# Election results bad news for Florida HSR



## pennyk

The new governor-elect of Florida does not like High Speed Rail. 

Details are in the Orlando Sentinel article: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/os-transit-bad-news-20101103,0,1423523.story


----------



## amtrakwolverine

Meanwhile japan and china and other country's laugh at our incompetence to build HSR.


----------



## henryj

amtrakwolverine said:


> Meanwhile japan and china and other country's laugh at our incompetence to build HSR.


I seriously doubt if they are laughing. We just don't have the population density to support it. Pretty much the NEC is it in this country. Japan and Europe are small and very compact regions with population centers close together. The US is huge by comparison and for the most part sparsely populated. HSR is just not cost effective. It's a huge boondoggle. Money would be better spent on conventional 'higher speed' rail.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

henryj said:


> I seriously doubt if they are laughing. We just don't have the population density to support it. Pretty much the NEC is it in this country. Japan and Europe are small and very compact regions with population centers close together. The US is huge by comparison and for the most part sparsely populated. HSR is just not cost effective. It's a huge boondoggle. Money would be better spent on conventional 'higher speed' rail.


Density might explain why some cities might have difficulty implementing efficient metro services, but how does density explain our near total lack of modern _intercity_ services? The US used to be the preeminent passenger rail empire. Our major cities today have far larger populations than they did back then. Seems like intercity passenger rail with services and connections like airports currently provide would go a long way toward easing our worsening congestion and reducing our consumption of oil, both from foreign adversaries and from disaster-prone domestic sources.


----------



## AlanB

I keep seeing this density argument all over the place. While I'm not suggesting that we dismiss it outright, the density argument isn't as important as many opponents believe.

One need look no further than the new Lyncburger. Virginia estimated that 50,000 people would ride that train in the first year. Tiny Lynchburg, population 67,720, with help from several other small towns managed to hit that 50,000 mark just 6 months into the first year in March. By July, they had doubled the estimate with more than 100,000 rides taken.

They're doing so well that they haven't had to take 1 dime of the subsidy monies that the state set aside for the train. In fact, as of August, the train is actually showing a $2 Million profit with 1 month left in the year.


----------



## henryj

daxomni said:


> henryj said:
> 
> 
> 
> I seriously doubt if they are laughing. We just don't have the population density to support it. Pretty much the NEC is it in this country. Japan and Europe are small and very compact regions with population centers close together. The US is huge by comparison and for the most part sparsely populated. HSR is just not cost effective. It's a huge boondoggle. Money would be better spent on conventional 'higher speed' rail.
> 
> 
> 
> Density might explain why some cities might have difficulty implementing efficient metro services, but how does density explain our near total lack of modern _intercity_ services? The US used to be the preeminent passenger rail empire. Our major cities today have far larger populations than they did back then. Seems like intercity passenger rail with services and connections like airports currently provide would go a long way toward easing our worsening congestion and reducing our consumption of oil, both from foreign adversaries and from disaster-prone domestic sources.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with you. I just don't think HSR is the answer in most cases because it requires a completely new right of way and is hugely expensive to implement. There is no way it would ever be cost effective no matter how you compute the benefits. On the other hand that same amount of money spent upgrading our current network to higher standards and expanding capacity would go so much farther and do so much more to restore intercity passenger rail to where it was before Amtrak(or actually back to the 1960's). Our current situation is simply our government being enthralled with interstate highways and automobiles at the expense of all else. If you go at this little by little step by step you will eventually end up with your HSR, just not tomorrow. Once the public is used to using rail, they will gradually demand improvements until capacity is reached and HSR is feasible on a given route. Politicians react to public demand. You have to get the public on your side first.


----------



## MattW

Not sure why sheer density is necessarily the issue. The ICE, TGV, AVE etc. don't stop at every Hooterville, Porterdale and Small Town Europe and neither will[should] High Speed Rail in this country. If you have X people trying to get to point B, why not let them? Why does the equivalent of fly-over country matter for the train?


----------



## henryj

AlanB said:


> I keep seeing this density argument all over the place. While I'm not suggesting that we dismiss it outright, the density argument isn't as important as many opponents believe.
> 
> One need look no further than the new Lyncburger. Virginia estimated that 50,000 people would ride that train in the first year. Tiny Lynchburg, population 67,720, with help from several other small towns managed to hit that 50,000 mark just 6 months into the first year in March. By July, they had doubled the estimate with more than 100,000 rides taken.
> 
> They're doing so well that they haven't had to take 1 dime of the subsidy monies that the state set aside for the train. In fact, as of August, the train is actually showing a $2 Million profit with 1 month left in the year.


Yes Alan and the Lynchburger is conventional rail and really not that fast...but it's a success. That is what I am saying. HSR money is better spent on fixing up what we have first as in 'higher speed' rail and increased capacity. HSR will follow in good time. You have to get the public back on trains and used to using them. With the public on your side, politicians will fall in line.


----------



## henryj

MattW said:


> Not sure why sheer density is necessarily the issue. The ICE, TGV, AVE etc. don't stop at every Hooterville, Porterdale and Small Town Europe and neither will[should] High Speed Rail in this country. If you have X people trying to get to point B, why not let them? Why does the equivalent of fly-over country matter for the train?


You have to look at the whole system in Europe to understand. There high speed trains are just part of the overall system. They get you between the major centers where you can transfer to local services. Here, for the most part, we don't yet even have local services. Yet we are trying to make a quantam leep from nothing to HSR overnight. I still think a gradual approach will work much better. Fix what we have first and HSR will follow. When you throw an HSR project in the publics face cold turkey they are just shocked at the cost. If you already have a system up and running and the public is used to using it they will be much more open to improving running times with HSR.


----------



## AlanB

henryj said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> 
> I keep seeing this density argument all over the place. While I'm not suggesting that we dismiss it outright, the density argument isn't as important as many opponents believe.
> 
> One need look no further than the new Lyncburger. Virginia estimated that 50,000 people would ride that train in the first year. Tiny Lynchburg, population 67,720, with help from several other small towns managed to hit that 50,000 mark just 6 months into the first year in March. By July, they had doubled the estimate with more than 100,000 rides taken.
> 
> They're doing so well that they haven't had to take 1 dime of the subsidy monies that the state set aside for the train. In fact, as of August, the train is actually showing a $2 Million profit with 1 month left in the year.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes Alan and the Lynchburger is conventional rail and really not that fast...but it's a success. That is what I am saying. HSR money is better spent on fixing up what we have first as in 'higher speed' rail and increased capacity. HSR will follow in good time. You have to get the public back on trains and used to using them. With the public on your side, politicians will fall in line.
Click to expand...

No arguements here Henry. 

Unfortunately though, we just lost two of those conventional lines that could have shown the truth to some of the naysayers.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

henryj said:


> amtrakwolverine said:
> 
> 
> 
> Meanwhile japan and china and other country's laugh at our incompetence to build HSR.
> 
> 
> 
> I seriously doubt if they are laughing. We just don't have the population density to support it. Pretty much the NEC is it in this country. Japan and Europe are small and very compact regions with population centers close together. The US is huge by comparison and for the most part sparsely populated. HSR is just not cost effective. It's a huge boondoggle. Money would be better spent on conventional 'higher speed' rail.
Click to expand...

They laugh. Believe me, they laugh. I laugh. I laugh so hard I break out in tears from it.

Here we are, the shell of what was once the most powerful and capable nation on earth, and we can't do anything.

Oh, we talk about doing stuff. We talk, we debate, we argue, we go through political promises of getting stuff done. We create logos to promote the idea of getting stuff done. We invent disorders to explain why people on the committee that were supposed to design that logo can't get their lazy arses out of bed.

But we don't get ANYTHING done. Our founding fathers were morons. They simply could not see that the basic idea of goodness, fairness, and intelligent decision making for the benefit of all is the kind of claptrap that sounds good in a B movie. People are too stupid, selfish, and self important to actually run their own government.

Well, we're running our government. Right onto the rocks. Old farts don't want to invest in the new generation. Auto drivers don't want to invest in public transportation. Companies don't want to invest in beneficial legislation because ruin their god given right to make too much money on the backs of workers.

Its a rat race. And you all are the rats running in it. Me? I'll stand by and watch. And laugh. And cry.


