Jump to content

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, J28 said:

Shove it up yer ass Blue Crab.  Conservatives welcome change that comes about through the actions in a free market economy, not change dictated by the central planning committee led by a loony 29 year old socialist with a hyper-inflated ego.

Railways are also a great example of free market failures if done in built up areas.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

How much will it take for you to shut the fuck up and never post here again Mis Raz'r Jib? That was fun.

One of the few things you posted I agree with.  It is however the only (legal) entity that has the power to send people with guns to bend you to it's will.

Posted Images

3 minutes ago, Laker said:

Historic railway rights of way count also.  Many have been converted to bike trails , but there are a lot others.

Didn't California just end their high speed experiment for cost overruns? 

 How many times has the left pointed out  - "where California goes the nation follows?"

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, jzk said:

How about you not make racist, ageist, sexist comments?  

Is the interstate highway system suitable for high speed rail?  High speed rail requires very straight track.

So you aren't an old white guy?   (BTW, most of us are, except for a few height challenged Aussies)  

As for high speed rail needing "very straight tracks", no it doesn't.  It needs well-designed and well-built tracks.  The French seem to have worked out that little problem, as have the Chinese and the Japanese...countries not known for being dead flat.  But then, we've got the Mid-west and Texas and Florida, so we kind of do know "dead flat and straight" pretty well.  

I'd say Interstate 10,20,40, 70, 80, 5, 15, 15, 35, 55, 95 might do just fine for long stretches.. 

Interstate_Highway_System_Map.jpg.113e1275dc470621e54bf769ce836a89.jpg

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The Joker said:

Didn't California just end their high speed experiment for cost overruns? 

 How many times has the left pointed out  - "as California goes the nation follows?"

 

So?  Their's didn't work.  Others will.  Japan's work.  France's work.  Even the Shanghai mag-lev works.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Left Shift said:

So you aren't an old white guy?   (BTW, most of us are, except for a few height challenged Aussies)  

As for high speed rail needing "very straight tracks", no it doesn't.  It needs well-designed and well-built tracks.  The French seem to have worked out that little problem, as have the Chinese and the Japanese...countries not known for being dead flat.  But then, we've got the Mid-west and Texas and Florida, so we kind of do know "dead flat and straight" pretty well.  

I'd say Interstate 10,20,40, 70, 80, 5, 15, 15, 35, 55, 95 might do just fine for long stretches.. 

Interstate_Highway_System_Map.jpg.113e1275dc470621e54bf769ce836a89.jpg

 

 

High speed rail doesn't need straight track because you say so?  Well there you go, problem solved.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, jzk said:

How about you not make racist, ageist, sexist comments?  

Is the interstate highway system suitable for high speed rail?  High speed rail requires very straight track.

Oops, sorry man, I thought we were talking R/L wing thinking. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jzk said:

High speed rail doesn't need straight track because you say so?  Well there you go, problem solved.  

You don't need Lagrangian analysis to see that there are curves allowed.  Just not hard curves.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Laker said:

You don't need Lagrangian analysis to see that there are curves allowed.  Just not hard curves.

Just not hard curves.  So overlaying high speed rail onto current rail lines is problematic to say the least. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

pulling shit out of your ass again trollbot?

If you have a position to take, take it.  Can high speed rail be installed right over the current US railway system?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Laker said:

high speed rail sure makes a lot of sense up here north of Seattle. Ever try to get to Portland except at 5 o'clock in the morning because of the traffic?  Building a high speed link requires practically no eminent domaining when compared with the amount required for more freeways that would soon clog up. 

Sounds like something your local and state government could do.  Why do you want federal funds to solve a local problem?

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Sounds like something your local and state government could do.  Why do you want federal funds to solve a local problem?

The present program is between Washington, Oregon and BC.  All three are throwing into the mix with US and Canadian federal funds paying also for at least the design phase.  Biggest issue I am told is the Border with neither government wanting to live with the increased cost of full time agents.  They seem to be OK with people at airports.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, J28 said:

Shove it up yer ass Blue Crab.  Conservatives welcome change that comes about through the actions in a free market economy, not change dictated by the central planning committee led by a loony 29 year old socialist with a hyper-inflated ego.

