[So, because fedgov was allowed to spend money on roads where powerful congessmen were located, we should allow them to spend even more money on building “high speed” rail where powerful congressmen are located? Even though government can’t profitably run the passenger trains they have now, a postal service, a bus line, a whorehouse, or a forced monopoly gambling business?]
No, I would be willing to spend some money where current traffic patterns show a monorial system would make sense. I don’t live in Miami (about 60 miles north), but I can tell you first hand that expanding the link from downtown Miami to points southwest of Miami are completely necessary. the ONLY way to travel via road is on US 1, which is horribly congested most of the day. There is no room to build more roads.
On a previous post I also mentioned Long Island as needing some traffic congestion relief.
There are SOME PLACES where NO MORE ROAD CONSTRUCTION IS POSSIBLE, but existing train lines can be extended and make a big difference.
And it would be nice if you at least admitted your criticism of me was factually wrong about who funded the roads in the 50’s.
On a previous post I also mentioned Long Island as needing some traffic congestion relief.
There are SOME PLACES where NO MORE ROAD CONSTRUCTION IS POSSIBLE, but existing train lines can be extended and make a big difference.
And it would be nice if you at least admitted your criticism of me was factually wrong about who funded the roads in the 50’s.
I copied and pasted diretly from your post regarding the the roadways in the areas of powerful congressmen. further another poster referenced and linked that fedgov fronted 90% of the financing.
Secondly, if it is so needed and profitable, private industries sould be lining up to invest and pay for it. Since they are not, the interest does not seem to be as great as you suggest.
Where I live, I can only get satellite internet. Same as most of my neighbors. Much of my banking needs to be conducted online. I don't expect you to pay for my convenience. If one of the cable carriers felt it was profitable to lay the cable and infrastructure, they would do so.
All of these programs are great when someone else is paying for them. In case people on here haven't realized, we are rapidly running out of other people's money, but the bills are still coming due.
Why don't we cut unecassary spending in the government, reduce the deficit and debt and lower taxes on the private sector. Then maybe private companies would be more willing to risk capital on building these railways everyone is talking about. Or maybe, just maybe the private sector will develop omething even etter that a plane, car, or train; something we can't even imagine right now. Believing government was the answer for everything got us into the position we are in now.
Everyone is all for reducing spending until it is their pet project.
Wrong. Everyone that is in any 'traffic jam' ....freely wants to be there. Just like a crowded concert. You don't hear people talking about concert crowd crises do you? Just like a popular bar. There, at the concert, in the 'traffic' everyone wants to be there. No one forced them. They are all adults, supposedly rational. If you want to live in a urban area, you are going to have times of maximum utilization of any public space. This is natural. If you don't like that urban phenomenon, the US is a big, open nation where you can live decades and never encounter urban events. Natural, rational events, are not 'horrible'.