Thread: high speed rail moves ahead

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/17/us...rain.html?_r=1

The government has identified 10 corridors, each from 100 to 600 miles long, with greatest promise for high-speed development.

They are: a northern New England line; an Empire line running east to west in New York State; a Keystone corridor running laterally through Pennsylvania; a major Chicago hub network; a southeast network connecting the District of Columbia to Florida and the Gulf Coast; a Gulf Coast line extending from eastern Texas to western Alabama; a corridor in central and southern Florida; a Texas-to-Oklahoma line; a California corridor where voters have already approved a line that will allow travel from San Francisco to Los Angeles in two and a half hours; and a corridor in the Pacific Northwest.

http://www.buffalonews.com/cityregion/story/642389.html

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration announced Thursday that it is proceeding with plans to allow 10 rail corridors — including one linking Buffalo and Albany —to compete for up to $13 billion in federal high-speed rail funding.

The announcement gives the new administration’s stamp of approval to rail corridors that were designated as eligible funding candidates as far back as 1991. The Empire Corridor, linking Buffalo and Albany, won its designation in 1998.

While only six of the 10 corridors are expected to receive funding, local lawmakers touted the Obama announcement as a hopeful sign.

And perhaps most hopefully of all, the White House invited Rep. Louise M. Slaughter, the Fairport Democrat who is spearheading the upstate New York high-speed rail effort, to attend Thursday’s White House announcement.

Other commitments prevented Slaughter from being able to attend, but both she and Sen. Kirsten E. Gillibrand, D-N. Y., said they were excited about the president’s announcement.

“The development of high-speed rail will create an economic development engine in upstate New York for decades,” Gillibrand said.

While competition for the funding is expected to be fierce, local lawmakers believe the upstate route has an advantage because it could be built on a third track along an existing right of way.

That means it could be built more quickly than other highspeed rail corridors — which is important because the first $8 billion in federal funding will come under the economic stimulus bill, which aims to fund projects that are “shovel-ready.” The Obama administration aims to announce that first round of funding by the end of summer.

“The ‘third track initiative’ is deserving of federal support and I intend to fight tooth and nail to make high-speed rail in upstate New York a reality,” Slaughter said.

Obama likened his highspeed rail plan to the unveiling of the interstate highway system in the 1950s.

“My high-speed rail proposal will lead to innovations that change the way we travel in America,” he said. “We must start developing clean, energy-efficient transportation that will define our regions for centuries to come.”

The Buffalo-to-Albany rail proposal will compete with proposals linking Chicago with several Midwestern cities, a link between Los Angeles and San Francisco, and other proposals in New England, the Southeast and Pacific Northwest.

Both Gillibrand and Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N. Y., have been pushing the upstate rail proposal, and Slaughter has formed an upstate caucus to push for the plan on a bipartisan basis.

“I’m glad we got to the next step,” said Rep. Chris Lee, RClarence, who also has been pushing the upstate route. “I know they will take a close look at the economic feasibility of this, and I hope that gets us to the final gate.”

i think its a great idea, and one that could really help the area. I just hope we aren't getting our hopes up then they pull the rug out and we get none of the federal money

It's a terrible idea.

And for those of you who don't understand what fascism is:

"Obama likened his highspeed rail plan to the unveiling of the interstate highway system in the 1950s."

Ask yourself where Eisenhower got the idea for that from.

Honest question: are you really saying that the Interstate Highway System is bad because it happened to be thought of by a Fascist? Other than giving fucking State Troopers free reign to set speed traps, what the hell is the problem?

Haha just because Hitler built highways doesnt make it a bad idea. Worse argument ever

lalala ruins everything

Originally Posted by LISabresFan61

Haha just because Hitler built highways doesnt make it a bad idea. Worse argument ever

How about the forcible expropriation of property required to make it? You like the 5th Amendment (read the entire fucking thing, not just the part inspired by Hobbes). Does that make it a bad idea?

I don't care enough about Joe Farmer to make me not want a new highway, or in this case railway running though the area.

They've been doing studies about this rail for about 20 years now, and i think the state owns all the land that it will go on. ( i think its just going to follow the thru-way. ) good idea, will create more jobs, and maybe get the central terminal in use again.

And lala if you think obama is hitler, and america is turning into fascism, just move already.

We haven't taken over Alberta yet Smash, so he's safe.

Originally Posted by buffalofan19

Honest question: are you really saying that the Interstate Highway System is bad because it happened to be thought of by a Fascist? Other than giving fucking State Troopers free reign to set speed traps, what the hell is the problem?

No, I'm opposed to it because it is fascist. There are many problems with state monopolies in any industry, from an economic standpoint to simple liberty being destroyed.

Originally Posted by Smashingt

They've been doing studies about this rail for about 20 years now, and i think the state owns all the land that it will go on. ( i think its just going to follow the thru-way. ) good idea, will create more jobs, and maybe get the central terminal in use again.

And lala if you think obama is hitler, and america is turning into fascism, just move already.

Obama's no different than W, they simply believe in the principle that the common good comes before the individual good.

America's been turning fascist in an accelerated path since Wilson, and leaders like FDR, LBJ, Nixon, W and now Obama have continued that path.

The problem isn't with creating jobs, it's with actually producing things.

Create more jobs? How come someone didn't build this fantastic railway before? Because it wasn't economic. So here's another thing that destroys capital. Congratulations. Just make sure you realize that there is a cost to printing dollars out of thin air.

Perhaps you should listen to the economists that predicted this current meltdown (along with the Great Depression, yes, they're batting 1.000), instead of the politicians that caused it for your economic advice.

Originally Posted by slowpokemcgee

We haven't taken over Alberta yet Smash, so he's safe.

Worry about Iraq or Afghanistan first before you threaten other nations.

Yea, I could take over Alberta myself. The rest of the country can go worry about the middle east.

I'm with our trolly friend on this one. If it was up to me, we would all live in agrarian societies. No federal government to provide us roadways or regulate what foods and drugs hit the market, so we would have to live on what we made in our own little sharecrops. It'd be 1796 all over again, baby. That's what the Constitution calls for. Any interpretation to the contrary is fascist. Anyone who interprets the Constitution differently (ie--every Justice on the Supreme Court since 1828 with the possible exception of Roger Tawney and Antonin Scalia) is a fascist. That includes Felix Frankfurter. Raging fascist, you know. In fact, anyone who disagrees with any of the above statements is a fascist. What is a fascist? I don't know. Even George Orwell said it was a word that completely lost its meaning. Fascists.

FASCISTS!!!!

Originally Posted by LALALALALALAFONTAINE

It's a terrible idea.

And for those of you who don't understand what fascism is:

"Obama likened his highspeed rail plan to the unveiling of the interstate highway system in the 1950s."

Ask yourself where Eisenhower got the idea for that from.

Were you aware that this is the worst argument of all time?

: Obama compares an overhaul of rail to Interstate Highway
: Interstate Highway was thought of by a fascist
:: Obama is fascist.

: I like America, a small-l liberal democracy
: Liberal democracies originated in thought in Greece and Rome, which kept slaves.
:: I love slavery.

I'm honestly getting pretty sick of you hijacking threads for the sake of trying to reconcile your hyper-libertarian worldview, which would fold like a house of cards if programs like interstate highway and the FDA were actually successful, life-saving, and Pareto improving, which they are.

Also, I hope you never have the need to eat food, drive your car, use medication, or call the police, fire department, or ambulance, or use the emergency room ever again, because if you do, you're submitting to fascism.

Getting back to the discussion, sans LALA hijacking.

