China Builds High-Speed Rail Links; U.S. to 'Invest' in Armed Guards for Schools.

[islandman]

Amtrak + U.S. Government = Crappy Service.

NOTE:

Yet as US cities continue to plot out high-speed rail solutions, the breakneck pace at which China has developed its own system has also raised concerns, particularly after a 2011 collision left 40 people dead.

http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2011/07/25/1226101/105773-110725-china-rail-accident.jpg

Oh no! You mean it's not a foolproof system yet??!?!?!!!

Like airplanes that never crash or cars that never die?

 

[islandman]

I'm skeptical of them being profitable if run by the government. I literally had a Facebook friend today post he's been riding the commuter train into Los Angeles for a year and today was the first day he was asked for his ticket.

You would make a mint selling these to LA:


http://lauradonovan.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/taxi.jpg

 

[bronzeage]

I'm skeptical of them being profitable if run by the government. I literally had a Facebook friend today post he's been riding the commuter train into Los Angeles for a year and today was the first day he was asked for his ticket.

If you look at it from that point of view, the Interstate System has yet to turn a profit. It just sucks up more money every year.

I've always wondered why possessing an automobile gets one preferential treatment from the government.

 

[Spins]

The car is the evolution of the horse. It allows you (relatively speaking) to go where you want, when you want.

Trains, light rail, airplanes, ships, etc always require you to be on a schedule not of your own choosing. You always have to delay your desires for the "good" of something else.

As someone who just spent nearly an hour on a tarmac waiting for a gate to open up with three children (not of my own making) screaming their heads off who then waiting at a Metro station while the rain and sleet did their best to remove the last of my sanity only to get on a train with no heat and a vagrant accosting everyone on the train for money I can tell you that sometimes having your own shit is the way to go.

But I'm sure most folks are far more patient and better than I am.

And I have no doubt China respected the rights of the citizens it relocated out into the middle of nowhere so a small percentage of their population could get from Hong Kong to wherever a few hours slower than the slowest plane...

 

[thør]

Exactly. I get all over the bay area on BART and MUNI every time I get there. I try to take the trolleys at least once per trip if I have time. In a city with decent public transportation, there's no need for anything else.

When I have business east of Seattle, I rent a car. It's a PITA, but for $13/day it's less money than cabs or limos. And, parking is generally free.

 

[Weird Harold]

Maintaining highways is expensive, and in many/most cases in inner cities, there's no place to expand to, the right of ways are where they're going to be, and you're not going to have cities claiming eminent domain and paying market value on thousands of homes and businesses, to expand something that will be outdated by the time it gets finished.

One of the arguments against the HSR proposed from Southern California to Las Vegas is that the existing freeway could be doubled in capacity and maintained for ten years or more for the same amount of tax dollars needed to construct the HSR. (not the total cost, just federal matching funds)

That completely ignores the projection that it will take 60-100 years to break even on the HSR link as proposed.

 

[richard_daily]

NYC says you're wrong.

Boston says you're wrong.

D.C. says you're wrong.

Chicago says you're wrong.

You don't need to own a car in any of those cities. Thanks for proving my point.

It's pretty easy to call out being short-sighted when it's someone else's dime, isn't it.




Again, I'm in NYC and NYC says you're wrong.

Any city with decent public transportation is also going to be a commerce hub that will require highways and the like. Ergo, they have decent public transportation so as to free up said highways and the like for commerce.

So which would you rather take, the BQE during rush hour, or the Number 2 train?

Come on, you're being difficult just for the sake of it.

Again, NYC says you're wrong. Highways are being expanded vertically where feasible. You can't turn around here without running into a sign that says that road improvements are paid by the 'American Jobs Act'. That literally points a finger at the lack of investment over decades.

Is it THE solution? No, not by a long short. But neither is a pie in the sky dream in which people will do the right thing just because it's the right thing. If you don't believe me, step out your door sometime and live the real world a bit. Or turn on the news. Waiting for your utopian change will take eons unless you're advocating government heavy-handedness to force people in that direction. Decay can be measured in decades.

You're talking about double decker expressways, and you want to talk to me about "pie in the sky"? And in ten years? Triple decker? quadruple decker?

 

[richard_daily]

One of the arguments against the HSR proposed from Southern California to Las Vegas is that the existing freeway could be doubled in capacity and maintained for ten years or more for the same amount of tax dollars needed to construct the HSR. (not the total cost, just federal matching funds)

That completely ignores the projection that it will take 60-100 years to break even on the HSR link as proposed.

And once the HSR infrastructure is there, it can be expanded simply by adding more trains, where as after 10 years, where will the highways be? needing another taxpayer cash injection.

 

[bronzeage]

And once the HSR infrastructure is there, it can be expanded simply by adding more trains, where as after 10 years, where will the highways be? needing another taxpayer cash injection.

The American people welcome any solution which involves more cars or more guns.

