhere to Nowhere line, in the hopes that some Congress, some time, might deign to return to California some of the money it has taken from California, along with money taken from other states, on the condition that this money be spent to realize the dream shared by some (Travis included), that an LA to San Fransisco HSR line be completed.

The rationality of this dream, and the value of its realization, are debated elsewhere.

 

[fuelair]

The insidious Republicans and their big oil benefactors got their way with the budget compromise. They made sure that no money will be spent by the Federal government in 2011 on high speed rail. America's most important next step in transportation infrastructure was essentially gutted simply so they can keep us dependent on fossil fuel based transportation for a bit longer.

To say that heads need to roll for this is putting it mildly. This comes even as California is getting ready to start construction on the LA to San Francisco line early next year. Hopefully when it is up and running people will see what it actually is. Then they will embrace it instead of the constant FUD* coming from the right that seems determined, more than ever, to make sure the USA turns into a third world country one day. Because, you know, trains mean Communism or something equally absurd.



* FUD = Fear Uncertainty & Doubt a favorite tactic of those that oppose progress because they think 7 mpg SUV's are some sort of symbol of American might.

Not my fault - I did not vote for any republickers and I will never vote for a republicker. Democrats aren't perfect but neither are they actively evil.

 

[Ziggurat]

The insidious Republicans and their big oil benefactors got their way with the budget compromise. They made sure that no money will be spent by the Federal government in 2011 on high speed rail. America's most important next step in transportation infrastructure was essentially gutted simply so they can keep us dependent on fossil fuel based transportation for a bit longer.

Oh, please. Big oil has nothing to fear from high speed rail. That will hardly make an impression on oil consumption. If you think that fears of demand decreases are really what drives big oil and hence conservatives, then hybrid cars are a hell of a lot bigger threat than high-speed rail

This comes even as California is getting ready to start construction on the LA to San Francisco line early next year. Hopefully when it is up and running people will see what it actually is.

And if it turns out to be a failure? Will you reevaluate everything you currently think about high-speed rail?

Or will you simply start looking for culprits to blame?

Then they will embrace it instead of the constant FUD* coming from the right that seems determined, more than ever, to make sure the USA turns into a third world country one day. Because, you know, trains mean Communism or something equally absurd.

Yeah, that's not what I've been hearing as the criticism of high-speed rail. Sounds like you're spreading a little FUD of your own.

 

[Neally]

Travis is whining yet again about his pet boondoggle project, high speed rail. Thankfully, cooler heads are prevailing in many areas that are putting the breaks on these pork barrel projects.

 

[leftysergeant]

We are running out of room to builld highways, and they are starting to cause immense harm to the environment. We could have had a decent rail system long ago had the automobile manufacturers not started tearing out light rail systems that were up and running.

Last I looked, the Bundesbahn was always running at close to capacity and nobody seemed greatly put out if they didn't have a car.

I think the opposition to public transportation of any sort is based largely on the rightwing's fear that their desires will not be catered to.

Every time any suggestion is made to improve public transportation here in Washington, I hear a chorus of right wing bloviators shrieking that the liberals are trying to force their fat butts out of their cars and onto buses.

Why are they so insistant that I HAVE TO drive to take part in a normal life style?

 

[Meadmaker]

They made sure that no money will be spent by the Federal government in 2011 on high speed rail.

According to the linked article, they actually made sure that no more than 1 billion dollars will be spent by the Federal government in 2011 on high speed rail.

 

[WildCat]

They made sure that no money will be spent by the Federal government in 2011 on high speed rail.

California is still free to build it themselves, which should be no problem since it's such a guaranteed money-maker, right?

 

[tyr_13]

California is still free to build it themselves, which should be no problem since it's such a guaranteed money-maker, right?

Infrastructure and transport improvements specifically, aren't money makers, they create wealth. They let people and companies make more money, transport workers and goods more easily, and encourage competition. The massive highway projects after WWII helped grow the nation greatly. Did they 'make money'? No. They were a massive initial investment.

The argument for them has never, as far as I've seen, been that they themselves make money.

 

[Dorian Gray]

The insidious Republicans and their big oil benefactors got their way with the budget compromise. They made sure that no money will be spent by the Federal government in 2011 on high speed rail. America's most important next step in transportation infrastructure was essentially gutted simply so they can keep us dependent on fossil fuel based transportation for a bit longer.