Couple of thoughts: My personal ass is exit only, YMMV, and I get yer point about the free market but this is a bigger conversation than that, on par with the Interstate system itself; bigger than that even. And maybe it's a deal for a Jeff Bezos/Musk/Gates/BC/Branson but I'd guess it will take all of our best thinking to do it effectively. Dunno what went specifically wrong in Cal but I'd guess too many political pockets to grease.

HS rail makes a lotta sense on both coasts. Maybe not in between so much but in our aging populace there's many a man and woman with more time than money AND an aversion to air travel. I gots lotsa miles and I fucking hate it. I'm so old I don't have to take my shoes off anymore, and I fucking hate it. And here in Merica you just know you're going to get a guy like a fat person next to you with too much cologne or IBS. . A shitload of business travel has been made obsolete with technology already with more on the horizon. A modest change in allowable business deductions could ensure that genuine business travel by air is vastly reduced.*

What we need for this discussion and beyond is new thinking. A commitment to new thinking. I'm loving this new group of US Reps, and their new thinking, or at least the balls to start new conversations. AOC is just the start of returning power to the people. Lead, follow, or get the fuck outta way. 

My second fav saying is "When the people lead, eventually the leaders will follow." My first is "Gas, grass, or ass ... no one rides for free." 

 

edit: * as outlined by me previously. I'd quote myself if I were nutty enough to keep track of that shit.

Edited by Blue Crab
Link to post
Share on other sites

What went wrong in CA was that it was politically necessary to run the route through the Central Valley. Imagine running the Acela through Albany because ... Upstate New York. You can't even take a passenger train from LA to Bakersfield over the Tehachapi Loop (Union Pacific owns it and says capacity limits.) Instead there's an Amtrak bus. You can only take the Coast Starlight from LA to SF once per day. From that to HSR is a stretch and then they larded it up.

I don't think the Central Valley route was necessary. Instead just a Central Valley backbone but not connecting to the Bay or LA. I also don't think service into SF is necessary either. Maybe just to Millbrae or rather a hub in the East Bay. A few HSR links rather than one grand route.

That and dig up and roast the corpse of whoever it was who made BART use non-standard gauge.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Laker said:

Historic railway rights of way count also.  Many have been converted to bike trails , but there are a lot others.

Many of those rail lines were built on easements. The SCOTUS  last uear said those easements belong to the property owner when the rail track is abandoned. A suit about bike trails on rail beds 2016 or 2017 IIRC.

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Blue Crab said:

AOC is just the start of returning power to the people. Lead, follow, or get the fuck outta way. 

That is fantastic.  She is advocating a huge, controlling, authoritarian government with her as the boss, and you think she is returning power to the people?  Amazing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Governments are by definition authoritarian.  It comes down to whom is served.  By what terms are you saying she is boss?  There are some real issues at the moment because the wrong people are being served on the basis of their present authority.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

What went wrong in CA was that it was politically necessary to run the route through the Central Valley. Imagine running the Acela through Albany because ... Upstate New York. You can't even take a passenger train from LA to Bakersfield over the Tehachapi Loop (Union Pacific owns it and says capacity limits.) Instead there's an Amtrak bus. You can only take the Coast Starlight from LA to SF once per day. From that to HSR is a stretch and then they larded it up.

I don't think the Central Valley route was necessary. Instead just a Central Valley backbone but not connecting to the Bay or LA. I also don't think service into SF is necessary either. Maybe just to Millbrae or rather a hub in the East Bay. A few HSR links rather than one grand route.

That and dig up and roast the corpse of whoever it was who made BART use non-standard gauge.

That's precisely the problem with every federal funded local project.  The locals know they can load up with pork and it won't look like too big a number.  But, when it accumulates it's pretty horrendous.

I still don't see the need for two "interstate" highway systems and their feeders running through the middle of Atlanta.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Laker said:

Governments are by definition authoritarian.  It comes down to whom is served.  By what terms are you saying she is boss?  There are some real issues at the moment because the wrong people are being served on the basis of their present authority.  

