Posted on 10/03/2009 6:18:08 AM PDT by Willie Green
LOS ANGELES, Oct. 2 (Xinhua) -- California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced on Friday that his state would build the first bullet train in the nation, a project that would provide a 10-billion-dollar economic boost to the state.
"I think it is disgraceful for America to be so far behind when it comes to infrastructure," Schwarzenegger told a press conference.
"In Europe and Asian countries, they're traveling now up to 300miles or 480 kilometers (per hour on bullet trains), while we're traveling on our trains at the same speed as 100 years ago. That is inexcusable. America must catch up," he said.
The governor added that to build the 800-mile (1280-kilometer) fast-speed rail from San Diego to San Francisco, California had applied for 4.7 billion dollars in federal stimulus money.
If built, the train can whisk people from Los Angeles to San Francisco in 2 hours and 40 minutes, create hundreds of thousands of jobs and bring in revenue of billions of dollars.
Schwarzenegger said California deserved to get more than half of the 8 billion dollars in federal stimulus money set aside for high-speed rail development because it was further along in planning than other states and is ready to break ground in 2011, a year before the federal deadline for getting the money.
"Those stimulus dollars will go further in California than in any other state because California has pledged to match -- dollar for dollar -- all money received (from the federal government), " Schwarzenegger promised.
In November, California voters approved issuing 9.95 billion dollars in bonds to fund construction of high-speed rail. More money would come from state, local and private matching funds.
The problem with fixed rail is - it’s fixed.
Check out the Southwest website. There are three airports in the Bay Area and four in LA plus SD. There are flights all day going to and from each airport. That provides flexibility the train can’t.
Getting through airport security takes twice as long as the flight? When have you ever spent 3 hours in security? You’re making it up.
Regardless, are you saying the airport security problem would be more expensive to fix than building this train?
California on track to build first U.S.bullet train
_____________________________
Why build only one? California is rich. Build bullet trains connecting every city in the state. I even think a bridge to Japan should be built on which a section will accommodate a bullet train to Japan.
The problem with fixed rail is - it’s fixed.
Check out the Southwest website. There are three airports in the Bay Area and four in LA plus SD. There are flights all day going to and from each airport. That provides flexibility the train can’t.
The big problem with airports are - they're fixed.
Airlines can't make convenient 5-minute stops for passengers to embark/disembark at stations along the route to the final destination.
That provides flexibility that airlines can't.
Getting through airport security takes twice as long as the flight? When have you ever spent 3 hours in security? You’re making it up.
No I'm not.
You've never taken a flight that was only 45min ~ 1 hour in duration???
You must not fly very often.
Sheesh is right! Do we need to embark on a multi-hundred billion dollar program to build airports? Last time I checked, they were everywhere. I guess you don’t get out much.
Your bullet train rails don’t exist. Airports do.
A bankrupt state looking to spending hundreds of billions on a new boondoggle. Who would have guessed?
Hmmmmmm....
Well it's pretty easy to see which one I'd rather have pass near my home.
Jet engines are a LOT noisier, even though they're quite a bit farther away.
Men in government (MIGs) should butt out, they are the problem. These men are incessantly arrogant, puffed up with their self-importance, and excellent brain, but mostly ignorant about the particulars of an industry they feign and lie about their competence to lead and specify.
Your bullet train rails don’t exist. Airports do.
K-Mart used to be everywhere.
Google says they're still around, but I don't think I've seen one in over 10 years.
Gotta keep up with the changing times to be competitive.
Airports had their heyday... now it's time for new technology.
You're right. I drive whenever possible. It's much more convenient. The shortest flight I take is Bay Area to L.A. --- about 80 minutes.
Unless they put the train station in Oakland I would never use the high-speed rail. Why drive farther to S.F. to take a train that is twice as slow as the airlines that are closer to me?
I think that private enterprise has been pretty much killed in this country by the flip-flop, unconstrained actions of government. Since constitutions at various levels are not respected by (immoral, unethical) officeholders, it is unpredictable what a future stream of income would be from an investment - inhibiting investment in anything, but particularly investment in new stuff. A newly built railroad across the country these days - forgetaboutit.
There is a plane that leaves Sacramento every hour on the hour for LA and points around LA. I am sure a bullet train would be welcome if the delay times for boarding were improved over those of waiting to get on a plane. Takes one hour to fly from Sac to LA or the vicinity. Takes 3 hours just to get on the plane. If a bullet train took 2.5 hours to get from Sac to LA there would be many business passengers willing to pay as long as the price was consistent with airfares, Ditto SF and LA, San Diego.
You are wrong about passenger screening trains being the same a planes, it doesn’t exist now and in fact a new ruling in some states that CCW holders can carry on trains has been enacted. Since trains can’t be driven into major popluation centers and crashed into buildings such as the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, I see no reason why such restrictions would ever be enacted, and if they tried they would get a violent reaction from passengers.
K-Mart in my area, across the street from a Wal-Mart and it is still going strong.
Unless they put the train station in Oakland I would never use the high-speed rail. Why drive farther to S.F. to take a train that is twice as slow as the airlines that are closer to me?
I've never been to the SF/Oakland area, but I bet the route planners intend to make it easy for you to hop aboard BART somewhere in Oakland, then make a quick and easy transfer to the high-speed rail (or airport if you prefer) in SF. Google says BART already connects to SFO and OAK, so I would guess that the high-speed rail would also terminate at one of those two, giving you more modes of transportation to choose from, depending on where you want to go.
The short-hop airlines won't like it that high-speed rail will likely serve their busiest destinations. But they'll survive by flying to other places where the rail doesn't go.
More transportation alternatives benefit the travelers!!!!
That's what competition is all about!!!
Just what we need, more debt.. so fat-arsed politicos can hustle around the state stripping it bare..
When I was a college student in the 60-70s, air travel was half the price of train travel for the marginal passenger (standby), and generally much faster.
Those were the good old days!
Gasoline was 29¢ a gallon, and you were allowed to smoke on the plane!!!
But that was 40 years ago and we're both getting old...
It shouldn't come as a surprise that modern high-speed rail is a lot more competitive than it was 40 years ago.
Just what we need, more debt.. so fat-arsed politicos can hustle around the state stripping it bare..
If you're going bankrupt anyway, might as well run up the tab and at least have something to show for it.
I could think of other things I’d blow dough on beside a giant train set. ;-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.