California's $43 Billion High Speed Train to Debt
Loading...
Loading...
1,551
Loading...
2:58
California's $10.3 Billion Unemployment Fund Deficitby AFPCalifornia1,096 views- 2:33
AFP's "Common Sense": California's Bureaucracy Nightmareby AFPCalifornia864 views
- 1:07
Californians Speak Up about High-Speed Railby CAHighSpeedRail502 views
- 7:39
Don't Go Greyhound Go California High speed railby sideslide23575 views
- 2:17
California Police & School Kids Held Hostageby AFPCalifornia1,269 views
- 2:00
AMAZING 300 MPH China High Speed Rail !!! Bullet Train with EXTREME SPEED!!! - Reportby ConservativeNewMedia550,689 views
- 2:47
California High Speed Railby WiredChuck33,511 views
- 1:52
Californian's against High Speed Railby CCHSRA938 views
- 3:06
Chriss Street, Orange County Treasuer, on California Debt Crisis and Greeceby wwwEverydayPapercom720 views
- 3:23
Common Sense: We Need A Revolutionby AFPCalifornia1,312 views
- 2:49
"Common Sense": Lifestyles of the Rich & Famous on Government Pensionsby AFPCalifornia22,766 views
- 2:27
California Banning Walmart?by AFPCalifornia1,334 views
- 2:05
AFP's "Common Sense": Fiddling while California Burnsby AFPCalifornia890 views
- 6:33
High-Speed Rail • 100 Year Opportunityby HSRworkshop381 views
- 0:42
High Speed Trainby HCDworld227 views
- 5:58
GLOBAL PULSE: Debt: Greece vs California (4/16/2010)by linktv4,921 views
- 2:44
AFP's "Common Sense": Texas Beats California in Economic World Seriesby AFPCalifornia3,988 views
- 28:50
California High Speed Rail Interview Part 1 on Arab TVby aaccsv173 views
- 2:09
California High Speed Rail Linkby afserthailand144 views
- 9:36
California's High Speed Rail - KQED QUESTby KQEDondemand26,452 views
Can you have common sense without being informed?
th3gtr0 7 months ago
I'm sure it would cost less than $191.
"Why would taxpayers subsidize a train?"
Who said anything about needing subsidies? Most high-speed rail systems in the world operate in the black. The Tokaido Shinkansen has been in the black since 1966, LGV Paris Sud-Est since 1984, Seoul-Busan since 2007, Taipei to Zuoying(Kaohsiung) in 2009 and even St. Petersburg to Moscow (n.d.).
Also, expanding airways and roads does not help us move toward environmentally sustainable transportation methods.
th3gtr0 7 months ago
of the Shinkansen trip was less than the SF to LA trip, notice the difference in time I spent at the train terminals and airports. I spent significantly less time waiting at the train terminals than at the airports.
Flying is not cheaper to take than high-speed rail. If I wanted to book a one-way flight from SF to LA today (8/20/11), Southwest would cost me $190 business and $161 for economy. High-speed rail would cost me about $100. I don't know if that's the price for business or not, but
th3gtr0 7 months ago
the cost.
Flying from SF to LA is not faster than 2hr38min. I did it twice just this summer. I got to SFO at 7:00am. Boarded at 8:30. Took off at 8:20. Landed at LAX at 9:40. Got outside the terminal at 10:10. That's 3hrs10min. I also went to Japan this summer and took the Tokaido Shinkansen from Shizouka station to Shinagawa station. I got to the station at 8:20. Boarded the train at 8:36. Got to Shinagawa at 9:33(exactly on time) and exited the station at 9:40. Now altough the distance
th3gtr0 7 months ago
"Will likely end up costing more than $80 billion."
What's your source?
"$4 billion for 125 miles of freeway lanes."
California's population is estimated to reach close to 50 million people by 2030. 125 miles of highway is nothing compared to how much we'll have to build in addition to runway extensions and airport gate expansions we'll need in order to accommodate the greater transportation demands of the coming decades. High-speed rail can bring us the same benefits of all those, at half
th3gtr0 7 months ago
This fellow needs to know infrastructure won't work when there's no creativity for an alternative. Don't get me wrong, it's good to repair roads that existed, but what happen suddenly it failed to function? And high speed railway usually for big city which passenger volumes are much higher, this fellow also need to know the basic concept of economy development and commercial ingenuity.
Well, unless he is a oil or airline lobbyist otherwise, he'll know what those two means.
ltmikepowell 8 months ago
this video is riddled with logical fallacies and deceptive figures.
just because they are starting construction of the easiest segment relates in no way to the final usefulness of the complete system.
125 mile lanes of freeway sounds extremely small for the amount, and more roads only beget more road use and sprawl.
CA needs a diversified transit system, more infrastructure will be needed to support the growing population.
Yes to the train, and yes to CA's future !
jmsoct31 1 year ago
Thank you! It seems no matter how many issues remain unresolved two years into this thing, the legislators continue to ignore the legal requirements of the bond measure, CEQA and NEPA. The Emperor has no clothes. Whatever happened to due diligence and ethics? Money and power is what. Citizens should be outraged and make their voices heard, yet they remain complacent. They will get what they deserve - higher taxes and a train (bridge) to nowhere.
see highspeedboondoggleDOTcom
twidapate 1 year ago
Cash for Clunkers was a waste of money, it only created jobs abroad, coz USA does not make small cars
tri400 1 year ago
Even if $4 billion actually did what the congressman said (which I don't believe), easing congestion by widening freeways is like going on a diet by loosening your belt. It doesn't solve the problem. It just makes it less noticeable.
And, why are road repairs and expansions needed in the first place? Because roads are over-used. Let people live farther from the city, give them a better way to get around, then traffic won't be jammed as much, and roads won't need as much repair. It's a win-win
lenojames 1 year ago