 

She says she's the boss.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know Atlanta. But Interstates are owned by the state in question and they're maintained by the state in question. Construction is mixed but states have an interest to them being efficient and politicians have an interest in getting re-elected.

SF didn't want a freeway running through it over the Golden Gate. Some supervisors ok'd one. Every single one got thrown out.

Vote better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Saorsa has a crush on her, don't blame him/her. AOC is funny, smart, hardworking, self-made and successful as well as being a right wing media star and darling. In a few short months she has made herself the love object of 10,000 furiously masturbating maga keyboard warriors. Limbaugh himself is currently dressing AOC cosplay while getting a full bukkake from team redhat in some sex dungeon deep in Kentucky.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

If you can't figure out why after a fire closed one of them, maybe admit the problem is your sight.

Well, for a start, the middle of the city was ripped out and they were built well before the fire occurred and the fire wasn't a planned event, seems it was arson.  They both ran through Atlanta to get rid of the poor folks

You know, there was a lot of vacant land on either side of Atlanta where they could have run a lot cheaper.  Then, when the fire was set you wouldn't have had to route around it in the middle of a major city.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jzk said:

High speed rail doesn't need straight track because you say so?  Well there you go, problem solved.  

High speed rail needs "straight track" and not "well-designed and well-built tracks", just because you say so?  

Oh, my goodness...are these TGV*s going around curves and over hills?    Mais oui!  Quelle surprise!

th-2.jpeg

th-1.jpeg

th-3.jpeg

 

You have a definite future in transportation planning.

 

*Les Trains Grande Vitesse

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Left Shift said:

.are these TGV*s going around curves and over hills?

On dedicated right of ways designed for them, not any old track where the right of way dates to the 1830s. (4km min radius on French high speed lines)

If only it was as simple to have "high speed rail" by just buying new trainsets.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bpm57 said:

On dedicated right of ways designed for them, not any old track where the right of way dates to the 1830s. (4km min radius on French high speed lines)

If only it was as simple to have "high speed rail" by just buying new trainsets.

Yes, yes!  You have to design them and pay for them.  I should have thought of that.  Gosh.   Unlike all those free airports that keep popping up hither and yon and then keep on growing like Topsy, replacing the ones that date from the 1930's.  

The original point was simply that in many locations, the existing Interstate ROW is appropriate.  But the trolls see an old rag and they just have to keep gnawing on it.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Left Shift said:

Yes, yes!  You have to design them and pay for them.  I should have thought of that.  Gosh.   Unlike all those free airports that keep popping up hither and yon and then keep on growing like Topsy, replacing the ones that date from the 1930's.  

The original point was simply that in many locations, the existing Interstate ROW is appropriate.  But the trolls see an old rag and they just have to keep gnawing on it.  

Look, it’s a fair point, southpaw. The old lines are designed to a set of specifications completely different than those needed for high speed rail. We could just buy more and better trains with complicated switching algorithms and possibly ramp up rail usage by passengers significantly, but would need to overcome a whole lot of NIMBY to get high speeds from new systems.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, phillysailor said:

Look, it’s a fair point, southpaw. The old lines are designed to a set of specifications completely different than those needed for high speed rail. We could just buy more and better trains with complicated switching algorithms and possibly ramp up rail usage by passengers significantly, but would need to overcome a whole lot of NIMBY to get high speeds from new systems.

That is all true.  Old lines will not accommodate high speed rail.  Never said they would.  That is why France has the Metro, the RER and the TGV systems.  Low, medium and high speeds.  

Even with Amtrak's relatively medium speed of 70-80 mph it is the preferred means of travel between such places as DC and New York, or Seattle to Portland.  Air travel between those places is becoming obsolete due to inconvenience and cost.  Yes, I know the train takes longer, but really not by much when you add in the end-of-trip travel.  And the productivity and comfort on the train is 2-3 times higher.  

High speed rail between LA and SF would be a fabulous transportation option.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Left Shift said:

Yes, yes!  You have to design them and pay for them.  I should have thought of that.  Gosh.

