Posted by red ink, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jan 15, 2009 at 12:52 pm
The need for additional modes of transportation is rapidly receding along with our economy. The state is tens of billions of dollars in the hole, and the country is trillions of dollars in the hole. Has it occured to anyone that maybe we don't need such a grandiose rail project at this time - especially if all of the supposed profits will never materialize, and it will likely be a gigantic money pit for years, possibly even forever.
Posted by frank, a resident of the Pleasanton Heights neighborhood, on Jan 15, 2009 at 9:42 pm
These last two posters are really out of sync with today's real world of economics. Milton Friedman and his disciple Alan Greenspan along with Reaganomics trickle down theory have turned out to be dead wrong. The economy lead by the prima donna financial giants, who the ideologues have held up as paragons of free enterprise and capitalism, is in a tail spin that has not yet hit bottom. (Note how these financial paragons have either disappeared or now are begging for government handouts - the most disgusting exhibition of so-called government welfare I have ever seen in my lifetime!)
If government does not start spending money on infrastructure projects such as high speed rail, where is the spending to come from to keep some of our 300 million population employed? I put my Bush tax cut last spring into savings - I did not spend it like so many others also saved it. And those who spent it on silly consumption items, they sent this money to China who manufactured those silly items. Few Americans were kept employed by it. Let's be explicit about it - last spring's tax refunds have been spectacularly unsuccessful. The economy has continued to spiral downward as if the tax cuts had never occurred. Nobody even mentions them anymore.
But to the point whether high speed rail can be successful...in Europe and Japan high speed rail has been very successful for decades in many important transportation corridors in those countries. In California we have such a corridor for which this is planned.
Next will be the complaint that high speed rail will need ongoing subsidies because it will not be profitable. Well, folks, are you aware that airlines in the United State would also not ever be profitable if they had to pay for the national air traffic control system (run by the FAA) as well as had to build and operate all of the airports they use? Who subsidizes the ATC (federal taxpayers) and builds and operates the airports (local taxpayers)?
From an economic perspective, high speed rail will be just like any of our other major transportation systems. And the infrastructure improvement will enhance our future economic activity and life style in ways we cannot now imagine, just like our national highway system did as well as our national air transportation system did. No one today can imagine being without either one.
Posted by Hi Speed rail won't help Tri valley, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jan 19, 2009 at 10:54 am
The very expensive proposed Hi speed rail will not benefit the Tri-Valley, even though it will run at a loss, and we will pay for it in our taxes. In fact it will hurt, because there will be no way for us to use it, and jobs, housing will be built elsewhere.
Even tho they seem to think there will be a market for people to ride from SF to Sacramento, the route goes thru San Jose, then south. It's like going to LA to get to Fresno from here (which incidentally is how you need to go if you want to try to fly there.)