Quote:

Originally Posted by ElCapitanAmerica 

This is what happens when you vote for a guy that looks like Voldermort.

 

 

Shouldn't be much of a surprise to the constituents then, eh?  "Kill the spaaaare", indeed.

At least your republican leadership isn't trying to change the laws that the VOTERS decided in the last election to take some of the "onus and hardship" from puppy mills.  Missouri rulz.

Maybe he's doing the whole Woody Allen "I wouldn't want to be a member of a club willing to have me" self-hating thing? As in "What's wrong with you fuckers, making me governor? You fucking suck! I'll show you!"

And what's the deal with the train hating Republicans? Did a train piss on Reagan's tomb or something? Trains are by far the best way to travel.

He's probably not thinking straight after killing his daughters at the Overlook Hotel this Christmas.

Jesus Christ. I live in Northwest Florida, but I've spend enough time all around the state to immediately perceive how awesome a high-speed rail connecting all those cities would be, and what it could do for employment opportunities. It's really not rocket science at all.

What a fucking asshat. I hope he gets drunk and runs his car into a ditch, HARD.

For years we've clamored for a three party system and when it kinda-sorta arrives, it's the fucking Tea Party? Why God, why?

Could we frame it as, hey, you know who has a lot of economic power and has high speed rails? China. You don't want to fall behind those [racial slur] do ya?

Trains are the best way to travel, and if you can get a high speed rail (is this a legitimate high speed rail, by the way?) then all the better.

It's far easier to build a high speed train in China. One guy orders it to happen, and it happens. There's no regard for impact upon the environment and people that might be in the way. They're railroaded (heh) and have no say in the matter.

Here in the States you have to deal not only with Federal regulations and problems, but individual state regulations and problems. Then there are the interest groups fighting you tooth and nail to stop this from going through, such as Environmentalist groups that fight every possible solution for our energy crisis. We are paralyzed by these issues. Besides, a high speed train that doesn't go where the people want to go and doesn't get them to their location faster than a conventional car is of little value.

I want a high speed train too, but can't we use logic to place the train's destinations for places people want to go that don't already have cheaper and faster methods of reaching them?

"There's no regard for impact on the environment..."

"...Environmentalist groups that fight every possible solution for our energy crisis."

Ooooo-kay.

I can see why it was rejected. $2.4 billion is a small piece of the pie, cost over run could hit $3 billion plus the upkeep. It doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to spend that kind of money to link towns that are 90 miles apart and you'd have to worry about transportation once you arrived. The California \ Las Vegas one makes a lot of sense.. we're talking about a 6 hour drive to a place that has almost all of the entertainment close together in walking distance, with attractions to watch along the way.... El Cap, tell your Gov to give the money to Nevada... we'll take it* ;)

* this post may contain bias

Isn't your governor the guy who presided over a health insurance company that was charged with the largest case of medicare fraud in the nation's history, and took the 5th like 50 times? 

But Scott isn't the only example of GOP governors that hate their states.  Walker, in Wisconsin, will actually hurt his state's economy irreparably in order to line the pockets of Walmart and McDonalds executives.  Luckily, Wisconsin is evidently inspired by Egypt and is standing up by the tens of thousands against this clown.

I remain incredibly grateful that Jerry Brown got elected.  He's not the progressive champion I would love, but he's sane; he's a grown-up; and he's a Democrat.  If we get the high speed rail money, I hope Floridians will stand up like they're doing in Wisconsin and throw that criminal out. 

That would be awesome. 

Meanwhile, someone posted this to Twitter ... Wisconsin State Capitol: Thunderdome

Source: http://twitpic.com/40tax9

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Vivisector 
Here in the States you have to deal not only with Federal regulations and problems, but individual state regulations and problems. Then there are the interest groups fighting you tooth and nail to stop this from going through, such as Environmentalist groups that fight every possible solution for our energy crisis. We are paralyzed by these issues. Besides, a high speed train that doesn't go where the people want to go and doesn't get them to their location faster than a conventional car is of little value.

You are clearly talking completely out of your ass.  All of the high speed rail proposals use the existing rail corridors, and the trains have to be electric.  If there are any environmental groups fighting tooth and nail against high speed rail, I haven't heard of them.  And do you seriously think that nobody wants to go from Tampa to Orlando or vice versa?  Or that a conventional car is somehow faster than a 225 mph train?