Well, better start the thousands of miles of eminent domain proceedings to get building this new right of way. After all, domestic air travel must be eliminated soon.

16 minutes ago, Left Shift said:

the existing Interstate ROW is appropriate.

If you ignore things like curve radius and maximum grade, certainly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Left Shift said:

Yes, yes!  You have to design them and pay for them.  I should have thought of that.  Gosh.   Unlike all those free airports that keep popping up hither and yon and then keep on growing like Topsy, replacing the ones that date from the 1930's.  

The original point was simply that in many locations, the existing Interstate ROW is appropriate.  But the trolls see an old rag and they just have to keep gnawing on it.  

 

12 minutes ago, bpm57 said:

Well, better start the thousands of miles of eminent domain proceedings to get building this new right of way. After all, domestic air travel must be eliminated soon.

If you ignore things like curve radius and maximum grade, certainly.

Let is also remember that EVERY over pass needs a new build... There is a bridge support between lanes at every bridge. Into metro areas there isn't room for a track  between lanes so there is a whole new eminent domain problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, bpm57 said:

Well, better start the thousands of miles of eminent domain proceedings to get building this new right of way. After all, domestic air travel must be eliminated soon.

"....the existing Interstate ROW is appropriate."  If you ignore things like curve radius and maximum grade, certainly.

So, does selective quoting work for you when you are in an educational or business environment?  Or is it part of your troll training.  

In other words, you just lost the day.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Blue Crab said:

man, wtf? 

the vid with AOC as the Boss, did not remotely support the contention that's she's an egotist.

You guys are not seeing what is in front of you.

 

 

They see a woman who's not downright ugly, and who has an opinion, and they're afraid. They aren't afraid of Rosa DeLauro. They aren't afraid of Susan Collins. They aren't afraid of anyone that they can make fun of...... But an attractive, young, intelligent, outspoken, working class woman?

 <<< SOUND THE AIR RAID SIRENS! DIVE! DIVE! DIVE! GOOD GOD WE'LL ALL BE DEAD IN MINUTES!!!!!!!>>>

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Blue Crab said:

man, wtf? 

the vid with AOC as the Boss, did not remotely support the contention that's she's an egotist.

You guys are not seeing what is in front of you.

 

 

You must be hypnotized by that chick.  Granted she’s got a great bod, but what the fuck?  Get a grip dude.

  • Downvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Left Shift said:

That is all true.  Old lines will not accommodate high speed rail.  Never said they would.  That is why France has the Metro, the RER and the TGV systems.  Low, medium and high speeds.  

Even with Amtrak's relatively medium speed of 70-80 mph it is the preferred means of travel between such places as DC and New York, or Seattle to Portland.  Air travel between those places is becoming obsolete due to inconvenience and cost.  Yes, I know the train takes longer, but really not by much when you add in the end-of-trip travel.  And the productivity and comfort on the train is 2-3 times higher.  

High speed rail between LA and SF would be a fabulous transportation option.  

Yes.  California should build it.

53 minutes ago, Blue Crab said:

man, wtf? 

the vid with AOC as the Boss, did not remotely support the contention that's she's an egotist.

You guys are not seeing what is in front of you.

 

 

I put it up to put it in context.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Left Shift said:

High speed rail between LA and SF would be a fabulous transportation option.  

Currently there is one train per day from Oakland Jack London Square to LA Union Station. There are many other trains that take connecting buses either directly to SLO and down or at Bakersfield and over because the UP won’t let Amtrak use the Tehachepi Loop route. I don’t know the reason for only one Coast Starlight down but it is a beautiful view especially seeing Point Conception having sailed it many times

I’d like to have HSR but the Central Valley route was an expensive bad idea meant to please certain Critters. They should start with LA-SD and then do LA-SF and maybe a Central Valley line but not connecting.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, J28 said:

You must be hypnotized by that chick.  Granted she’s got a great bod, but what the fuck?  Get a grip dude.

Nah.

Sure, she's a would bang for me but what I like is she's willing to step up. That's big. Apparently all the dudes are too busy sucking cocks to take the job seriously. So, I'm down with the women taking over. I think it's funny that some of you killjoys think she won't get re-elected. Heh.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Left Shift said:

High speed rail needs "straight track" and not "well-designed and well-built tracks", just because you say so?  

