Why Do Conservatives oppose High Speed Rail?

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by ErikBEggs, Dec 18, 2013.

  1. unrealist42

    unrealist42 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2011
    Messages:
    3,000
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Amtrak moves over 900,000 people a month in the Northeast corridor. A car carries one or two people, an intercity bus carries about 50, a short haul jet carries about 140. One Amtrak train carries over 800 people on dedicated tracks that do not contend with other users, like cars and aircraft do on the highways and airports.

    Amtrak's express trains will get you from downtown Boston to downtown NYC quicker than flying. If it did not have to spend the profits from its northeast service subsidizing money losing routes required by congress it could easily cut travel time from Boston to NYC to less than two hours.

    The government has spent $Trillions building highways and airports over the last decades but only a few $Billion for intercity passenger rail. If highways and airlines were not so heavily subsidized passenger rail would never have went away in the first place. Bringing passenger rail back is still the cheapest and most efficient way to improve intercity travel, far cheaper than building new airports and highways and far more efficient at moving people.
     
  2. gamewell45

    gamewell45 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Messages:
    24,711
    Likes Received:
    3,547
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The solution is easy; don't upgrade the tracks; keep em' at 55 mph through those states. Also check to see what ties, if any, the governors have with the airline industry.
     
  3. ErikBEggs

    ErikBEggs New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2013
    Messages:
    3,543
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Nope, we need to be bigger and not let country continue divide because of silly Republican governors.
     
  4. Daggdag

    Daggdag Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2010
    Messages:
    15,668
    Likes Received:
    1,957
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Actually they can. The rail system would not be completely public. The depots and tracks were be government property, similar to airports, but the trains would be owned and operated by private companies, similar to airlines.
     
  5. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    I believe we may need a new Standard of 100 miles per hour.
     
  6. Rainbow Crow

    Rainbow Crow New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2013
    Messages:
    4,924
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I never said I was against looking into a hyperloop system, but that's not what the left has been pushing.
     
  7. ErikBEggs

    ErikBEggs New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2013
    Messages:
    3,543
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This has nothing to do with "the left"

    Let's cut the bullcrap. "High Speed Rail Network" isn't limited to obselete HSR of the late 20th century. We are America.. if you believe we are "exceptional", you believe we can build on existing rail / maglev / transit / tram technology and come up with something to suit our needs.
     
  8. Lil Mike

    Lil Mike Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51,271
    Likes Received:
    22,660
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The translation for that seems to be that you didn't know what you were talking about and got called on it.

    Let me give you a hint of how wrong you were. The vote in the senate for that federal aid highway act was 89-1. Now, for what political party did the senator who made the lone no vote belong to?


    You should change your name to "Need Fundamentals"
     
  9. ErikBEggs

    ErikBEggs New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2013
    Messages:
    3,543
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Why would we want to replicate the failure that is the airline industry?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Political party isn't important. Liberal (good) and conservative (bad) have been flip-flopped among parties and between parties for decades.
     
  10. Lil Mike

    Lil Mike Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51,271
    Likes Received:
    22,660
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You weren't following the conversation. The poster argued that Republicans opposed the Interstate Highway System.
     
  11. Subdermal

    Subdermal Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    Messages:
    12,185
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    0
    They are poorly run. Not as poorly as - say - Amtrak...but poorly. I responded to the comment that "NOT ONE AIRLINE AS EVER BEEN PROFITABLE". Perhaps you should correct that poster.

    I'll slow down for you and give you a bit of leeway, since leftist posters are anxious to conflate private airlines with HSR/etc. There isn't one rail system in America which doesn't lose money.



    Oh goodie. About 40% the speed of a 757 - and about 100x the infrastructure cost.

    Cite, rose-colored glasses. Trains suffer all those issues, as well as the inevitable fact of linear travel due to track limitations. The only way you approach the amount of ridership on trains is if you include the Subway.

