DescentBB

Question is…do we really need high speed, or is what we have now good enough.

Other countries have much larger percentages of their populations using public transportation then we do, seems like a lot to spend on a relative few.

Seems to me, we should make the prudent improvements to the existing system, and leave high speed to some time in the future, when we have our budget under control.

Spidey wrote:Question is…do we really need high speed, or is what we have now good enough.

if you have any sense of vision and what other nations and economies have reaped from robust high speed rail, you shouldn't find that question difficult to answer. Frankly, our view of 'good enough' renders that quaint old idea of American Exceptionalism to be a joke nowadays.

Other countries have much larger percentages of their populations using public transportation then we do, seems like a lot to spend on a relative few.

if you make it robust and fairly affordable(yes, Virginia, subsidized), we'd have FAR more riders, I suspect.

Seems to me, we should make the prudent improvements to the existing system, and leave high speed to some time in the future, when we have our budget under control.

our budget will be out of control in some respects for as long as we allow our infrastructure and hence our economy to stagnate. Want to get that budget in check fast? SLASH Defense spending.

when I hear about quick fixes, 'good enough' and the like, this picture always comes to mind:

callmeslick wrote:when I hear about quick fixes, 'good enough' and the like, this picture always comes to mind:

Teamsters union driver...can't fire him. Time to find out if the photographer is a conservative and audit his ass...

and the usual knee-jerk turn-everything into ideology approach has been what has made America quite unexceptional.

callmeslick wrote:and the usual knee-jerk turn-everything into ideology approach has been what has made America quite unexceptional.

So you are acknowledging your role in the faults of society?!? Excellent!

ummm, chief: I brought up the issue of infrastructure. Yes, I noted that of late, one party seems dead-set against spending a dime on it. However, ideology ought not prevent any forward thinking. You, Will are so obsessed with one-upping me and pushing the same tired ideological talking points, that you can't accept that. Too bad, I'm sure your grandkids will be so proud of what you did for your country.

Will Robinson wrote:

callmeslick wrote:when I hear about quick fixes, 'good enough' and the like, this picture always comes to mind:

Teamsters union driver...can't fire him. Time to find out if the photographer is a conservative and audit his ass...

So was that WalMart truck driver, that slammed into the back of Tracy Morgan's limo causing him serious injuries, a union driver? Working for WalMart, most likely not.

I found it impressive that he can tell whose a Union member from a picture of a truck accident.

callmeslick wrote:I found it impressive that he can tell whose a Union member from a picture of a truck accident.

I find your humor deficit amusing.

Well, we only have about a dozen or more infrastructure issues that are far more important than high speed rail, and many of them mean much more for future generations than rail.

We can start with the electric grid and work our way down to rail, but it’s going to take a while to get there. (priority list)

A nation needs to prioritize things, not build stuff just because some other country has it. There is no real need for high speed rail at the present time…but it’s for sure the bridges are falling down. High speed rail is more of a wish list, than an actual need.

I sure would hate to be the guy that has to explain to people in California and Texas that we are building high speed rail, while they have no water, or the power grid is vulnerable to solar storms, because some people need to get to work faster.

Priorities are the key when you have limited resources. Sure we could slash defense spending, but I’m pretty sure that would have devastating affects on the economy, when we fire all of those (and some of the last) high skill, high paying jobs. Also less demand for automobiles will have an affect as well, because I’m quite sure all of those fancy new trains will be built overseas. (therefore no offset to the auto industry)

I looked up your usage of “complex” the other day, you sure do use it an awful lot against other people, but have no problem oversimplifying something you want to promote.