Oh, my goodness...are these TGV*s going around curves and over hills?    Mais oui!  Quelle surprise!

th-2.jpeg

th-1.jpeg

th-3.jpeg

 

You have a definite future in transportation planning.

 

*Les Trains Grande Vitesse

Are you really this stupid?  Given that high speed trains travel at "high speeds," existing track footprints and interstate highway routes are not suitable.  A higher turn radius is required.  Is that really so hard to understand?  It doesn't even mean we shouldn't have high speed rail, just that it is more complicated than upgrading existing track routes.  Why would you pick such a stupid and easily verifiable topic to dispute?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blue Crab said:

man, wtf? 

the vid with AOC as the Boss, did not remotely support the contention that's she's an egotist.

You guys are not seeing what is in front of you.

 

 

Look at this one....

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, jzk said:

That is fantastic.  She is advocating a huge, controlling, authoritarian government with her as the boss, and you think she is returning power to the people?  Amazing.

Yeah, the Reich intends to stick with our good old venerable corporate overlords. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jzk said:

Are you really this stupid?  Given that high speed trains travel at "high speeds," existing track footprints and interstate highway routes are not suitable.  A higher turn radius is required.  Is that really so hard to understand?  It doesn't even mean we shouldn't have high speed rail, just that it is more complicated than upgrading existing track routes.  Why would you pick such a stupid and easily verifiable topic to dispute?

Do you not know how to read plain language or interpret modifying clauses in a sentence?  I made none of the broad claims that you attribute to me.  None.  Nada.  Sorry.  

No wonder you're scared of Ocasio-Cortez.  She speaks about complicated ideas, not slogans.  That, plus she's one of those mysterious girl persons.

(And it's not a "higher turn radius" that is required ... that could be dangerous ... its a longer turn radius.) 

You are not serving your paymasters well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Left Shift said:

Do you not know how to read plain language or interpret modifying clauses in a sentence?  I made none of the broad claims that you attribute to me.  None.  Nada.  Sorry.  

No wonder you're scared of Ocasio-Cortez.  She speaks about complicated ideas, not slogans.  That, plus she's one of those mysterious girl persons.

(And it's not a "higher turn radius" that is required ... that could be dangerous ... its a longer turn radius.) 

You are not serving your paymasters well.

Really?  Delusional are we?

"As for high speed rail needing "very straight tracks", no it doesn't.  It needs well-designed and well-built tracks."

The higher a turn radius, the longer it is.  The lower it is, the shorter it is. 

Are you really Bent Sailor? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of you lib haters are mistaking AOC for an accomplished pol when actually she's a bellwether of the Big Blue Wave, coming soon to a polling place near you. Sometimes the first spring tulips are eaten by foraging deer but not all. Your cat might nail that first robin working a worm but there will soon be others. Political spring has sprung. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Blue Crab said:

Some of you lib haters are mistaking AOC for an accomplished pol when actually she's a bellwether of the Big Blue Wave, coming soon to a polling place near you. Sometimes the first spring tulips are eaten by foraging deer but not all. Your cat might nail that first robin working a worm but there will soon be others. Political spring has sprung. 

Will “Political Spring” repeal the laws of physics?

  • Downvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

And the high speed rail routes will certainly be discussed but obviously the routes could run over the interstates for most routes and especially if the supports are prefabbed and installed from the sides without stopping traffic altogether. We already own those RsOW. If we could get the naysayers off their negative asses to pitch in it would help. 

That physics query is too much like that J28 stern.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The US is a very big country.

Rail makes sense for moving a lot of people.  For that to be true, you have to have major hubs that have lots of people that want to go to other hubs that have lots of people, but it's too far for driving and to short for commuter planes to make up the difference.

For example, Cleveland <-> Columbus, Cleveland <-> Detroit, Cleveland <-> Pittsburgh all make a certain sense.  It's a 2-3 hour drive so it's farther than you can UBER, but too close to fly, and there's a lot of commercial activity between them.