And I haven't looked into it, but I'm pretty sure Federal regulations relating to trains are, if anything, too lax.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fafhrd 

You are clearly talking completely out of your ass.  All of the high speed rail proposals use the existing rail corridors, and the trains have to be electric.  If there are any environmental groups fighting tooth and nail against high speed rail, I haven't heard of them.  And do you seriously think that nobody wants to go from Tampa to Orlando or vice versa?  Or that a conventional car is somehow faster than a 225 mph train?

 

And I haven't looked into it, but I'm pretty sure Federal regulations relating to trains are, if anything, too lax.

Are the trains actually going to run at 225 mph?  I remember reading (and being pissed off at the fact that) our "high speed trains" would only go like 20-25mph faster than our current lot...coincidentally just fast enough for them to officially be labeled as "high speed trains."

I think those uber-fast trains require all new tracks and stuff.

Sounds good to me.

Thanks.

I just heard on the radio that the mayors from individual cities in FLA are possibly going to do an end-run around Scott, even the Republican mayors.  LOL!  Oh, Florida. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Closer 

Are the trains actually going to run at 225 mph?  I remember reading (and being pissed off at the fact that) our "high speed trains" would only go like 20-25mph faster than our current lot...coincidentally just fast enough for them to officially be labeled as "high speed trains."

 

I think those uber-fast trains require all new tracks and stuff.

Prop 1A (2008) was pretty specific about the trains running at 220mph, and the required travel times between the proposed rail hubs. (it's possible that the speed of the train is one of the things that Thomas Elias feels has changed since the prop passed, but the CHSRA website is till saying 2:40 from LA to SF and 80 minutes from LA to San Diego, which sounds the same as what I remember the proposition saying).  I assume that most other states would be looking at using the same types of trains.
 

Well of course Scott is against High Speed rail. After all, who's going to build it? And Ride the trains? The POOR! (I.e. anyone making less than $1 Million a year). You think letting Poor people travel to work (or more in a cheap and efficient manner is going to help Scott and his cronies? Shit, no! Nope, you build that rail line and you'll just attract homeless people!

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElCapitanAmerica 

You're confusing Charles Crist with Lord Voldermort (aka Rick Scott). Crist was in favor of this project.

Fixed!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaieke 

I can see why it was rejected. $2.4 billion is a small piece of the pie, cost over run could hit $3 billion plus the upkeep. It doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to spend that kind of money to link towns that are 90 miles apart and you'd have to worry about transportation once you arrived. The California \ Las Vegas one makes a lot of sense.. we're talking about a 6 hour drive to a place that has almost all of the entertainment close together in walking distance, with attractions to watch along the way.... El Cap, tell your Gov to give the money to Nevada... we'll take it* ;)

 

 

 

* this post may contain bias

The consensus is that cost overruns *might* be 280 million.  Even at double that amount (paid over 20 years), would be a fraction of the annual state budget.   I, for one, would greatly appreciate the reduced traffic (living in the middle of I-4).  Nevermind the fact that Florida voters already approved the high speed rail (and by a greater margin than he was elected governor).  I hope this bites him in the ass and helps ensure that he is a one term governor.

Well, we're talking about a distance of 90 miles here... if the train goes 168 MPH or 225 MPH.. it doesn't matter so the concern over how fast it goes seems kind of moot to me however who will be using it, should be a concern considering it is only an hour and a half car ride. So, how much money are they planing to charge for this high speed rail? A trip from Connecticut to NYC is about $15. I mean, are you guys expecting to get 20 million people* to travel between Tampa and Orlando on a yearly basis?

Doesn't make a lot of sense to do something if you're going to take a loss each year. I'd me curious what the numbers are... the only thing I can pull up in google is how this thing is supposed to have huge cost over runs based on previous rail projects and keep in mind, one of these was from 1998.

*20 million times 15 dollars = $300 Million a year -- and it doesn't have to be 20 million unique people, one commuter would probably represent 400+ trips each way yearly.

Snaieke, the whole cost overruns thing has been debunked, I believe.  Evidently, part of the bidding process on this project includes a clause about contractors absorbing overrun costs.   Rick Scott's other comment about having to give the money back if the project fails has also been debunked -- evidently the Feds said Rick Scott never asked about that, but it's negotiable. 

links? to reputable news sources only, no blogs by people in underwear or AOL owned huffington post.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/04/running-the-numbers-on-high-speed-trains/

Here's something from an economist at the NY Times, it came out back in 2009... it gives you a broader scope of what I am talking about with regard to operating costs. Like I said, I'd love to see the real numbers plugged in instead of these estimates from a mythical high speed rail line.