    Most of my flights are over 500 miles. Now what? The argument here is that train infrastructure is inefficient, and will not be used the USA enough to justify even a fraction of its cost.

    Perhaps the nuance of understanding that we could BUY A FOCKING CAR for the amount we subsize trains per rider is lost on you.
     
  12. Subdermal

    Subdermal Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    Messages:
    12,185
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Learn what a non sequitur is.

    Ancient technology should not be heavily invest.

    Yep, your posts are a waste of time.
     
  13. Subdermal

    Subdermal Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    Messages:
    12,185
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So apparently you're no rocket scientist, as you've been soundly refuted. Why did you claim no airline has ever been profitable?

    You demonstrated earlier that you don't know much at all about companies who profit in the airline industry.

    You're jousting windmills. I never said anything about profitability except in response to your inane claim that airlines haven't profited, and that trains should be subsidized simply because planes are. My point as remained the same: one subsidy makes sense; the other does not.

    I strongly suggest that the problem is your reading comprehension.
     
  14. Moi621

    Moi621 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2013
    Messages:
    19,291
    Likes Received:
    7,606
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I am a fan of High Speed Rail.
    Indeed I believe it should be the policy of America to maintain, 3 rail systems.
    Cargo, High Speed and Light rail similar to the construction of the interstate freeway system.

    In the Greatest State of California, our High Speed Rail has been 'derailed' by the usual government idiots.
    The premise is the first construction would be to move people as fast as possible between the Los Angeles area to San Francisco Bay Area.
    The proposed route and the first segments being constructed are near Fresno.
    Planners have made this High Speed Rail effort into a "milk run" to include towns in the San Joaquin Valley.
    Even "the French" complained about this route and pulled out of any cooperation.

    So, While I support a National Effort to create good rail service, and the west has been lacking in this while Easterners have significant rail corridors -
    The P.C. Government crowd are NOT the ones to do it. They have demonstrated their ineptness in California.
    Right now I don't know who are the best to pull it off.

    BTW First The government should eminent domain all existing rail right of ways.
    It is a fragmented road system that badly needs reforms. Some are unused yet, still maintained as private.



    Moi :oldman:
    I hope this upload doesn't qualify me as a conservative :blankstare:






    No :flagcanada:
     
  15. ErikBEggs

    ErikBEggs New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2013
    Messages:
    3,543
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Excuses. Why do you defend the airline industry so much? Are you a lobbier too?

    A lot of conservatives are known lobbyists to airlines and big oil, which HATE the prospect of an alternative transportation network that isn't so oil dependent.

    That is not a valid excuse for not even exploring the option. The airline and interstate highway system made our older railroads obselete. However, the road infrastructure is poorly maintained and deteriorating and the airline industry faces rising costs, NEGATIVE balance sheets, constant mergers and corporate bailouts.




    Most flights in this country are not 757s, they are 737s.

    Perhaps you forgot how much it cost to run and maintain our countrys airports and TSA beauracracy.

    I'm just playing devil's advocate. I don't care if the airline industry stays our not. However, if the plane trip is less than 500 miles, I'd take an HSR any day.

    Build a new track, and stop comparing everything as a win vs. loss scenario.


    Typical conservative naysayer. Everything is about you. Your life. Your country. Your little world.

    HSR is more efficient travel than automobile and airplane (time, money, and energy-wise) between 150-500 miles. It is so much more efficient at that range that most European countries have cut flights of that range. That range alone connects the Northeast Corridor and the great lakes, the two most populated regions in our country.

    Let me be just as selfish: Why should I have to choose between an 8 hour drive between Buffalo and Washington DC, or a 45 minute ($400) flight with 1.5 hour early arrival and a 1-2 hour commute from Reagan or Dulles into downtown DC?
     