Spidey wrote:Well, we only have about a dozen or more infrastructure issues that are far more important than high speed rail, and many of them mean much more for future generations than rail.

that might be a fair assessment. The optimist in me hopes all get addressed, but you're good with your priorities.

callmeslick wrote:when I hear about quick fixes, 'good enough' and the like, this picture always comes to mind:

And why would this picture come to mind? Other than the driver is a idiot and probably can't read English. Having drove a truck during the 1080 recession, let me clue you into why the driver is dumber that a brick. Look close at the picture and it appear there is a sign right over the damaged trailer that says 12' something (any of you with skills blow it up and verify) Standard trailer heights are 13' something. So the pill popping driver didn't see that. Also there is a handbook for truck drivers that list every low bridge/overpass in the country. Evidently the driver never bothered to buy one. So now I have to ask slick, "Just what does the picture have to do with infrastructure and the need to fix it?". I could post pics of trucks running into bridge abutment on expressway overpasses. Does that mean we need to "fix" those also? Or do we have to stop blaming walking trees for people running into them instead of claiming the drivers are innocent victims of our crumbling infrastructure?

Also TC if you look at the trailer you will see the driver was probably a contract hauler for Schaffer trucking. Can't see the name on the tractor so he could work directly for the company.

Ferno wrote:Some time ago, I was planning a trip to the US for an event. I saw the price of the tickets and remembered my last flying experience. Having to go through three-four hours waiting at the airport to be screened by someone who thinks you're up to no good to be stuffed into a bus with wings for hours on end is not my idea of a good trip. I'd rather take a train.

As someone who's done a decent amount of travel for work (thus, quite a bit of flying), I avoid airports as much as I can.

woodchip wrote:...Also TC if you look at the trailer you will see the driver was probably a contract hauler for Schaffer trucking. Can't see the name on the tractor so he could work directly for the company.

I was replying to Will's snarky example of union drivers as inferior and unsafe. I don't think Shaffer Trucking even has unionized drivers either, but I'm not sure from their website.

you people are overthinking that picture.

That's why it's a bad example.

Will Robinson wrote:Teamsters union driver...can't fire him. Time to find out if the photographer is a conservative and audit his ass...

lies.

Ferno wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:Teamsters union driver...can't fire him. Time to find out if the photographer is a conservative and audit his ass...

lies.

Clueless.
It was a cynical commentary. I have no idea the identity or status of the driver as most people would have correctly taken for granted...

Only those who have a soul burning need to find a flaw in something, anything, a conservative type says are blinded by that so badly they can't get it.

Will Robinson wrote:It was a cynical commentary. I have no idea the identity or status of the driver as most people would have correctly taken for granted...

Or maybe I caught you in your usual tripe and you backpedaled as fast as you could.

Only those who have a soul burning need to find a flaw in something, anything, a conservative type says are blinded by that so badly they can't get it.

This from the guy who attacks slick, myself, and tunnelcat at every chance he can? That's good.

Lighten up, Francis.

Ferno wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:It was a cynical commentary. I have no idea the identity or status of the driver as most people would have correctly taken for granted...

Or maybe I caught you in your usual tripe and you backpedaled as fast as you could.

Lol! You are too much!
Yea I back peddled so fast I was like Superman flying the opposite rotation of the earth to turn back time so I could tell slick his sense of humor was also lacking so it makes it look like I said that to him days before you made your silly claim of 'catching me'....that's how fast I roll when I back pedal....

Ferno wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:Only those who have a soul burning need to find a flaw in something, anything, a conservative type says are blinded by that so badly they can't get it.

This from the guy who attacks slick, myself, and tunnelcat at every chance he can? That's good.

I challenge the assertions you guys make. You find it as an attack because you have issues....like that burning desire you have so eloquently displayed here...

Vander wrote:Lighten up, Francis.

actually i'm pretty calm. you should see me when i'm truly upset. It's kind of freaky.

But if you mean will.. well, I can't speak for him.

See, that’s exactly what’s wrong with debate these days, challenge someone’s opinions and it becomes an attack or racism…or some such.

But if you looked at this site objectively, it would be pretty clear which side does more of the attack the messenger not the message.

Some messages are pretty bad and need to be buried.

You could say the same for some of the messengers