BigFootsSocks Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Lol anyone find the irony that this douche nozzle doesn't want a high speed train built by private money, but is totally cool with a big toll road (249) cutting through his county? http://m.yourhoustonnews.com/courier/opinion/texas-taxpayers-should-not-be-railroaded-into-high-speed-project/article_4991ce35-8fce-592c-862a-8e2af223b897.html?mode=jqm 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Morons. Don't want a private company or taxpayers paying for it. They just hate the idea of rail, because they don't know any better. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Merced to Bakersfield and Palmdale to Burbank will be done in 2-3 years. The rest who knows but the idea is to build some of it get people to try it and then private investment will come and put the rest of the $42 billion. Right now $26 billion of funding they have. Makes you appreciate how cheap the Texas project is. The flat terrain and cheaper property acquisition is the reason for the huge difference I think (besides the distance). How much is the Merced-Bakersfield section? That is some of the flattest terrain in the United States. And probably will have about 15 riders per day. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Lol anyone find the irony that this douche nozzle doesn't want a high speed train built by private money, but is totally cool with a big toll road (249) cutting through his county? http://m.yourhoustonnews.com/courier/opinion/texas-taxpayers-should-not-be-railroaded-into-high-speed-project/article_4991ce35-8fce-592c-862a-8e2af223b897.html?mode=jqmI don't think it's hypocritical, and I can think of several reasons why his line of reasoning makes total sense. However, I don't want to fan flames over rails vs. highways, efficacy of both types, etc. because too many threads have been locked over this largely pointless argument.Not to mention they serve two entirely groups of commuters, and one's partially built. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFootsSocks Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 My problem with his article is the random conclusions he jumps to and baseless nonsense he spews. "Texas officials" have said it's impossible to privately build? Really? Why haven't we heard anyone say that from TXDOT? Why is TXDOT now funding studies to carry HSR further? Where did he get his $30 billion cost from? One professor who has no mind of interest in this project. Yeah no, I can understand opposition to this; I wi not, however, take anything this bloke says seriously. I'm curious how much he's being paid in fundraising to say this. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 My problem with his article is the random conclusions he jumps to and baseless nonsense he spews. "Texas officials" have said it's impossible to privately build? Really? Why haven't we heard anyone say that from TXDOT? Why is TXDOT now funding studies to carry HSR further? Where did he get his $30 billion cost from? One professor who has no mind of interest in this project. Yeah no, I can understand opposition to this; I wi not, however, take anything this bloke says seriously. I'm curious how much he's being paid in fundraising to say this.Oh, ok. Looks like I wasn't the only one to misinterpret your post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFootsSocks Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I'm confused but sure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 How much is the Merced-Bakersfield section? That is some of the flattest terrain in the United States. And probably will have about 15 riders per day.15 riders is an absurd statement Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 15 riders is an absurd statementYou have no sense of humor, do you? And, you've never been to Bakersfield, or you would be laughing.At least the Texas HSR is privately funded, so when it fails, only some Japanese banks suffer. When California's HSR fails, the taxpayers will be on the hook. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFootsSocks Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) Yeah I really wish Americans won't judge future high speed rail options on the California line because neither of those two cities are places I ever want to travel. Edited January 13, 2015 by BigFootsSocks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 You have no sense of humor, do you? And, you've never been to Bakersfield, or you would be laughing.At least the Texas HSR is privately funded, so when it fails, only some Japanese banks suffer. When California's HSR fails, the taxpayers will be on the hook.I've been to Bakersfield. The reason this project is being built is because California is crowded and the traffic is awful. It's time for an alternative. If it's fully built it will inspire the rest of the nation to build similar projects Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DNAguy Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Real info: http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/blog/morning_call/2015/01/high-speed-rail-station-could-redevelop-dallas.html The Dallas-to-Houston bullet train is going through an environmental review process and Texas Central Railway, the private company behind the project, won't comment on where a Dallas station could be built. But DART has gotten a head start with its own drawing for where the station should go. The rendering shows a massive airport-like concourse on the former Reunion Arena site near Union Station to accommodate the bullet train and additional DART stations. The rendering also shows both the Morning News and WFAA buildings as "potential redevelopment blocks." The rendering is preliminary, DART officials say. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgriff Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Is there any reason to believe that the nightmare security issues that airports have won't be replicated with high speed rail? What's to keep this from becoming the same as airports where you have to show up an hour plus in advance and go through TSA? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) Is there any reason to believe that the nightmare security issues that airports have won't be replicated with high speed rail? What's to keep this from becoming the same as airports where you have to show up an hour plus in advance and go through TSA? Excellent question. I'm thinking that generally trains are perhaps less attractive targets than airplanes for terrorists. At least so far, HSR in the UK has not replicated the "nightmare" security issues of airports and I believe the same is true in Europe and Japan. Edited January 13, 2015 by Houston19514 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DNAguy Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Is there any reason to believe that the nightmare security issues that airports have won't be replicated with high speed rail? What's to keep this from becoming the same as airports where you have to show up an hour plus in advance and go through TSA? You can't hijack a train and run it into a building which means that you can't make it a weapon. The remote advanced control / monitoring required to operate a HSR system (like a mini-mission control) would also be able to disable the train remotely. So to answer your question: YES. There are many reasons to believe that I'm not going to have to go through the same hurdles as a plain. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFootsSocks Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 What he said^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UtterlyUrban Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 You can't hijack a train and run it into a building which means that you can't make it a weapon. The remote advanced control / monitoring required to operate a HSR system (like a mini-mission control) would also be able to disable the train remotely. So to answer your question: YES. There are many reasons to believe that I'm not going to have to go through the same hurdles as a plain.But a terrorist can blow up a train. Just ask the folks in Spain.Assuming this project ever gets built (I remain unconvinced that it will) I too will be curious if there will be some kind of enhanced security or screening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luminare Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Is there any reason to believe that the nightmare security issues that airports have won't be replicated with high speed rail? What's to keep this from becoming the same as airports where you have to show up an hour plus in advance and go through TSA? .....have you ever been on a train before? I've been on commuter rail and EuroStars EuroStars are HSR. If it's going from city to city in the same country then it doesn't matter. It's like any train. You get there whenever you want to get there even if it's 5mins before. That's also the cool thing about it is that there isn't the security bs on a normal train ride. Now when it's going from country to country then it's stepped up a little bit. It does feel a little like an airport where you go through security, and then go through customs, etc... but you still don't have to get there an hour before. Again though that is when it's INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL. Plus we have seen terrorist blowup a marathon with a pressure cooker, and just recently had some kill cartoonist. They don't care what, where, or when. People will kill however they want to kill and will do it however they want too. It's why I can never get behind most arguments on gun control or anything involving a ban. If someone wants to do it they will. Trains don't kill people. People kill people. But I guess we should cancel all marathons or ban pressure cookers and layoff all cartoonist..... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mollusk Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Much of the "security" at the airport is theater. The really effective changes were a secure lock on the cockpit door and a change in passenger attitudes from "go along and it'll be over" to active self defense. The point of terrorism is to make people skeert. As demonstrated by the formation of the TSA, Homeland Security, etc. and having to virtually strip nekkit before getting on a plane, it looks like the 9/11 attack worked. Besides, as has been pointed out, you can't really hijack a train. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luminare Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Yeah I really don't see a Source Code type scenario happening often. I also agree that the security at airports is simply an illusion to give peace of mind. There are eyes you do not see at airports. They profile, they have lists, etc. Way more effective means of spotting threats then the idiots who man those TSA stations. Hell I would fully support the first Republican, Democrat, or Libertarian that boldly tries to chop off either the TSA or the Department of Homeland Security. If people want to keep it then they should fall under the Department of the Interior since thats the department which deals with Domestic affairs. You can't protect everything with security officers! Yes have a few patrol officers on duty at stations, and have surveillance, but there is no need for the type of security that is so prevalent at airports. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arche_757 Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Merced to Bakersfield and Palmdale to Burbank will be done in 2-3 years. The rest who knows but the idea is to build some of it get people to try it and then private investment will come and put the rest of the $42 billion. Right now $26 billion of funding they have. Makes you appreciate how cheap the Texas project is. The flat terrain and cheaper property acquisition is the reason for the huge difference I think (besides the distance). California also must have projects engineered to meet their seismic conditions and environmental impacts that are not considered in Texas. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DNAguy Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 But a terrorist can blow up a train. Just ask the folks in Spain.Assuming this project ever gets built (I remain unconvinced that it will) I too will be curious if there will be some kind of enhanced security or screening. Yes, but that could be said of a lot of things. Buildings and trains have all been targets of terrorists. They can't however, be used as a weapon themselves. That's where the distinction is. There have been numerous Metro / subway bombings in the world. That hasn't stopped people from building them or riding them. You don't have draconian security measures in them either and people seem fine w/ the trade-off for absolute security vs. ease of use. That's why I think you don't see (see being the operative word b/c there is a lot of security you don't necessarily see that goes on in the background) the same level of security at train stations around the world and why I don't think you'll see it here. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 I've been to Bakersfield. The reason this project is being built is because California is crowded and the traffic is awful. It's time for an alternative. If it's fully built it will inspire the rest of the nation to build similar projects I've lived in Bakersfield. No one there is going to do anything other than drive to Merced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 I've lived in Bakersfield. No one there is going to do anything other than drive to Merced.I guess you're unaware of Bakersfield-Sacramento-San Francisco ridership on Amtrak, 5th busiest corridor in the nation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mollusk Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Every time I read the last few comments on this thread I get an earworm. And a desire to run 20 red lights. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArchFan Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 I guess you're unaware of Bakersfield-Sacramento-San Francisco ridership on Amtrak, 5th busiest corridor in the nation. Slick, just a question: is that statistic for Amtrak traffic originating in Bakersfield and going on to either of the two other places? To me, Bakersfield doesn't seem big enough to generate such a high volume, so I'm wondering if the statistic includes a significant amount of traffic passing through B-field on the way to those places. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Slick, just a question: is that statistic for Amtrak traffic originating in Bakersfield and going on to either of the two other places? To me, Bakersfield doesn't seem big enough to generate such a high volume, so I'm wondering if the statistic includes a significant amount of traffic passing through B-field on the way to those places.I wouldn't trust Slick's numbers. He'll swear up and down about the ridership numbers of current and proposed lines, but I haven't forgotten the line about "Houston has no tourists", which hasn't been recanted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFootsSocks Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 http://m.bizjournals.com/dallas/news/2015/01/16/high-speed-rail-to-the-airport-nope-this-is-texas.html?page=all&r=fullFor those wondering why they aren't going airport to airport. According to Eckels it's an additional $1 billion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luminare Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Wow the arrogance of that title.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFootsSocks Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Apparently for our states's (really, our nation's) first attempt at HSR we need to immediately be up to the standards that Europe has with their immense and well developed system. Because if we don't, it's not that we're simply failures, it's because we're Texas LOL we h8 gvmt and ride horses to work! Man what a great ironic title I'm high af Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.