Judge it!Just goes to show that when you neglect something for a long time, you probably will be paying for the blown engine instead of a quart of oil."High-speed spending may not result in much transit"
The Edmond Sun 8/6/09
http://www.edmondsun.com/opinion/local_story_...
" How would you like to pay $1,000 so that someone — probably not you — can ride high-speed trains less than 60 miles a year? That’s the question the Federal Railroad Administration effectively asked in June when it invited states to submit proposals for spending $8 billion of stimulus money that Congress allocated to rail.
Soon after Congress approved this $8 billion, President Obama and the FRA grandly announced their “vision” for rail in America. Except in California and possibly Florida, they aren’t talking about bullet trains. Instead, in Oklahoma and 30 other states, they are merely proposing to upgrade existing freight lines to run trains at top speeds of 110 miles per hour — which means average speeds of 55-75 mph.
What the FRA did not say is how much this plan would cost, who would pay for it, who would be likely to ride the trains and whether the benefits would justify the costs. However, based on projections made by California, Florida, New York and other states, we can estimate the answers to these questions.
California wants very fast (top speed of 220 miles per hour, average speed of 145 mph) trains from Sacramento to San Diego, which will require all-new construction. The total cost is estimated to be at least $52 billion — and the state expects federal taxpayers to pay for half of it.
The FRA’s plan for Florida calls for 125-mph trains (average speed of 85 mph) between Tampa and Miami via Orlando. The estimated cost is $11 billion, but the state of Florida itself is unenthusiastic about the project.
Upgrading the 7,500 route miles in 31 other states to 110-mph standards will cost nearly $27 billion, for a total cost of close to $90 billion. Since about 90 million file and pay federal income taxes each year, that’s about $1,000 per taxpayer.
That’s only the beginning. Cost overruns are practically certain; based on similar rail projects, they are likely to add 40 percent to the total.
Taxpayers also will have to cover operating losses: Amtrak currently loses $28 per passenger in it 90-mph corridor from Los Angeles to San Diego, and $84 per passenger in its 110-mph corridor from Chicago to Detroit. Amtrak expects the states to cover most of these losses.
The FRA plan also has huge gaps, such as Dallas to Houston, Jacksonville to Orlando, and the entire Rocky Mountains. Once states start building high-speed rail, expect local politicians to demand these gaps be filled at your expense. And don’t be surprised when the government asks for billions more "
Or it's like letting that little leak remain unfixed because it only leaks when it rains, and then you are left with a room full of mildew and mold for months after one rainstorm.
This article states the obvious.. Rail transport has been starved for decades at the behest of companies like GM and the Airlines. Now the neglect is showing up, and you, An "Average Working Honolulu Resident" pores over the web everyday looking for negative media regarding the cost to rebuild the transportation systems of America.
You propagandists make me sick. We know you for what you are. We aren't falling for your regurgitated, manufactured B.S. anymore.
Search the Travel Forum:
Sagittarius
