High-Speed Rail and Infrastructure

WizardofOz

New member
Should the US government start spending more on repairing infrastructure? Should they invest in high-speed rail projects?


Almost all spending on transportation, drinking water, and wastewater infrastructure is done by the public sector. Federal, state, and local governments spent $416 billion on it in 2014. That amount equaled about 2.4 percent of gross domestic product, a percentage that has been fairly stable for roughly 30 years



Should that be increased as a percentage of GDP or total dollar amount?


America's infrastructure is desperately in need of investment, according to the American Society of Civil Engineers. The ASCE estimates the US needs to spend some $4.5 trillion by 2025 to fix the country's roads, bridges, dams, and other infrastructure.



If we do seek to implement high-speed rail, what is the best way forward? Is it worthwhile to begin with?


In Asia and Europe, super-fast locomotives are comparable to air travel in price and door-to-door speed.

Across Asia and Europe, high-speed rail is providing a competitive alternative to air travel on the same routes, in terms of price and the all-important barometer of time. Put that together with the environmental benefits that flow from not burning jet fuel, and staying on the ground begins to make more sense for travelers who would otherwise trudge to the airport.

here



How the US rates on various infrastructure:
Aviation: D
Bridges: C+
Dams: D
Drinking Water: D
Energy: D+
Hazardous Waste: D+
Inland Waterways: D
Levees: D
Parks and Recreation: D+
Ports: C+
Rail: B
Roads: D
Schools: D+
Solid Waste: C+
Transit: D-
Wastewater: D+

Thoughts?
 

The Berean

Well-known member

Catholic Crusader

Kyrie Eleison
Banned
High-Speed Rail is a convenience that will cost billions of dollars, paid for by taxes that hurt the poor, to pay for a shiny Gadget that will only be used by the wealthy. I mean, how many poor people do you know who need to jump the high-speed rail from Boston to New York every day to get to the office
 

jgarden

BANNED
Banned
High-Speed Rail is a convenience that will cost billions of dollars, paid for by taxes that hurt the poor, to pay for a shiny Gadget that will only be used by the wealthy. I mean, how many poor people do you know who need to jump the high-speed rail from Boston to New York every day to get to the office
`
If one goes to Europe and/or Asia, there is no comparison with their modern public transportation and airport infrastructure and that which currently exists in the US!

America is literally decades behind - but the Republican priorities were to provide a $1 trillion "tax cut" to wealthy, rather than upgrade America's aging infrastructure!
 

jgarden

BANNED
Banned
Recently, Caifornia governor Gavin Newsom gave the State of the State address. He stated that he will greatly scale back the high speed rail project. There will be no San Francisco to Los Angeles route anymore.

https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/central-valley-high-speed-rail-merced-bakersfield-13610732.php
China, Japan and much of Europe are headed in the opposite direction - even in places like Bangkok, Thailand they have rapid urban light rail transportation far superior to most American cities!
 

Idolater

"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
If we can get other countries to subsidize our military spending, that protects all of us, the world round, and not just Americans, then we could find enough money to get into this more.

It would bring real estate booms along all the corridors, even more than interstate highways did, because of the "high speed" part, you could afford to live at least twice as far away from work I would think, if you live near a high speed rail stop. And the real estate building boom would be the best kind, out in the sticks, relieving population centers as people can afford time-wise to live outside the cities and still work there.

It is a game changer, and I think we should do it, but we spend so bloody much on military it's like one hand tied behind our back. And our military helps the whole world, so the whole world justly should help pay.

For our high speed rails.
 

WizardofOz

New member
As a mechanical and manufacturing engineer I geek out at high speed rail. My major concern is cost. Here in California we are building a high speed rail system and it's already massively over budget and well behind schedule. It was initially estimated at $33 billion back in 2009. Now, the latest estimate is between $77 to $98 billion.


https://www.city-journal.org/californias-high-speed-rail-project

https://www.sacbee.com/latest-news/article223441880.html

And now,
New California Gov. Gavin Newsom slams brakes on San Francisco-to-Los Angeles bullet train
The governor scaled back the high-speed train, calling for a more limited rail line now but leaving the door open to a statewide project in the future.

Here



:doh: You beat me to it

Recently, Caifornia governor Gavin Newsom gave the State of the State address. He stated that he will greatly scale back the high speed rail project. There will be no San Francisco to Los Angeles route anymore.

https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/central-valley-high-speed-rail-merced-bakersfield-13610732.php
 

The Berean

Well-known member
China, Japan and much of Europe are headed in the opposite direction - even in places like Bangkok, Thailand they have rapid urban light rail transportation far superior to most American cities!