----------



## henryj

Green Maned Lion said:


> henryj said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> amtrakwolverine said:
> 
> 
> 
> Meanwhile japan and china and other country's laugh at our incompetence to build HSR.
> 
> 
> 
> I seriously doubt if they are laughing. We just don't have the population density to support it. Pretty much the NEC is it in this country. Japan and Europe are small and very compact regions with population centers close together. The US is huge by comparison and for the most part sparsely populated. HSR is just not cost effective. It's a huge boondoggle. Money would be better spent on conventional 'higher speed' rail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They laugh. Believe me, they laugh. I laugh. I laugh so hard I break out in tears from it.
> 
> Here we are, the shell of what was once the most powerful and capable nation on earth, and we can't do anything.
> 
> Oh, we talk about doing stuff. We talk, we debate, we argue, we go through political promises of getting stuff done. We create logos to promote the idea of getting stuff done. We invent disorders to explain why people on the committee that were supposed to design that logo can't get their lazy arses out of bed.
> 
> But we don't get ANYTHING done. Our founding fathers were morons. They simply could not see that the basic idea of goodness, fairness, and intelligent decision making for the benefit of all is the kind of claptrap that sounds good in a B movie. People are too stupid, selfish, and self important to actually run their own government.
> 
> Well, we're running our government. Right onto the rocks. Old farts don't want to invest in the new generation. Auto drivers don't want to invest in public transportation. Companies don't want to invest in beneficial legislation because ruin their god given right to make too much money on the backs of workers.
> 
> Its a rat race. And you all are the rats running in it. Me? I'll stand by and watch. And laugh. And cry.
Click to expand...

Sieg Heil


----------



## amtrakwolverine




----------



## henryj

Back in 1959 Trains Magazine dedicated a whole issue to the question: Who Shot the Passenger Train. Now over 50 years later we are still debating the same things over and over again.

http://www.kalmbachstore.com/trpdf024.html

http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?4,568280


----------



## Nexis4Jersey

The TP , put an Interesting map the other day....apparently the Wisconsin line just died aswell.







For Advocates of Alternative Transportation, A Difficult Election Day


----------



## Kurn

henryj said:


> MattW said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure why sheer density is necessarily the issue. The ICE, TGV, AVE etc. don't stop at every Hooterville, Porterdale and Small Town Europe and neither will[should] High Speed Rail in this country. If you have X people trying to get to point B, why not let them? Why does the equivalent of fly-over country matter for the train?
> 
> 
> 
> You have to look at the whole system in Europe to understand. There high speed trains are just part of the overall system. They get you between the major centers where you can transfer to local services. Here, for the most part, we don't yet even have local services. Yet we are trying to make a quantam leep from nothing to HSR overnight. I still think a gradual approach will work much better. Fix what we have first and HSR will follow. When you throw an HSR project in the publics face cold turkey they are just shocked at the cost. If you already have a system up and running and the public is used to using it they will be much more open to improving running times with HSR.
Click to expand...

Well,that's what the now dead 3C train would have done.


----------



## jis

henryj said:


> Sieg Heil


Sigh. At least I expected a more intelligent response than that from you Henry :blink:

I think the real deep issue is that we have figured out a way of spending endless amounts of money on essentially non-productive activities, while we are progressively de-funding productive activities. Even if we remove HSR from the discussion we still see that even highway projects (or any other significant infrastructure project even upkeep of existing ones) are now starting to get defunded because there is no money, while we seem to be incapable of canceling completely pointless zillion dollar defence projects, even when the SecDef himself says it is pointless.HSR or not, that in itself should give us pause.


----------



## henryj

jis said:


> henryj said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sieg Heil
> 
> 
> 
> Sigh. At least I expected a more intelligent response than that from you Henry :blink:
> 
> I think the real deep issue is that we have figured out a way of spending endless amounts of money on essentially non-productive activities, while we are progressively de-funding productive activities. Even if we remove HSR from the discussion we still see that even highway projects (or any other significant infrastructure project even upkeep of existing ones) are now starting to get defunded because there is no money, while we seem to be incapable of canceling completely pointless zillion dollar defence projects, even when the SecDef himself says it is pointless.HSR or not, that in itself should give us pause.
Click to expand...