San Francisco to LA just isn't a great route.  It's a longish train ride and there's not a lot (Lompoc anyone?) between them WITHOUT some serious detours that add even more time.  Santa Barbara - LA - San Diego or something like that would have been my first push for High Speed rail.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as were brainstorming: we condemn a strip 2 miles wide inland from the high tide mark on all three bodies of water, the Gulf and the oceans. This returns the coastlines and beaches to the people, and allows for centuries of encroaching  water levels. The new ROW builds could be in that area (otherwise called beach parking) without privatizing the views. The rich shouldn't be able to hog the scenic parts of the country. And kick those Marines out of the Trestles surfing area. Two miles wide would return Miami Beach to barrier island status. As God intended. With Liberty and Justice for all, not just the rich.

AOC who?

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the early 70s, I had a 3 month student co-op on a project to do a mag-lev from Toronto to Montreal. 325 miles.  It was to be powered by a nuclear reactor at one end.  Mag-levs  don't have the same rail radius and grade issues as normal rail.  Take a look at the Vancouver Sky-train with its linear induction motors.  The project, of course didn't go ahead, but more for NIMBY problems in built up areas than budget or technical issues.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Blue Crab said:

Some of you lib haters are mistaking AOC for an accomplished pol when actually she's a bellwether of the Big Blue Wave, coming soon to a polling place near you. Sometimes the first spring tulips are eaten by foraging deer but not all. Your cat might nail that first robin working a worm but there will soon be others. Political spring has sprung. 

It's apparent that she's not an accomplished politician.  The whole "let's play a game, I'll be the bad guy and you'll be my accomplices" was just silly.

We were supposed to have that big blue wave in 2018 and it was little more than a ripple when compared to prior mid-term house changes.  I won't mention the senate.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blue Crab said:

As long as were brainstorming: we condemn a strip 2 miles wide inland from the high tide mark on all three bodies of water, the Gulf and the oceans. This returns the coastlines and beaches to the people, and allows for centuries of encroaching  water levels. The new ROW builds could be in that area (otherwise called beach parking) without privatizing the views. The rich shouldn't be able to hog the scenic parts of the country. And kick those Marines out of the Trestles surfing area. Two miles wide would return Miami Beach to barrier island status. As God intended. With Liberty and Justice for all, not just the rich.

AOC who?

What percentage of the nation’s population lives within that strip? You & I have to pay to relocate them all & pay them fair market value.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blue Crab said:

As long as were brainstorming: we condemn a strip 2 miles wide inland from the high tide mark on all three bodies of water, the Gulf and the oceans. This returns the coastlines and beaches to the people, and allows for centuries of encroaching  water levels. The new ROW builds could be in that area (otherwise called beach parking) without privatizing the views. The rich shouldn't be able to hog the scenic parts of the country. And kick those Marines out of the Trestles surfing area. Two miles wide would return Miami Beach to barrier island status. As God intended. With Liberty and Justice for all, not just the rich.

AOC who?

That might the dumbest fucking idea ever.  As if the ecovangalists would allow construction of anything along the coasts.  Can you imagine their outrage over the loss of wetlands, pollution of the oceans, etc.

I never figured you for a socialist.  I was wrong.

  • Downvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, J28 said:

That might the dumbest fucking idea ever.  As if the ecovangalists would allow construction of anything along the coasts.  Can you imagine their outrage over the loss of wetlands, pollution of the oceans, etc.

I never figured you for a socialist.  I was wrong.

Didja even read the proposal? Eco warriors (the correct term) would support me for Emperor of the Universe. And correctly so. Even though this was tongue-in-cheek it marks you as a very poor reader.  Tsk tsk.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, cmilliken said:

The US is a very big country.

Rail makes sense for moving a lot of people.  For that to be true, you have to have major hubs that have lots of people that want to go to other hubs that have lots of people, but it's too far for driving and to short for commuter planes to make up the difference.

For example, Cleveland <-> Columbus, Cleveland <-> Detroit, Cleveland <-> Pittsburgh all make a certain sense.  It's a 2-3 hour drive so it's farther than you can UBER, but too close to fly, and there's a lot of commercial activity between them.