China is a totalitarian nation and can spend money however they wish. Japan and France are small nations geographically compared to America. So do you not care at all about how much a high speed rail will actually cost? Here in California the high speed rail has MASSIVE cost overruns and was behind schedule by over a decade. These things don't bother you? As a California taxpayer they greatly bother me. Plus those high speed rail systems in Japan and France lose money. They are unprofitable.
 

Catholic Crusader

Kyrie Eleison
Banned
If we can get other countries to subsidize our military spending, that protects all of us, the world round, and not just Americans, then we could find enough money to get into this more.

It would bring real estate booms along all the corridors, even more than interstate highways did, because of the "high speed" part, you could afford to live at least twice as far away from work I would think, if you live near a high speed rail stop. And the real estate building boom would be the best kind, out in the sticks, relieving population centers as people can afford time-wise to live outside the cities and still work there.

It is a game changer, and I think we should do it, but we spend so bloody much on military it's like one hand tied behind our back. And our military helps the whole world, so the whole world justly should help pay.

For our high speed rails.

Man you must have been smoking crack to come up with that idea. First of all nobody is going to subsidize our military. Other countries May occasionally subsidized specific operations that enhance their own security, but nobody will ever subsidize our military in general. Second of all since we are 20 trillion dollars in debt which is a number that can have catastrophic consequences, we have no business spending money on stupid b******* like this. If we ever were to amazingly bring the budget into balance, all money should go towards paying off our insane debt. Using your logic, a family would have 20 Tapped Out credit cards, and if they could get somebody to make a few payments on a couple of them then that's an excuse to tap out a few more credit cards. Insane
 

WizardofOz

New member
High-Speed Rail is a convenience that will cost billions of dollars, paid for by taxes that hurt the poor, to pay for a shiny Gadget that will only be used by the wealthy. I mean, how many poor people do you know who need to jump the high-speed rail from Boston to New York every day to get to the office

Trump Infrastructure Plan Includes Elon Musk-Style High-Speed Rail Tunnels

He and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez actually have something in common, they both like expensive high-speed rail projects.
 

Catholic Crusader

Kyrie Eleison
Banned
Unlike you Democrats who considered diversity to be a thing of skin color only, we Republicans have diversity of thought and we do not agree in lockstep with every single thing that every other Republican agrees with. I do not agree with Trump's infrastructure plans. I do agree with almost everything Trump is doing and I am pleased with his outstanding success with the economy, but I do not believe an infrastructure program is correct at this time when we are 20 trillion dollars in debt
 

WizardofOz

New member
Man you must have been smoking crack to come up with that idea. First of all nobody is going to subsidize our military. Other countries May occasionally subsidized specific operations that enhance their own security, but nobody will ever subsidize our military in general. Second of all since we are 20 trillion dollars in debt which is a number that can have catastrophic consequences, we have no business spending money on stupid b******* like this. If we ever were to amazingly bring the budget into balance, all money should go towards paying off our insane debt. Using your logic, a family would have 20 Tapped Out credit cards, and if they could get somebody to make a few payments on a couple of them then that's an excuse to tap out a few more credit cards. Insane

Trump should stop spending like a drunken sailor :think:
 

WizardofOz

New member
Unlike you Democrats who considered diversity to be a thing of skin color only, we Republicans have diversity of thought and we do not agree in lockstep with every single thing that every other Republican agrees with. I do not agree with Trump's infrastructure plans. I do agree with almost everything Trump is doing and I am pleased with his outstanding success with the economy, but I do not believe an infrastructure program is correct at this time when we are 20 trillion dollars in debt

Who are you replying to? Learn how to use the quote function.
 

Idolater

"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Man you must have been smoking crack to come up with that idea.
Takes one to know one?
First of all nobody is going to subsidize our military.
President Trump has already begun trying to get more contribution from NATO partners. And the idea comes from justice. The workers are worthy of their hire. Our brave armed forces protect the whole world from evil, it's not just us blessed Americans who benefit from what our service members have been doing for decades and still do today. They help the whole world, so justice dictates that the whole world should pay them.
Other countries May occasionally subsidized specific operations that enhance their own security, but nobody will ever subsidize our military in general. Second of all since we are 20 trillion dollars in debt which is a number that can have catastrophic consequences, we have no business spending money on stupid b******* like this. If we ever were to amazingly bring the budget into balance, all money should go towards paying off our insane debt. Using your logic, a family would have 20 Tapped Out credit cards, and if they could get somebody to make a few payments on a couple of them then that's an excuse to tap out a few more credit cards. Insane
The question was posed in the OP. We're not actually making policy here. Of course our debt is tremendous, and the OP said that we need to spend more than a fifth of that on infrastructure maintenance in the next <10 years, which is about what we'll be spending on active duty military over that same time frame (not including VA, which is just about as large an expense all by itself). I was just comparing the relative magnitudes and commenting on them, offering up a thought.