Nice try, Snaieke, but if you had read about this from a legitimate news source, it wouldn't be such a surprise.  Aren't you sick of looking stupid because your Fox/Limbaugh/Beck sources strategically slant the story leaving such salient details out? 

Here's your link, from the Miami Herald, in its first piece on Rick Scott's announcement, not even under the fold:

Three main reasons

Scott said he opted to reject the federal taxpayer money for three main reasons.

First, he predicted construction cost overruns would put Florida taxpayers on the hook for $3 billion.

Secondly, he said, low ridership would have required state subsidies.

And finally, he said, if the project was shut down, the state would have to return the $2.4 billion to Washington.

A spokeswoman for the U.S. Department of Transportation, though, said the state wouldn’t necessarily have had to pay back the money and the issue could have been negotiated if Scott had ever raised it with federal officials.

As to his first two concerns, bid documents being prepared by state transportation officials would have required companies bidding on the project to cover the state’s obligation, as well as any construction cost overruns and operating losses due to low ridership. Companies had indicated they were willing to accept those terms.

If and this is a big IF the contractors were going to cover the costs and operating fees and the state didn't have to pay back the fed, yeah, big mistake on the Gov's fault but that article you link to... makes me doubt that is the whole story.

take a look at this.

Well, that means that if the project is shut down.. let's say the contractor agree's to pay cost over run.. and it does equal to 1 BILLION dollars... after a few hundred million the company stops work and declares bankruptcy. The project is unfinished and now Florida has to repay the 2.6 billion and has an unfinished project. You see, the quote uses past tense.. meaning that boat has sailed and Florida would be on the "hook" (going with a fishing theme here).

Also, here is another article that says Florida has to pay part of the project, almost 300 million dollars, see the above post about ridership.

http://miami.cbslocal.com/2011/02/17/florida-high-speed-rail-project-not-dead-yet/

Also, here is one discussing how tax payers are already covering operating losses of existing rail lines that are cheaper than the high speed costs. For example.. The New York MTA had to get 600 MILLION last year to help cover their losses (not in this article).

http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/dpp/news/local/taxpayer-cost-rail-lines-021711

I know that for the first time home buyer tax credit that was for last year, it had a clause that you cannot sell your house for so many years... I'm sure there is a clause about the high speed rail project and shutting it down (read bottom link about one exact same situation). Now you can say a private business will cover the costs all you want but they have the ability to declare bankruptcy, have insurance from multiple companies that might help them with those costs etc... a state does not have that luxury, they can either raise taxes (which, is a huge hurdle) or cut spending (read: eliminate jobs, state programs, schools etc...) Now.. if you can't see how a high speed rail project between 2 towns 90 miles apart that costs 3 billion dollars and will have potentially high operating costs MIGHT cost the state of Florida a lot of money.... there is nothing more I can say to help you understand what it is I am talking about.

Now, I'm cool with tax payers covering high speed rail costs as long as there is a tax increase to offset that deficit. Charge 8 cents more per gallon or something but with the deficits being the way they are... and every state looking at making cuts, I can see why Scott (not saying that is Scott's reason) would balk the project. If it's political, then fuck the dude but we won't know that unless he opts to run for President or a new piece of news comes out.

I'm down with High Speed rail, if it is economically feasable.. California to Nevada, hell ya! We're talking about millions upon millions of people per year dealing with TSA bullcrap, waiting in an airport for an hour or two before hand.. taxi on the runway vs. hopping on a train ... I'd buy STOCK in that train company because it's a winner.

rick scott nay, scott walker yea.

Seriously though, a 6% matching in pension funds? They've never had to pay for it before, but now they're whining about 6%?

Please. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pompoussory Estoppel 

rick scott nay, scott walker yea.

 

Seriously though, a 6% matching in pension funds? They've never had to pay for it before, but now they're whining about 6%?

 

Please. 

Pomp, there's a separate thread for this, but to answer your question: it's not about the money.  There's so much more to it and so much more at stake for working Americans than that.  I notice that on TV, with a handful of exceptions, that's how it's being portrayed though. 