To say that heads need to roll for this is putting it mildly. This comes even as California is getting ready to start construction on the LA to San Francisco line early next year. Hopefully when it is up and running people will see what it actually is. Then they will embrace it instead of the constant FUD* coming from the right that seems determined, more than ever, to make sure the USA turns into a third world country one day. Because, you know, trains mean Communism or something equally absurd.



* FUD = Fear Uncertainty & Doubt a favorite tactic of those that oppose progress because they think 7 mpg SUV's are some sort of symbol of American might.

I gotta say, every budget has had this type of compromise. It's just that usually the budget is passed in a more timely and less public manner.

I've also gotta say that high speed rail is to the US what the metric system is to the US. We're just not going to do it. And keeping the highways we've already got does not keep us (directly) tied to fossil fuels. Electric cars? (Plants run on coal, thus 'directly'.)

If electric cars catch on fairly well, then we can try high speed rail like this: flat cars that you can drive your electric car onto and plug in, ride the train to your destination, then unplug and drive off the train. Otherwise, I just don't see it happening.

 

[Dorian Gray]

We are running out of room to builld highways, and they are starting to cause immense harm to the environment. We could have had a decent rail system long ago had the automobile manufacturers not started tearing out light rail systems that were up and running.

Last I looked, the Bundesbahn was always running at close to capacity and nobody seemed greatly put out if they didn't have a car.

I think the opposition to public transportation of any sort is based largely on the rightwing's fear that their desires will not be catered to.

Every time any suggestion is made to improve public transportation here in Washington, I hear a chorus of right wing bloviators shrieking that the liberals are trying to force their fat butts out of their cars and onto buses.

Why are they so insistant that I HAVE TO drive to take part in a normal life style?

If they are running out of room to build highways, then where are they going to build railways?

Also, how many of the liberals in Congress ride the bus? I mean, come on.

 

[Thunder]

I see nothing wrong with paying down the debt slower rather than quicker.

Paying down the debt quicker will require more pain & suffering for the middle and lower class American people.

I guess you can just call me a "Conservative".

 

[rwguinn]

If the government is going to spend money to improve the economy (a result I have doubts about), I would prefer that much more of it be spent doing R&D and actual building stuff, rather than being spent on converting private property to government property--and HS rail in the areas you propose will be nearly ALL land purchase.

 

[theprestige]

I see nothing wrong with paying down the debt slower rather than quicker.

Paying down the debt quicker will require more pain & suffering for the middle and lower class American people.

I guess you can just call me a "Conservative".

It's true: I paid down my debt at the rate of zero paydown per year. Some years, I even paid down negative debt!

And I didn't suffer at all. In fact, I enjoyed a very high standard of living during those years... until all my creditors stopped advancing me credit. Then I suffered a lot, until I'd paid down a substantial part of my debt, as quickly as possible.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

America's most important next step in transportation infrastructure was essentially gutted simply so they can keep us dependent on fossil fuel based transportation for a bit longer.

You really need to try putting the shiny side outward, Travis. It doesn't work if you put the shiny side inward.

* FUD = Fear Uncertainty & Doubt a favorite tactic of those that oppose progress because they think 7 mpg SUV's are some sort of symbol of American might.

…or, as clearly demonstrated here, by those who oppose basic fiscal restraint and responsibility on the part of government; preferring instead to have government waste taxpayer resources on expensive, useless boondoggles.

 

[WildCat]

Infrastructure and transport improvements specifically, aren't money makers, they create wealth. They let people and companies make more money, transport workers and goods more easily, and encourage competition. The massive highway projects after WWII helped grow the nation greatly. Did they 'make money'? No. They were a massive initial investment.

The argument for them has never, as far as I've seen, been that they themselves make money.

Travis says it will. So let California build it, all that wealth it creates will fill the state's coffers, right? Who needs the feds?

 

[Puppycow]

Travis, I want to be with you as a fellow democrat, but I'm a little skeptical.

Can you link to a compelling pro-high-speed-rail case?

Somebody somewhere must have made the case. I want to read it and see if I'm convinced.

 

[Ziggurat]

I see nothing wrong with paying down the debt slower rather than quicker.

We're not paying down the debt at all. So what the hell are you talking about?

 

[quixotecoyote]

Travis says it will.

Could you quote that part of the OP? I must have missed it.