Excuse me.
 

Idolater

"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Unlike you Democrats who considered diversity to be a thing of skin color only, we Republicans have diversity of thought and we do not agree in lockstep with every single thing that every other Republican agrees with.
That's right. The Republicans are the big tent. Everybody's welcome. To be a Democrat, you have to believe the authorized Democrat narrative. It's why it's the R word, if you're not a Democrat, to run as any other party than a Republican, because the Republican party already has the election infrastructure in place to help you get elected.
I do not agree with Trump's infrastructure plans. I do agree with almost everything Trump is doing and I am pleased with his outstanding success with the economy, but I do not believe an infrastructure program is correct at this time when we are 20 trillion dollars in debt
Infrastructure work is jobs, and the right infrastructure work will lead to building booms, which is more jobs. I think that's all he's thinking.
 

WizardofOz

New member
LOL. Yeah, right. Obama incurred more debt than all other previous presidents combined but I never heard you complain about the Socialist Kenyan Pig. So you can save your crapola about Trump

That's because you're an idiot binary thinker who assumes anyone criticizing Trump must be a democrat.

Here

and this should suffice

What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? Obama isn't in office. In addition, I never voted for Obama and have long been an advocate of balanced budgets so you're off-base here.



You are so naive. We spend $600 billion on defense as it is. He wants to increase this by $54 billion. He "deserves" to do this? It's our money not Trump's. Who says he deserves to do this? Tax cuts will increase the deficit. WE HAVE TO CUT SPENDING if we are going to cut taxes. Cutting taxes and increasing spending is not going to reduce our debt. Math obviously isn't your strong suit.

:sozo:How is he going to reduce our debt?

Do you care at all about deficits or balanced budgets or are you just another big brother liberal who doesn't care one bit about the government spending us into oblivion?

Amazing. Trump supporters are just as clueless as Obama supporters but they all have equally big mouths about how bad the other guy was/is.

Or
Certainly but let's talk modern history ;)

The deficit is real. Spending must be cut. The need to cut spending is now dictated by rather simple math. We're insolvent.



Efficiency can only be spoken of relative to the level of inefficiency we're dealing with. Do you agree that a dollar taxed to be redistributed can never be a full dollar redistributed?

What have democrats done to show this efficiency (less inefficiency)?



I agree with all of the above. Whether it would be enough is the question....



It depends on what measure of inflation you're buying into. When the U.S. Treasury prints $40 billion per month that previously never existed to buy mortgages that have no market value, who gets hurt?

The middle class.

This is more relevant than the incomplete data found in the CPI from the BLS.

image004.gif


or this
MB%2C_M1_and_M2_aggregates_from_1981_to_2012.png


The value of the dollar is going down the toilet. What foreign investors will want to hold it? If a new reserve currency ever gets pushed through, the dollar has had it.

Try to stay on topic



I never once voted for Obama.

You know what, you may be too stupid to participate in this thread. Perhaps you should refrain.
[MENTION=15148]CatholicCrusader[/MENTION] - you should probably also refrain. You're probably too stupid to participate.
 

WizardofOz

New member
LOL. Yeah, right. Obama incurred more debt than all other previous presidents combined

And Trump is one track spend about the same.


Barack Obama: Added $8.588 trillion, a 74 percent increase from the $11.657 trillion debt at the end of Bush’s last budget, FY 2009.

FY 2017 - $672 billion.
FY 2016 - $1.423 trillion.
FY 2015 - $327 billion.
FY 2014 - $1.086 trillion.
FY 2013 - $672 billion.
FY 2012 - $1.276 trillion.
FY 2011 - $1.229 trillion.
FY 2010 - $1.652 trillion.
FY 2009 - $253 billion. Congress passed the Economic Stimulus Act, which spent $253 billion in FY 2009. This rare occurrence should be added to President Obama's contribution to the debt.



That's bad


Donald Trump: As projected in the FY 2019 budget, Trump plans to add $4.775 trillion, a 29 percent increase from the $20.245 trillion debt at the end of Obama's last budget for FY 2017.

FY 2021 - $1.119 trillion.
FY 2020 - $1.198 trillion.
FY 2019 - $1.225 trillion.
FY 2018 - $1.233 trillion.



That's not looking much better. How about not sticking your head in the sand every time a Republican is in office... That'd be great

US Debt by President by Dollar and Percent
Who Increased the U.S. Debt the Most? Depends on How You Measure It.


The ‘Trump economy’ vs. the ‘Obama economy’
 
Top