The quote uses past tense because Scott already killed the federal funds and the project, not because the terms under which the federal funds would have been accepted were set in stone you fucking moron.

I know that there's a lot of differences between South Korea and the United States politically, geographically and a host of other factors but I can say the KTX high speed trains are fantastic. You can get from one end of the country to the other (Seoul to Busan) in well under three hours at speeds up to 300 km/h. It's a really comfortable and fast way to travel.

Hopefully at least one high speed link can get established in the US which is fast, popular and economical enough for the idea to catch on; because when done properly it is worth it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fafhrd 

 

 

The quote uses past tense because Scott already killed the federal funds and the project, not because the terms under which the federal funds would have been accepted were set in stone you fucking moron.

http://www.fox11online.com/dpp/news/wisconsin/wisconsin-dot-suspends-work-on-high-speed-train

Hmmmmmmm

Came from the DOT re: Wisconsin's high speed rail project .. so yeah, I'm 100% positive the state would be on the hook if the project was stopped, thanks for playing.

I want high speed rail so bad. I want us to be as cool as Europe and China. But can we spend money connecting places that are not already connected? Look at this map:

There is already a connection between Tampa, Jacksonville, Orlando and Miami. Can we get high speed from coast to coast? Can we get a North/South line from Chicago to Miami that runs through that huge chunk of white space known as Kentucky, Tennessee, and Georgia. We have plenty of train lines for passenger service, but years ago they became cargo only.  High speed from LA to Las Vegas makes sense.  Get high speed lines that run along the major cross-country interstate routes, I40 and I75. There are only 4 North/South passages on that map. No connections to Mexico and 2 connections to Canada. Florida needs the jobs, but do you need the rail line? Building stuff for the sake of building stuff isn't a great use of funds.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaieke 

Came from the DOT re: Wisconsin's high speed rail project .. so yeah, I'm 100% positive the state would be on the hook if the project was stopped, thanks for playing.

Last I checked Wisconsin wasn't Florida, which is the state we were talking about.  Wisconsin would have to pay back because they'd already accepted the federal funds under those terms.  You did READ that entire article, and about how they're putting a hold on work that was already started, as opposed to refusing any federal funding and killing a project that was in the planning stages, which is what Scott did in Florida?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fafhrd 

Last I checked Wisconsin wasn't Florida, which is the state we were talking about.  Wisconsin would have to pay back because they'd already accepted the federal funds under those terms.  You did READ that entire article, and about how they're putting a hold on work that was already started, as opposed to refusing any federal funding and killing a project that was in the planning stages, which is what Scott did in Florida?

Killed it because he would have to pay the money back if it wasnt' completed, which is what that article in Wisconsin was about... Yeah I read it, apparently you didn't. Thanks for playing, learn to read.

Which of course brings us back to:

A spokeswoman for the U.S. Department of Transportation, though, said the state wouldn’t necessarily have had to pay back the money and the issue could have been negotiated if Scott had ever raised it with federal officials.

You nitwit.  Scott didn't even enter into negotiations for the money, he just said 'NO.'  Hence the DOT spokesperson using the past tense.  Thanks for playing, learn to keep track of your arguments.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fafhrd 

Which of course brings us back to:

A spokeswoman for the U.S. Department of Transportation, though, said the state wouldn’t necessarily have had to pay back the money and the issue could have been negotiated if Scott had ever raised it with federal officials.

 

You nitwit.  Scott didn't even enter into negotiations for the money, he just said 'NO.'  Hence the DOT spokesperson using the past tense.  Thanks for playing, learn to keep track of your arguments.

It's like talking to a fucking child. You got a link to someone who negotiated not paying back the money WHEN the project is abandoned? Until you do, go run along and play with your mommy, ok? He said NO because there is a PROOF the DOT will make the state pay the money back. Now, considering Florida was already given a huge chunk of money specifically for the high speed rail project last year to do survey, engeering reports etc... if El cap is right that he never had a report done, it would beg the question what exactly WAS done with that money because there should have been a ridership report (Thus, I asked ealier where to find that data). I mean, Reid has a fucking bldg full of data on how great it would be for Nevada and he's a Senator.

hey guys is Snaieke still a fascist fucking fag thanks in advance

Snaieke, there's no reason to talk to people like that.  Just being the loudest, meanest voice in the room doesn't make you right.

Why does anyone even engage that douchebag Snaieke in a conversation?