 

[islandman]

You're talking about double decker expressways, and you want to talk to me about "pie in the sky"? And in ten years? Triple decker? quadruple decker?

Concrete, rebar and asphalt is 'pie in the sky' for you?

Seriously?

So which would you rather take, the BQE during rush hour, or the Number 2 train?

Come on, you're being difficult just for the sake of it.

Sample size: 1

Sorry, your point is invalid, not to mention not geographically analogous. Had you said 'BQE to LIE to Van Wyck to JFK Expressway' to get to JFK or the A train, most NYers will opt for a cab. I know I have and would again. The train to the plane sucks.

And once the HSR infrastructure is there, it can be expanded simply by adding more trains, where as after 10 years, where will the highways be? needing another taxpayer cash injection.

Add more trains?

Is it your belief that this infrastructure would be built at tremendous cost to run just a few trains a day on it?

No. It would be run at capacity. "More trains" would mean more rails.

 

[richard_daily]

The American people welcome any solution which involves more cars or more guns.

They should just strap them to the hoods and call it a day.

 

[richard_daily]

Concrete, rebar and asphalt is 'pie in the sky' for you?

Seriously?




Sample size: 1

Sorry, your point is invalid, not to mention not geographically analogous. Had you said 'BQE to LIE to Van Wyck to JFK Expressway' to get to JFK or the A train, most NYers will opt for a cab. I know I have and would again. The train to the plane sucks.





Add more trains?

Is it your belief that this infrastructure would be built at tremendous cost to run just a few trains a day on it?

No. It would be run at capacity. "More trains" would mean more rails.

So you take a plane to work every day?


JFK should have a train going to it, but instead money was used for other public works.

Honestly,t he solution is going to have to be HSR AND highways, at least until the cities are built with 50-100 years into the future in mind.

At 200+ MPH, more trains can be added based on ridership needs.

 

[islandman]

So you take a plane to work every day?


JFK should have a train going to it, but instead money was used for other public works.

Honestly,t he solution is going to have to be HSR AND highways, at least until the cities are built with 50-100 years into the future in mind.

At 200+ MPH, more trains can be added based on ridership needs.

Post #69 to this thread:

Ignoring decades-old, underfunded investment in our highways in favour of the HSR is akin to sticking one's head in the sand and hoping for a miracle solution, which in your case is the HSR. To your 'nail, head" comment, you've admitted that Americans won't give up their cars, making the HSR - logically - a complementary solution at best

 

[Weird Harold]

And once the HSR infrastructure is there, it can be expanded simply by adding more trains, where as after 10 years, where will the highways be? needing another taxpayer cash injection.

As compared to projected maintenance costs for HSR capable rails, the highway, even expanded to four lanes the entire distance, is a major bargain. Not to mention that the owner/operator of a HSR has to front the cost of more rolling stock, while private individuals buy or rent their own cars and operate them; while paying highway/fuel taxes to maintain the highway.

The proposed HSR from Southern California to Las Vegas simply isn't economical. The cost of right-of-way alone is more than such a rail system would earn.

Another point raised in objection to a Las Vegas HSR link is security; a HSR quality rail to Las Vegas would run through about 300 miles of basically uninhabited desert. It would be nearly impossible to patrol and a prime target for terrorists of all stripes, carrying, as it would, "sinners bound for Sin City."

An AMTRAC running 60-70 MPH through the desert is vulnerable enough. Can you imagine the increased damage derailing a 250-300 MPH passenger train would cause? Europe, or the Eastern Seaboard has enough population to make security patrols feasible. The Western US and flyover states don't.

I'm generally in favor of mass-transit, including inter-city rail and HSR systems, but middle America just can't support the traffic volumes required to make HSR self-supporting. California could probably support an HSR system, but they decided to build the first leg from nowhere to nowhere -- with no connections to existing mass-transit or inter-city rail.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

In a nutshell, the economic difference between China and the U.S. today.


World's Longest High-Speed Rail Line Opens in China

HONG KONG — China began service Wednesday morning on the world’s longest high-speed rail line, covering a distance in eight hours that is about equal to that from New York to Key West, Florida, or from London across Europe to Belgrade.

Bullet trains traveling 300 kilometers an hour, or 186 miles an hour, began regular service between Beijing and Guangzhou, the main metropolis in southeastern China. Older trains still in service on a parallel rail line take 21 hours; Amtrak trains from New York to Miami, a shorter distance, still take nearly 30 hours.

Completion of the Beijing-Guangzhou route is the latest sign that China has resumed rapid construction on one of the world’s largest and most ambitious infrastructure projects, a network of four north-south routes and four east-west routes that span the country.

- - - - - - - - -


Discuss.

You do realize that in the past two years I have posted about the unsafe HST in China that are no longer allowed to go high-speed for the mass-produced rail is ruled by the laws of quantity over quality and they cannot withstand the pressures a HST generates.