Well Jis I really didn't know how to respond to "our founding fathers were morons". Personally I think they did a good job. Perhaps we have just messed it up over time. If you want to open the discussion up beyond HSR, then you have to address global free trade and the loss of millions of jobs to China and other countries overseas. As a country we are dead broke. We don't even take in enought revenue to take care of our basic needs like social security, medicare, unemployment, etc. much less things like HSR. The military budget is not all that big and I really don't want to find myself in a country that has dropped to second or third best in defense as that would be catastrophic for the nation and the world. I am too old to learn Chinese or Russian. To fund all these nice things like the Europeans have we have to increase tax revenue. That means bringing jobs back into this country. No other country that I know of lets their basic industries leave without even putting up a fight and most require that to do business in their country you have to hire the local population. Other than some government contracts, we don't even do that. We have serious fundamental problems and I really don't hear any politician out there addressing them. Government by itself doesn't create wealth or jobs. Government just spends other people's money and right now there is not enough of it. Maybe we should give the job of policing the world to China or Russia. Certainly Europe is not prepared to take up the slack. Maybe there are those on here that think we can just bury our heads in the sand and play with our trains and no one will bother us. Personally I don't share that opinion. The world is an increasingly dangerous place.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

henryj said:


> The military budget is not all that big and I really don't want to find myself in a country that has dropped to second or third best in defense as that would be catastrophic for the nation and the world.


I really don't follow you. Isn't our military budget as large as the next dozen countries _combined_? Unless I'm mistaken that doesn't even cover the "alternative funding" bills used for our continuing mercenary misadventures in the Middle East. What rational adult can claim that's "not all that big?" It's a stupefyingly massive waste of resources we simply don't have!


----------



## henryj

daxomni said:


> henryj said:
> 
> 
> 
> The military budget is not all that big and I really don't want to find myself in a country that has dropped to second or third best in defense as that would be catastrophic for the nation and the world.
> 
> 
> 
> I really don't follow you. Isn't our military budget as large as the next dozen countries _combined_? Unless I'm mistaken that doesn't even cover the "alternative funding" bills used for our continuing mercenary misadventures in the Middle East. What rational adult can claim that's "not all that big?" It's a stupefyingly massive waste of resources we simply don't have!
Click to expand...

Here is a link, you can read it for yourself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_States_federal_budget

I don't consider it a stupefyingly massive waste of resources unless of course you don't care who you might have to bow down to in the future. The defense budget is 663.7 billion and social security is 677 billion. All mandatory spending is 2.2 trillion. Estimated total receipts is 2.4 trillion. So you see, after all the social programs are taken care of there is only around 200 billion left to divide up. Defense is listed under discretionary spending. Total budget is 3.5 trillion so we are in the hole about 1.1 trillion for 2010. I already get social security and medicare both of which I paid for all my life so I am against cutting that. You young people are the ones that have to decide what you want for your future. If you think it's ok for the US to be a second rate power and there will be no consequences to that then more power to you. I don't plan to be around that long. lol. You might get your trains....but they may be chinese. What languages are you studying? I only speak English. Personally I think we should cut 'other mandatory programs' 571 billion and then start eliminating some of those worthless departments listed under discretionary spending.


----------



## Eric S

Military spending accounts for about half of all discretionary spending. I'd say that means it is in fact quite big. Defense spending could be reduced significantly and it would still be quite high compared to any other nation. And to suggest that cuts in military spending will result in Americans having to learn Chinese or Russian is an almost laughably ridiculous exaggeration of any effect it might have.


----------



## Ryan

henryj said:


> I don't consider it a stupefyingly massive waste of resources unless of course you don't care who you might have to bow down to in the future.


Let's take a look at that, shall we?

Who in the top 18 of that list do you see us having to defend against? We spend as much money as 2-18 on that list. As a sailor for 7 years now employed as a defense contractor, I know for a fact that we spend money on the military like a drunken frat boy, and much of it is completely unnecessary.



> I already get social security and medicare both of which I paid for all my life so I am against cutting that.


In other words, "screw you guys, I got mine". Looks like GML was right.
Answer me this, Henry - you said yourself we're in the hole 1.1 trillion and posted a link to the Federal budget. Go ahead and make a list of the "worthless departments" and how much their budgets are, and show us how we can close that hole.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

henryj said:


> Sieg Heil


I'm confused. Are you suggesting that there are only two forms of government: deadlocked representative democracy and militant fascism?

Functional governments, complete with checks and balances, careful distribution of power, and so on can be set up in such a way that the stupid selfishness of human nature can't easily derail it.



henryj said:


> Well Jis I really didn't know how to respond to "our founding fathers were morons". Personally I think they did a good job. Perhaps we have just messed it up over time. If you want to open the discussion up beyond HSR, then you have to address global free trade and the loss of millions of jobs to China and other countries overseas. As a country we are dead broke. We don't even take in enought revenue to take care of our basic needs like social security, medicare, unemployment, etc. much less things like HSR. The military budget is not all that big and I really don't want to find myself in a country that has dropped to second or third best in defense as that would be catastrophic for the nation and the world. I am too old to learn Chinese or Russian. To fund all these nice things like the Europeans have we have to increase tax revenue. That means bringing jobs back into this country. No other country that I know of lets their basic industries leave without even putting up a fight and most require that to do business in their country you have to hire the local population. Other than some government contracts, we don't even do that. We have serious fundamental problems and I really don't hear any politician out there addressing them. Government by itself doesn't create wealth or jobs. Government just spends other people's money and right now there is not enough of it. Maybe we should give the job of policing the world to China or Russia. Certainly Europe is not prepared to take up the slack. Maybe there are those on here that think we can just bury our heads in the sand and play with our trains and no one will bother us. Personally I don't share that opinion. The world is an increasingly dangerous place.


I don't think there is anything wrong with our government that a more intelligent, less selfish citizenship couldn't fix.

Among the many scrappy little things I do in pursuit of making a living is finding perfectly good items people throw away and selling it to other people at a low, low price that is, for me, almost 100% profit. You believe in the free market economy? Well I'm in the flea market economy, and doing pretty well in it, thank you.

The other day I found a most lovely couch, made out of beautifully woven fabric. When it was new, it most have cost its owner well north of $1000. Currently, it was filthy, but cleanable. I brought it with me, along with many other things, and proceeded to attempt to hock it at the flea market. I started out with a price of $100. By the end of the day, I had it priced at $5, then put a sign on it saying that they had but to come and take it home with them.

I have no use for such a couch, so I left it there figuring someone else would come running and throw it in their truck. A few hours later, I got an annoyed call from the manager asking me to come and remove my couch. This beautiful couch, a most lovely object, was simply too much trouble and aggravation for anyone to want to take it home.

Likewise, our country is a mares nest of rotten, selfish people, demanding of too much and giving too little. Lazy, inept, arrogant, and generally cantankerous, our country is populated by a ton of problems and hassles. No other country in the world wants to take us over. If they won us without a shot fired, it would still be the most pyrrhic victory of all.

Our government spends way too much money on way too much nonsense, none of which really has to do with any project we undertake, per se, but all of the red tape surrounding it. Forget pointless projects. Get rid of all the studies we perform on whether projects are pointless or pointful, or just plain senatorial pissing contests, and we'd be a good percentage of the way to more efficient government.

Inspectors must inspect swiss cheese in this country, not for quality, or disease, or spoilage, but for the number and size of holes in the cheese. I rest my case.

Our government is defacto defunct. Our economy is a text book example of chaos theory. As Jishnu put it, we spend far too much of our time working on pointless nonsense, while eliminating all high-profile progress to show how much we are tightening our belts.


----------



## jis

henryj said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> henryj said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sieg Heil
> 
> 
> 
> Sigh. At least I expected a more intelligent response than that from you Henry :blink:
> 
> I think the real deep issue is that we have figured out a way of spending endless amounts of money on essentially non-productive activities, while we are progressively de-funding productive activities. Even if we remove HSR from the discussion we still see that even highway projects (or any other significant infrastructure project even upkeep of existing ones) are now starting to get defunded because there is no money, while we seem to be incapable of canceling completely pointless zillion dollar defense projects, even when the SecDef himself says it is pointless. HSR or not, that in itself should give us pause.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well Jis I really didn't know how to respond to "our founding fathers were morons".
Click to expand...

