On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 17:20:49 -0700, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


"Wes" wrote in message
...
Ignoramus21954 wrote:

kind of shocking and sad. I have a feeling that they will not build
anything due to the typical reasons.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/08/bu...e&ref=business

You mean like environmental regulations and eminent domain lawsuits? High
speed rail,
NIMBY!

Wes

It is not NIMBY. A majority of the voters voted for a debacle. The train
can not go 150 mph for most of it's route. Does not go where the people
need it. And the cost will be so high, would be cheaper to give free
airplane tickets out. They are talking about going to San Francisco and the
Transbay Terminal. Where are you going to run a 100+ mph train?
Burlingame, says put it underground. Add another billion to the build
costs. Then you will have employees making living wages just like BART.
$80k+ fully paid retirement and benefits for someone with a GED. Ride the
TGV in France from Lyons to Paris. Most of the trip is maybe 75 mph. The
building trades unions are all for it. They were one of the sponsors of
the initiative. Get a couple years employment and then what. What is the
people of California will be spending billions paying for the bonds.
Cheaper to give them welfare.



Not quite. Schedule time between Paris and Lyon is almost exactly 2 hours for
a 280 mile trip.


Since they upgraded the lines and stations from the Victorian standards we
had, we now get Pendolino trains passing at 110mph 30 yards from the car park
at work. They make less disturbance than the 30mph traffic on the road at the
same distance.

Still be better if they were steam, though :-)

Mark Rand
RTFM