San Francisco to LA just isn't a great route.  It's a longish train ride and there's not a lot (Lompoc anyone?) between them WITHOUT some serious detours that add even more time.  Santa Barbara - LA - San Diego or something like that would have been my first push for High Speed rail.

I'm sure that SW Airlines is bothered by skipping past Lompoc.  

Uber and Lyft, in my opinion, are just another extension of the private car problem US cities have.  I believe that some studies have shown that a dense ride-share environment actually ends up with more cars using the streets.  If you have $100,000 you want to turn into $10,000, I suggest you jump on the Lyft IPO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, cmilliken said:

San Francisco to LA just isn't a great route.  It's a longish train ride and there's not a lot (Lompoc anyone?) between them WITHOUT some serious detours that add even more time.  Santa Barbara - LA - San Diego or something like that would have been my first push for High Speed rail.

That means you don't stop in Lompoc which means you get to LA faster. Or you don't stop in Lompoc very often which means people get to LA faster more often. Or you don't stop in Lompoc yet which means initial construction costs are lower. It's a feature not a bug. You want this to be fast which means fewer stops.

I'm not even opposed to the I5 route. But the US99 route just adds a bunch of Lompocs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Blue Crab said:

As long as were brainstorming: we condemn a strip 2 miles wide inland from the high tide mark on all three bodies of water, the Gulf and the oceans. This returns the coastlines and beaches to the people, and allows for centuries of encroaching  water levels. The new ROW builds could be in that area (otherwise called beach parking) without privatizing the views. The rich shouldn't be able to hog the scenic parts of the country. And kick those Marines out of the Trestles surfing area. Two miles wide would return Miami Beach to barrier island status. As God intended. With Liberty and Justice for all, not just the rich.

AOC who?

I live 20 miles from the Gulf of Mexico and my home sits at 9.5 feet above MHHW.  We've had a number of hurricanes since I moved down here and the water has been over the seawall a couple of times but never hit the house.  We did have the eye of Charlie pass over my house.

Your 2 miles is just a number pulled from somewhere.

The current 12 year estimate for the end of the world as we know it means you need a sea level rise about 10 inches per year to reach my ankles.

I do think it would be great to forbid building on barrier islands and let them do their job.

.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Olsonist said:

That means you don't stop in Lompoc which means you get to LA faster. Or you don't stop in Lompoc very often which means people get to LA faster more often. Or you don't stop in Lompoc yet which means initial construction costs are lower. It's a feature not a bug. You want this to be fast which means fewer stops.

I'm not even opposed to the I5 route. But the US99 route just adds a bunch of Lompocs.

Big nets on the platform at Lompoc, the train wouldn't even have to slow down. Some of the older passengers might need a push.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, phillysailor said:

What percentage of the nation’s population lives within that strip? You & I have to pay to relocate them all & pay them fair market value.

 

11 hours ago, J28 said:

That might the dumbest fucking idea ever.  As if the ecovangalists would allow construction of anything along the coasts.  Can you imagine their outrage over the loss of wetlands, pollution of the oceans, etc.

I never figured you for a socialist.  I was wrong.

 

2 hours ago, Saorsa said:

I live 20 miles from the Gulf of Mexico and my home sits at 9.5 feet above MHHW.  We've had a number of hurricanes since I moved down here and the water has been over the seawall a couple of times but never hit the house.  We did have the eye of Charlie pass over my house.

Your 2 miles is just a number pulled from somewhere.

The current 12 year estimate for the end of the world as we know it means you need a sea level rise about 10 inches per year to reach my ankles.

I do think it would be great to forbid building on barrier islands and let them do their job.

.

 

Holy shit.

Please, tell me you guys are just counter-trolling.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/22/2019 at 7:58 PM, Saorsa said:

I live 20 miles from the Gulf of Mexico and my home sits at 9.5 feet above MHHW.  We've had a number of hurricanes since I moved down here and the water has been over the seawall a couple of times but never hit the house.  We did have the eye of Charlie pass over my house.

Your 2 miles is just a number pulled from somewhere.

