Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

ST3 / Car Tabs / Sales Taxes / Bloated KC Metro

1246789

Comments

  • dnc
    dnc Member Posts: 56,855
    AZDuck said:

    PurpleJ said:

    Either regulation made it so the only attractive investment in rail air travel and auto travel is through the government, or the auto technology itself is obsolete and no private company will touch it absent massive subsidy.

    Government built "freeways" - late 1950's tech
    Internal combustion engines - late 1890's tech
    Airports and runways - built and maintained largely by governments
    Roads and freeways - built and maintained largely by governments
    Oil and gasoline - prices managed by a foreign cartel and US government stockpile, plus massive military intervention in the Middle East

    All transportation modes require government subsidy. Which ones move the most people more efficiently in the most comfort with the least disruption and consumption of energy?

    If only someone had studied this question...

    image

    But isn't this apples and oranges? Is it really surprising that a nation with 235 people per square mile can move them more efficiently than a nation with 84 people per square mile?

    I think rail works great with dense populations (and would presumably work great in Seattle if you didn't have to trust the Seattle government to execute it). I'm not sure it translates nationwide in the US though.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • AZDuck
    AZDuck Member Posts: 15,381
    PurpleJ said:

    "All transportation modes require government subsidy"

    WRONG

    Name two that don't. There's only one transportation system, worldwide, that doesn't require a subsidy. The Hong Kong Metro.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • doogie
    doogie Member Posts: 15,072
    Seattle has the 11th most travelled rail system in the United States.

    Statistically speaking, it doesn't move jack shit in terms of riders.

    Time to let go of 1850's technology and accept the future. Think mobility.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • PurpleJ
    PurpleJ Member Posts: 37,773
    AZDuck said:

    PurpleJ said:

    "All transportation modes require government subsidy"

    WRONG

    Name two that don't. There's only one transportation system, worldwide, that doesn't require a subsidy. The Hong Kong Metro.
    Doesn't sound like all to me. It was fine as a private industry here for years.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • PurpleThrobber
    PurpleThrobber Member Posts: 48,557 Standard Supporter
    doogie said:

    Seattle has the 11th most travelled rail system in the United States.

    Statistically speaking, it doesn't move jack shit in terms of riders.

    Time to let go of 1850's technology and accept the future. Think mobility.

    It's not in the developers/property owners best interest to move people quickly and inexpensively. It's in their interest to have a somewhat captive workforce who are therefore forced to pay ridiculous prices for rent and purchase of the real estate. Simple supply and demand curves and if the limited supply can be reduced, it drives the prices up.

    A high speed train to/from the suburbs would make urban real estate far less valuable.

    Can you imagine if you could commute door to door from Cle Elum to downtown Seattle in 30 to 45 minutes?

    Always follow the money trail.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • AZDuck
    AZDuck Member Posts: 15,381
    dnc said:

    AZDuck said:

    PurpleJ said:

    Either regulation made it so the only attractive investment in rail air travel and auto travel is through the government, or the auto technology itself is obsolete and no private company will touch it absent massive subsidy.

    Government built "freeways" - late 1950's tech
    Internal combustion engines - late 1890's tech
    Airports and runways - built and maintained largely by governments
    Roads and freeways - built and maintained largely by governments
    Oil and gasoline - prices managed by a foreign cartel and US government stockpile, plus massive military intervention in the Middle East

    All transportation modes require government subsidy. Which ones move the most people more efficiently in the most comfort with the least disruption and consumption of energy?

    If only someone had studied this question...

    image

    But isn't this apples and oranges? Is it really surprising that a nation with 235 people per square mile can move them more efficiently than a nation with 84 people per square mile?

    I think rail works great with dense populations (and would presumably work great in Seattle if you didn't have to trust the Seattle government to execute it). I'm not sure it translates nationwide in the US though.
    That's a reasonable poont.

    But the US isn't even close and Germany isn't even the best model (Switzerland is).

    I don't think that high speed rail is feasible coast-to-coast in the US, although the Chinese are building HSR lines that are longer than the 400-600 mile optimum range. Long distance Amtrak service should be abolished. That is 1920's dinosaur rail.

    But people in the US are concentrated into urban regions. California, the P-NW I-5 corridor, the Midwest (centered on Chicago), the BOS-NYC-WAS corridor, Atlanta-JAX-Charlotte-Raleigh, HOU-DAL-AUS-SAN, DEN-COS-ALB, SLC valley, Florida.

    High speed rail would work in those regions. And any metro area of decent size can increasingly support intra-city rail. Like the Doovil said above about PHX's line, rail drives development, so you can better shape your city, reduce sprawl, and create virtuous rather than vicious cycles (more walking, biking, public transit, etc.)

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • doogie
    doogie Member Posts: 15,072
    High speed rail fare from Cle Elum to Seattle, heavily subsidized, would cost far more then what the little people this "solution" is sold to, would be willing to pay.

    Rail as a "solution" toward moving people, is a circle jerk for emotional thinkers.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Mosster47
    Mosster47 Member Posts: 6,246
    AZDuck said:

    PurpleJ said:

    "All transportation modes require government subsidy"

    WRONG

    Name two that don't. There's only one transportation system, worldwide, that doesn't require a subsidy. The Hong Kong Metro.
    Holy Fuck, AZ has pummeled J this week.

    It's painful to see baseless stupidity in the internet age.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • AZDuck
    AZDuck Member Posts: 15,381
    PurpleJ said:

    AZDuck said:

    PurpleJ said:

    "All transportation modes require government subsidy"

    WRONG

    Name two that don't. There's only one transportation system, worldwide, that doesn't require a subsidy. The Hong Kong Metro.
    Doesn't sound like all to me. It was fine as a private industry here for years.
    LOLwut

    Interstate Commerce Commission

    Railroad Land Giveaway

    19th Century Rail Subsidies



    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • doogie
    doogie Member Posts: 15,072
    Like I said, 19th century "solutions" to 21st century issues.

    Thanks for the links!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter