Why are Republicans and shows on CNBC protesting/ridiculing high speed rail in California, and now complaining about the tens of billions of public money spent to construct California's international airports?
Scoble, Alex Scoble
and
Morton Fox
liked this
CNBC called them trains to no-where. Umm? So San Francisco, LA, Anaheim/San Diego are no where? And $42 billion for the route is on par with the cost of building OAK, SFO, SJC, LAX, SAN. I just don't understand how the mere mention of train travel causes a lapse of rationality in some people.
- Ray Cromwell
It might be different if the state wasn't troubled with debt already, it's like a homeless person buying a Porsche. Airports promote interstate travel, a railway would only assist intrastate travel, thus trains to no-where.
- OCoG of FF, Jimminy
True, but federal money is paying for the upfront design work. They're not likely to add $30 billion discretionary spending to the budget for trains. Either the feds will cough up more, or they'll try a bond measure or some public/private partnership. The proposed northern most station is SFO (http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/map...), so you'll take Bart to SFO and hop on the train to LA.
- Ray Cromwell
What bothers me, is that there's always an infinite amount of money for the status quo. If someone proposes a new sports arena or bridge, or airport terminal, they're like "hell yea", but trains are associated with socialism somehow (but airports aren't!)
- Ray Cromwell
Airports and Trains are both government build-outs and I guess airlines pay some usage fees (landing rights) but probably never equal to the cost of the planes.. but of course airports help make Boeing in business.
- Harry Hawk