pineda Posted November 29, 2005 Share Posted November 29, 2005 Trietsch means treacherous... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeightsGuy Posted November 29, 2005 Share Posted November 29, 2005 Pineda, I know you've railed against the proposed Grand Parkway, and I agree with you on that, but you can't have it both ways. There will be more people and more freight to move around southeast Texas, and something will have to be done about it. To someone who is against additional roads, think of this: for every train that rumbles by, it's about 500 semi-truck shipments taken off the roads. Passenger rail makes sense but is still a tough argument sometimes. However, when it comes to cargo, trains are far more efficient at moving cargo than semi-trucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pineda Posted November 29, 2005 Author Share Posted November 29, 2005 (edited) Heights-When I said Trieitsch means treacherous, I was merely repeating what was said in the opening of the article. I have been supportive of some things that Union Pacific has been doing the last several years, so I wouldn't say I'm against rail. I am leery about some of the rail relocation topics brought up by a recent constitutional amendment, and am looking into that further to study the ramifications. I'm not a fan of Rick Perry and his Trans-Texas Corridor, and am wondering how this all ties in together. Edited November 29, 2005 by pineda 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.