Yes, I love the idea of high-speed rail. It's good for commerce and the environment. If I live in Ithaca and could take a 40 minute trip to Syracuse to catch a 90 minute train to Buffalo to catch a Bills/Sabres game, that is definitely preferrable to driving 3 hours to Buffalo. In fact, if such a system existed, I would likely go to Buffalo more often, and spend my money there. If there are thousands or tens of thousands of Jacksons out there who would travel to Buffalo if there was light rail but are not traveling to Buffalo in the status quo, the impact on Buffalo's economy would be substantially positive.

Our train system is antiquated and obsolete. Europe and East Asia have high-speed rail and Maglev trains, and cities and centers of commerce have benefited as a result. I hope New York is deemed worthy of such a project.

Originally Posted by slowpokemcgee

Yea, I could take over Alberta myself. The rest of the country can go worry about the middle east.

Except Alberta has firearms.

Think Texas, but educated, with colder weather.

And a LOT more oil and gas.

Originally Posted by Ignatius B. Fisticuffs

I'm with our trolly friend on this one. If it was up to me, we would all live in agrarian societies. No federal government to provide us roadways or regulate what foods and drugs hit the market, so we would have to live on what we made in our own little sharecrops. It'd be 1796 all over again, baby. That's what the Constitution calls for. Any interpretation to the contrary is fascist. Anyone who interprets the Constitution differently (ie--every Justice on the Supreme Court since 1828 with the possible exception of Roger Tawney and Antonin Scalia) is a fascist. That includes Felix Frankfurter. Raging fascist, you know. In fact, anyone who disagrees with any of the above statements is a fascist. What is a fascist? I don't know. Even George Orwell said it was a word that completely lost its meaning. Fascists.

FASCISTS!!!!

Not trolling, but if you are a bitch and like giving away your liberties, that's your problem.

The Federal government was never set up to set up railways or regulate foods or drugs. But hey, let's hope that someone close to you is on a third strike and incarcerated for life because of their third toke.

You can set up all the straw men you like, and change the interpretation of various justices, but you can't ignore that it was Mussolini and Hitler that offered positive compliments on the New Deal. But I know, that's lost it's meaning. Then call them socialists, as that's really what they are anyway.

Originally Posted by Ignatius B. Fisticuffs

Were you aware that this is the worst argument of all time?

: Obama compares an overhaul of rail to Interstate Highway
: Interstate Highway was thought of by a fascist
:: Obama is fascist.

: I like America, a small-l liberal democracy
: Liberal democracies originated in thought in Greece and Rome, which kept slaves.
:: I love slavery.

I'm honestly getting pretty sick of you hijacking threads for the sake of trying to reconcile your hyper-libertarian worldview, which would fold like a house of cards if programs like interstate highway and the FDA were actually successful, life-saving, and Pareto improving, which they are.

Also, I hope you never have the need to eat food, drive your car, use medication, or call the police, fire department, or ambulance, or use the emergency room ever again, because if you do, you're submitting to fascism.

The government doesn't produce food, make cars (at least the ones I buy, you go buy Ladas and Chryslers), create medication, run the fire department or ambulance or operate hospitals. And when they do, they FUCK THINGS UP.

I've managed to eat raw milk this year, which you've likely never done because your idiotic government prevents you from consuming it. Good luck eating certain raw cheeses that haven't aged for 60 days. Eat your tasteless cheeze wiz. I'll eat some taleggio. So the government can stay the fuck out of interfering with my food choices. Same goes for every aspect of my life. It isn't helped by bureaucrats like you pretending they know what's right for my life.

It's interesting that you mention the one legitimate role of the government (police) with all the others. You're simply looking for a fucking parent, not a protector of your rights.

It isn't hijacking a thread to note that government control of the railways is fascist. I couldn't give a fuck if speech offends you.

Pareto improving? Shut the fuck up. Pareto efficient outcomes occur in a strictly voluntary environment, which is destroyed by the existence of the FDA. And that's by definition. So don't argue with me, argue with logic. So stop throwing around words you don't understand.

Hyperlibertarian? You mean another word for someone that cares about freedom? Now go support another candidate that likes torturing people.