The current 12 year estimate for the end of the world as we know it means you need a sea level rise about 10 inches per year to reach my ankles.

I do think it would be great to forbid building on barrier islands and let them do their job.

.

Your property was under water 120,000 years ago and many times before that.  It will be under water again one day (unless we build it up greatly), and it still wont be the end of the world.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/22/2019 at 8:58 PM, Saorsa said:

I live 20 miles from the Gulf of Mexico and my home sits at 9.5 feet above MHHW.  We've had a number of hurricanes since I moved down here and the water has been over the seawall a couple of times but never hit the house.  We did have the eye of Charlie pass over my house.

Your 2 miles is just a number pulled from somewhere.

The current 12 year estimate for the end of the world as we know it means you need a sea level rise about 10 inches per year to reach my ankles.

I do think it would be great to forbid building on barrier islands and let them do their job.

.

 

Florida10.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Why do you lie #6? Why do you type such easily verifiable lies? She hasn't tweeted a damn thing this morning, and there's nothing like a meltdown.

You know who was talking about her this morning? Fox news https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ocasio-cortez-blasts-upcoming-bluff-vote-on-green-new-deal

Lotsa folks have been talking about it.

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&amp;q=Green+new+deal+senate+vote

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, BillDBastard said:

That proves it for me, Climate Change is real!

LOL...the only debate is over "Bad man made" climate change and the solution is sending massive amounts of $$$$$$...to international governments and the politicians  controlling those governments.... while crippling the American economy (strength)

and

If Climate change was going to end the world in 12 AOC years....why would China dredge and fill a pristine Pacific tropical atoll and turn it into a military base....and where was Greenpeace & Ocean Keepers when they were busting up tropical reefs and filling lagoons  ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BillDBastard said:

You say that like it is a bad thing Skippie.

Just consider Carbon Taxes as  Global Reparations for our raping of the planet and move on. After all, 'we didn't build that' to quote a famous American.

The planet is flourishing because of our CO2 emissions.  Every time you drive your car, you are growing the rainforest a little bit more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jzk said:

The planet is flourishing because of our CO2 emissions.  Every time you drive your car, you are growing the rainforest a little bit more.

I thought you went to sea.  CO2 may be increasing the rainforest, but certainly ruining the reefs and ocean bugs that create even more O2.  The rise in ocean acidification is alarming.

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Laker said:

I thought you went to sea.  CO2 may be increasing the rainforest, but certainly ruining the reefs and ocean bugs that create even more O2.  The rise in ocean acidification is alarming.

Might go to Bimini tomorrow, but still on land.  Thanks for asking.

So say you.  Meanwhile the facts are than human CO2 emissions are causing plants to grow.  A fuckton.  An area the size of 2 continental USAs has been added to the total vegitation of the Earth.  The Amazon rain forest is one of the primary areas of growth.  

Is increased plant growth a good thing?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, jzk said:

Might go to Bimini tomorrow, but still on land.  Thanks for asking.

So say you.  Meanwhile the facts are than human CO2 emissions are causing plants to grow.  A fuckton.  An area the size of 2 continental USAs has been added to the total vegitation of the Earth.  The Amazon rain forest is one of the primary areas of growth.  

Is increased plant growth a good thing?

When I can't go for a run because the ozone level on the the ground will damage my health, should I care?

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, hasher said:

When I can't go for a run because the ozone level on the the ground will damage my health, should I care?

I told you it was  a dumb idea to run interstates through the middle of town.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SailBlueH2O said:

LOL....from where the fake news

If you are incapable of having a discussion based on facts...  you are a member of little donnie's gang.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

I told you it was  a dumb idea to run interstates through the middle of town.

And to let the coal plants continue to burn.  And not to get the cars off the roads.  I would like to see the freeway turned into a sidewalk.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SailBlueH2O said:

Nah....little donnie finally found me and enough of the population to elect him POTUS...

The little don will go to the place made for him.  And you and your views will die too.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SailBlueH2O said:

Love it !...Libgressives having grand mal seizures 

That is a non sequitur.  Please try again.

Link to post
Share on other sites