http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2010/...ecipients/



No one commented about this over the weekend and I figured there would at least be some complaints over the govt. spending at this time.

I'd be alright if all of the proposed lines were between states, and not totally useless ($1.25 billion for Tampa-Orlando, when its no better than 1.5 hours on 1-4).

Maybe I'm just concerned because Atlanta wasn't included (caused by the ineptitude of Atlanta politics I'm sure) even though it is the "capital of the South" and has the most extensive rail system in the area that this could easily tap into.

I spent some time on my hometown paper's site discussing this. My hometown had a bunch of kool aid drinkers who kept insisting this would be great. Then the proposal left them out.

Anyway, Coyoteblog covers this subject extensively. Every dime spent on subsidized passenger rail is wasted.

http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/ca...ss-transit

More insanity

(02-01-2010 10:40 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  I spent some time on my hometown paper's site discussing this. My hometown had a bunch of kool aid drinkers who kept insisting this would be great. Then the proposal left them out.

Anyway, Coyoteblog covers this subject extensively. Every dime spent on subsidized passenger rail is wasted.

http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/ca...ss-transit

I'd like to thank all of you for pitching together so that I can have a 3-4 hour train ride from STL to Chicago, which I may use once a year. I've heard it's costing the feds about 75k per rider.

A 4 hr train ride direct with no stops from Mpls to Chi-town would be a winner, at least in the "Well, it's connecting two large, important American cities" mindframe.

But here is the rub.

This train wouldn't go direct from Mpls to Chicago. It would probably go frm Minneapolis to St. Paul, then down to Rochester (Mayo Clinic pulls serious weight in this state,) then down to Madison (I guess for the Badger crowd?) over to Milwaukee to pick-up the drunks, and finally to downtown Chicago, probably at rushour or at 3 am. Total estimated time on rail? +8.5 hrs. And it would be more expensive than gas.

I can drive from my door in S. Mpls to the western Chicago suburbs in 7 hours @70mph. Push it and I can do it in 6hrs. Plus there is no need for transportation to the train stop in MN, and no worrying about how to get to the IL burbs to visit grandma.

More stupid ass government spending. I have never been on a damn train(subways excluded) and have NO compulsion to ever do so. How about fixing the damn potholes in the roads that I do use?

Acquiring the land for these HS corridors is extremely difficult. A hell of a lot of pissed off land owners who get their land condemned or lowballed on price.

Huge waste of taxpayer dollars here in Ohio. Driving to Columbus and or Cleveland is super easy, not much traffic or congestion at all (you get a little around rush hour). The train will cost much more than driving, and we immediately open this rail line with a tax payer subsidy of 17 Million a year.
Than number is an estimate so you know it is going to be worse than than that. Ohio isn't Europe or the East Coast.

I want to know where the New York to Chicago high speed rail that went through Cleveland went to. Who in the hell wants to o to Cincin nasti. I would love to know the backstory on that one. Probably Columbus got a hold of the plans and wanted the rail to go through them. That Ohio rail is the dumbest thing I see. Link Cleveland to New York and Chicago.

(02-01-2010 12:39 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I want to know where the New York to Chicago high speed rail that went through Cleveland went to. Who in the hell wants to o to Cincin nasti. I would love to know the backstory on that one. Probably Columbus got a hold of the plans and wanted the rail to go through them. That Ohio rail is the dumbest thing I see. Link Cleveland to New York and Chicago.

Who in the hell wants to go to Columbus or Cleveland? (for business yeah I go but that is it). I would much rather go to Louisville, Lexington, and Chicago.

(02-01-2010 12:39 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Than number is an estimate so you know it is going to be worse than than that. Ohio isn't Europe or the East Coast.

They lose money too!

See, it's all one big friggin' myth that passenger rail makes sense. Maybe, maybe in Japan have they pulled it off (after writing off pensions to the gov't). But nowhere else.

NOWHERE.

(02-01-2010 12:42 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(02-01-2010 12:39 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I want to know where the New York to Chicago high speed rail that went through Cleveland went to. Who in the hell wants to o to Cincin nasti. I would love to know the backstory on that one. Probably Columbus got a hold of the plans and wanted the rail to go through them. That Ohio rail is the dumbest thing I see. Link Cleveland to New York and Chicago.

Who in the hell wants to go to Columbus or Cleveland? (for business yeah I go but that is it). I would much rather go to Louisville, Lexington, and Chicago.

1. Louisville=dirty
2. Chicago=loserville
3. I know this b/c I've been to all of these cities, AND I DIDN'T NEED A TRAIN!

We have roads that we paid for! Use them, and stop taking billions to waste on this crap.

Cleveland is becoming internationally known for health care. I don't understand keeping everything in Ohio. The plans I saw called for a Great Lakes corridor. It started in Chicago. Had a spur from Toldeo that went to Detroit. It connected Chicago, Toledo, Sandusky, Cleveland, Erie, Pa., Buffalo, and NYC.

Chicago=loserville

Man, we are on opposite sides here. I loved Chicago. Great city. Michigan Avenue especially.

(02-01-2010 12:52 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Cleveland is becoming internationally known for health care. I don't understand keeping everything in Ohio. The plans I saw called for a Great Lakes corridor. It started in Chicago. Had a spur from Toldeo that went to Detroit. It connected Chicago, Toledo, Sandusky, Cleveland, Erie, Pa., Buffalo, and NYC.

Is this what you're talking about?

http://www2.dot.state.oh.us/ohiorail/Ohi.../maps.html

Did you ask yourself, "How is this gonna be 'high speed' with all these stops"?

Thanks for taking out the time and finding that Torch. By reading that it looks like the Cleveland to Cinci is just phase 1.

If Amtrak loses money every year what makes them think people will use an even more expensive method?

What about safety? Terrorist love transportation systems.

I'd like to think it could be of use since the highways seem to get more and more congested every year. And when they get expanded with additional lanes, that also requires bumping people out of their houses and other property, just like adding train tracks.

But I don't see how you can make money off of it. I've heard that Amtrak near Chicago is really slow due to having to wait for freight trains. I don't know from personal experience though. If there was a fast train across the continent maybe I would do that instead of flying, especially if its scenic.

The problem is that even after they spend all this money what they will have is crap systems.
If we had the equivalent of a Shinkansen or TGV or Eurostar, Americans would ride it. I would think that for business travel in the northeast corridor, there would be a high demand.
The reason nobody uses the "high speed trains" running in that corridor today is because they are crap. To extrapolate that into a conclusion that people wouldn't ride good trains is a mistake.
The really good high-speed trains are almost as far removed from what we call "high speed trains" as space travel is from hitchhiking.