  16. Subdermal

    Subdermal Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    Messages:
    12,185
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think you should be arguing with RetardedMentalist. That's the person who doesn't think big, and wants to spend billions on a 19th century mod of transportation that doesn't fit for our population density. I was discussing the potential technological breakthroughs which may lurk around the corner which would change the paradigm completely, and she wasn't having it. Perhaps you should tell her to think bigger - and less stupidly.
     
  17. ErikBEggs

    ErikBEggs New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2013
    Messages:
    3,543
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not at all. Your input is very constructive.

    A lot of government in these private works corporations are idiots getting into it with the purpose to screw (*)(*)(*)(*) up. Kind of what the GOP does to every proposal they don't agree with.

    There is no logical reason on the planet as to why it isn't a good investment for our country's future infrastructure. Every argument is strawman, fear, or just the general conservative reaction of "no."

    I've even heard some libertarian analysts go so far as rails are repungent to conservatives because they embrace collectivism as oppose to individualism, which explains their staunch devotion to personal vehicles.

    - - - Updated - - -

    It doesn't fit our current population density, which will continue to increase since most of our future growth is in urban centers. That is the problem with this country. The problems of tomorrow are cheaper to fix today than waiting until tomorrow.
     
  18. Subdermal

    Subdermal Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    Messages:
    12,185
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm done arguing with you. Trains are stupid in this country. Just as an example in microcosm of how stupid your arguments are, a 737 is capable of Mach .8, which is over 600mph.

    Derp.
     
  19. Subdermal

    Subdermal Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    Messages:
    12,185
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    0
    One more. Our current population density isn't projected to attain the levels necessary to justify HSR (read: over 500 people/mile for over 1500 years. We are simply not reproducing quickly enough to justify this.

    Thanks for losing the argument.
     
  20. garyd

    garyd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    56,560
    Likes Received:
    16,652
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Go ahead that is one of the only two places in the country where it makes a limited amount of sense provided you don't make the damn thing stop at every major and more than a few minor population centers between Philly and Washington.I frankly don't have problem with that one. I do have a problem with people who think you can run high speed rail between Boston and LA.
     
  21. CKW

    CKW Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2010
    Messages:
    15,296
    Likes Received:
    3,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It it will be a profitable successful venture....private sector will accomplish it. Red Flag....when its only the government trying to shove it through.
     
  22. garyd

    garyd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    56,560
    Likes Received:
    16,652
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Dude what generally screws up high speed rail in this country are politicians who for their vote will want the train to stop in one or more communities in their district. You won't ever get to 200 mph if you have to stop every 30 miles to take on passengers. Buy the way in the Northeast where this is actually feasible most of those politicians wil be Democrats.
     
  23. Alaska Slim

    Alaska Slim Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2012
    Messages:
    1,002
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Correction, it wouldn't have existed during the 1930s. With the DC-3, subsidies were no longer necessary, airlines could have from that point on existed on their own. Air mail however would have and did exist on its own by the 1930s. It's all about what is profitable at the time, given the state of technology.

    So I repeat; paternalism is not necessary, that was mistake on their part as it lead to the regulation era under the CAB, where prices rose every year, and the airlines began to stagnate.

    And the Air mail routes of the 1920s and 1930s were largely run by Jennys with Liberty engines, both of which were WWI surplus. It doesn't matter where the inception of these designs came from, what matters is if we can use them efficiently to produce value.

    Spin-off technologies of war is no endorsement of Government-run enterprise.
     
  24. snakestretcher

    snakestretcher Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2010
    Messages:
    43,996
    Likes Received:
    1,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Rubbish; the French government owns SNCF which operates the TGV high-speed rail network. Last year it posted profits of £1 billion.
    http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?17,3041181
     
  25. snakestretcher

    snakestretcher Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2010
    Messages:
    43,996
    Likes Received:
    1,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Oh dear god! A train can carry around 1000 in comfort. Many trains operate through things called 'timetables' on the same piece of track. What do you think happens; one train only goes from end to end? Planes have to stop, refuel, re-stock, turn around etc. And you talk about ignorance?
     

Share This Page