I would just point out that you are imagining things. I did not say anything about any of the founding fathers or the structure of the constitution with its checks and balances, which I still think is brilliant. I don't think there is a problem with the basic principles. I think there is a problem with the stewards of that inheritance, namely us and our utterly selfish attitudes towards fellow human beings, and completely cynical approach to collective activities of any sort based on the principle that anything that anyone can get away with, without any consideration for collective good is par for the course. Now if diverting attention to founding fathers helps some remove that guilt from ourselves..... so be it..... and.. well I rest my case.


----------



## mercedeslove

henryj said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> henryj said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> amtrakwolverine said:
> 
> 
> 
> Meanwhile japan and china and other country's laugh at our incompetence to build HSR.
> 
> 
> 
> I seriously doubt if they are laughing. We just don't have the population density to support it. Pretty much the NEC is it in this country. Japan and Europe are small and very compact regions with population centers close together. The US is huge by comparison and for the most part sparsely populated. HSR is just not cost effective. It's a huge boondoggle. Money would be better spent on conventional 'higher speed' rail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They laugh. Believe me, they laugh. I laugh. I laugh so hard I break out in tears from it.
> 
> Here we are, the shell of what was once the most powerful and capable nation on earth, and we can't do anything.
> 
> Oh, we talk about doing stuff. We talk, we debate, we argue, we go through political promises of getting stuff done. We create logos to promote the idea of getting stuff done. We invent disorders to explain why people on the committee that were supposed to design that logo can't get their lazy arses out of bed.
> 
> But we don't get ANYTHING done. Our founding fathers were morons. They simply could not see that the basic idea of goodness, fairness, and intelligent decision making for the benefit of all is the kind of claptrap that sounds good in a B movie. People are too stupid, selfish, and self important to actually run their own government.
> 
> Well, we're running our government. Right onto the rocks. Old farts don't want to invest in the new generation. Auto drivers don't want to invest in public transportation. Companies don't want to invest in beneficial legislation because ruin their god given right to make too much money on the backs of workers.
> 
> Its a rat race. And you all are the rats running in it. Me? I'll stand by and watch. And laugh. And cry.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sieg Heil
Click to expand...

This reply is distasteful, disgusting and completely inappropriate. Save it for your KKK rally.


----------



## George Harris

Ryan said:


> I already get social security and medicare both of which I paid for all my life so I am against cutting that.
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, "screw you guys, I got mine". Looks like GML was right.
Click to expand...

The logic of this response escapes me completely. From the perspective of someone drawing social security or anticipating drawing same, it is no different from withdrawing your savings or receiving the payments due from an annuity. *It is not welfare, it is something that we have paid into.* If you younger guys want to collect, WORK and PAY IN.


----------



## Ryan

Nice try, but I am.


----------



## Trogdor

George Harris said:


> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I already get social security and medicare both of which I paid for all my life so I am against cutting that.
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, "screw you guys, I got mine". Looks like GML was right.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The logic of this response escapes me completely. From the perspective of someone drawing social security or anticipating drawing same, it is no different from withdrawing your savings or receiving the payments due from an annuity. *It is not welfare, it is something that we have paid into.* If you younger guys want to collect, WORK and PAY IN.
Click to expand...

The difference is that with a savings account, it is optional. If I want to put money into a savings account, I can. If not, I don't have to.

On the other hand, most workers (except, incidentally, railroad employees among a few other categories) have to pay into Social Security.

Social security is, essentially, a pyramid scheme. People aren't paying in for their own retirement. They're paying in to cover the people who have *already* retired. When today's workers retire, they will not be taking money from what they put into social security. That money will have long since been spent. Instead, they will be taking money from the next generation of employees.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm in no way saying that Social Security is a bad thing, if only because it is somewhat of a forced savings plan for a country that doesn't seem to know what savings is. However, one cannot ignore the reality that if Social Security were optional, and today's working generation opted out, then folks like Henry would be going home empty-handed (and you couldn't blame "[us] younger guys" for it).