Then there are the Broken Windows Sophisms of Bastiat in which you relish and desire what you see, in his case the glazier working, but in this case the HST, but you stop there and forget to ask, who did not get access to that Capital and what would have become of it? China has wasted much money building cities that no one wishes to live it and Americans do not want to give up their cars, or their property...,



... or their guns. The Chinese aspire to cars, have no claim to their property and have no means to fight back.

As for the guns, nobody would be talking about the cops in schools if the government had first not decided to make them safe havens for shooters, a variation on Broken Windows...

All the Left saw was a microcosm of what they wanted their society to be, gun-free and they were suddenly and unexpectedly confronted with the results of their unintended consequences. And, with one parting note, we might also remember that at the same time we had a school-shooting, China had a mass school stabbing and, in the areas where we need it the most, we have been paying for rail service for two full generations now; it is called AMTRACK and like most government services, it is over-priced, often under-utilized, and the last time I rode on it, old, dirty and poorly maintained, like the VA.

 

[mercury14]

Blibber-blabber.

China engaged in government planning because they didn't trust 1.2 billion people to organize themselves in an efficient manner.

As the VA near me is a wonderful facility, clean and pretty well staffed now. Sorry yours isn't. Write your congressmen and ask him for some more socialist resources to satisfy you.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Michael Pettis on China Reforms, Ponzi Schemes in Wealth Management Programs, Rebalancing Implications

Here are portions of a email from Michael Pettis at China Financial Markets on the unsustainable nature of China's growth, Ponzi schemes in wealth management programs, and the implications of China's rebalancing efforts. By permission ...

As analysts wrack their minds over specific debt problems in China and how they are to be resolved, I think we must remember to look not at specific debt issues but rather at the way the overall system operates.

...

How it works (and why it will crash):
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/#T6X4ihcCLgSVwYv8.99

 

[richard_daily]

Post #69 to this thread:

No, not "at best". Throwing good money after bad at outdated and overcrowded highways but then supporting solutions that will actually work (as proven in other countries) is the "at best" solution.

 

[richard_daily]

As compared to projected maintenance costs for HSR capable rails, the highway, even expanded to four lanes the entire distance, is a major bargain. Not to mention that the owner/operator of a HSR has to front the cost of more rolling stock, while private individuals buy or rent their own cars and operate them; while paying highway/fuel taxes to maintain the highway.

The proposed HSR from Southern California to Las Vegas simply isn't economical. The cost of right-of-way alone is more than such a rail system would earn.

Another point raised in objection to a Las Vegas HSR link is security; a HSR quality rail to Las Vegas would run through about 300 miles of basically uninhabited desert. It would be nearly impossible to patrol and a prime target for terrorists of all stripes, carrying, as it would, "sinners bound for Sin City."

An AMTRAC running 60-70 MPH through the desert is vulnerable enough. Can you imagine the increased damage derailing a 250-300 MPH passenger train would cause? Europe, or the Eastern Seaboard has enough population to make security patrols feasible. The Western US and flyover states don't.

I'm generally in favor of mass-transit, including inter-city rail and HSR systems, but middle America just can't support the traffic volumes required to make HSR self-supporting. California could probably support an HSR system, but they decided to build the first leg from nowhere to nowhere -- with no connections to existing mass-transit or inter-city rail.

So you're saying that we shouldn't build HSR because terrorists MIGHT target it?

I guess we shouldn't build malls and skyscrapers either?

I'm honestly not familiar with the specific project, so I'll have to look into it and get back to you on it, but the vast majority of them that I know of, are operating on right of ways already owned by rail lines and the government.

This project involves buying up the entire stretch from Las Vegas to So Cal?

 

[unregistered]

 

[islandman]

The only thing this thread needs is Gene Wilder and Richard Pryor.

You mean Brewster's Millions.

 

[VaticanAssassin]

High speed rail should have been invested in a decade or more ago. It's not going to happen, because we're spending all our money fighting the "war on drugs", "the war on terror", and the "war on poverty".

So they decided to cancel the LA to San Diego disaster?

 

[richard_daily]

So they decided to cancel the LA to San Diego disaster?

veteman?

Let's hope so.

 

[Weird Harold]

So you're saying that we shouldn't build HSR because terrorists MIGHT target it?

No, we shouldn't build an unprofitable boondoggle that might take a century to break even -- especially if it would be easy for terrorists to target, too.

 

[KingOrfeo]

There's a reason why mass transit hasn't worked outside of the eastern seaboard.

The reason is that most sprawlburbs and strip-malls elsewhere in the country were built post-WWII, and not to a walkable scale, but designed on the assumption that everyone will get everywhere by car. But, there are ways to solve that problem by rezoning and retrofitting and infilling.

Also, there's no reason to demonize driving.

You really, really need to read this. Also this and this.