Frankly, retired (and soon-to-be retired) folks should thank their lucky stars that social security isn't optional. In a previous (government) job, I opted out of my company's pension plan. I did so for a number of reasons, including the fact that previous generations of employees (including some that retired while I was there) had left such a mess that I had no intention of subsidizing lazy slobs that didn't do a damn thing while they were at work (and made for a larger mess for my coworkers and me to clean up after they were gone). I figured I'd be better off investing on my own rather than paying into a dying pension that would probably go bust by the time I was of retirement age anyway.

If SS were optional, and the younger generation were upset at the state of affairs their elders left them, all they'd have to do is opt out, find their own savings/retirement plan, and plug their ears for a couple of years to drown out the screams and howls of the retirees. I'm sorry if that sounds harsh, but the attitudes of some of the above quotes are part of the reason why some people might just take that opinion. It *is* essentially "I've got mine, so **** you" ("I want my social security, I feel I'm entitled to it, cut something else, I don't want to have to sacrifice anything of mine, other people should make the sacrifices in these tough times, and all you young folks out there, go out and WORK and PAY IN so I can keep getting my check, but in the mean time I don't care if they cut your education benefits and force states to raise tuition to levels where you'll be in debt the rest of _your_ life, or that we leave you with crumbling infrastructure and no money to pay to fix it, or any of the multitudes of other things you may need").


----------



## henryj

Fellow train advocates. You can trash me or the government or whatever all you want, but it still doesn't solve the problem. If you make the defense budget zero you still have a deficit. Social Security whatever it's problems, is still covered by the 940 billion in payroll taxes so it's not loosing money. I assume payroll taxes are also covering most of medicare also. The government only has three main sources of revenue, income taxes, payroll taxes and corporate taxes. They are just not enough to pay the bills. In my opinion because we have just sent too many jobs overseas. We are just hemoraging jobs now every year. That is causing the governments revenue to not keep up with expenditures. We either will have to cut expenses drastically or increase taxes drastically or both. Either option is going to cause major upheaval to the economy. That is why our representatives hesitate to take the necessary actions. It will be death warrant for them. So we stumble on in the dark. Some day in the near future we will have to pay up. And the longer we wait the worse it's going to be. I don't have the answers. I don't know anyone that does.


----------



## mercedeslove

George Harris said:


> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I already get social security and medicare both of which I paid for all my life so I am against cutting that.
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, "screw you guys, I got mine". Looks like GML was right.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The logic of this response escapes me completely. From the perspective of someone drawing social security or anticipating drawing same, it is no different from withdrawing your savings or receiving the payments due from an annuity. *It is not welfare, it is something that we have paid into.* If you younger guys want to collect, WORK and PAY IN.
Click to expand...


Ok...well what if you can't work. Thanks to cancer I am physically unable to work, and it might be like that for the rest of my life. So what about me and others like me (I am not the only one you know) she we all rot in in hell so you can save a few dollars or whatever? When I was able to work I had to pay takes, the boy friend has to pay property taxes and stuff. We have no kids in the school system yet I am paying for other peoples brats so they can become better people. Sadly in this area most are about 3 grades below their reading level and end up dropping out. We all have to pay for things we don't like or don't use. It's life.


----------



## George Harris

mercedeslove said:


> George Harris said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I already get social security and medicare both of which I paid for all my life so I am against cutting that.
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, "screw you guys, I got mine". Looks like GML was right.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The logic of this response escapes me completely. From the perspective of someone drawing social security or anticipating drawing same, it is no different from withdrawing your savings or receiving the payments due from an annuity. *It is not welfare, it is something that we have paid into.* If you younger guys want to collect, WORK and PAY IN.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ok...well what if you can't work. Thanks to cancer I am physically unable to work, and it might be like that for the rest of my life. So what about me and others like me (I am not the only one you know) she we all rot in in hell so you can save a few dollars or whatever?
Click to expand...

Don't really understand your rant. No one here is complaining about disability for the *truly* disabled. We are bugged by those that are scamming the system, and the able but unwilling.



> When I was able to work I had to pay takes, the boy friend has to pay property taxes and stuff. We have no kids in the school system yet I am paying for other peoples brats so they can become better people. Sadly in this area most are about 3 grades below their reading level and end up dropping out. We all have to pay for things we don't like or don't use. It's life.


The basic rationale behind publically funded education is that an educated populance is of benefit to everybody, whether it is your kids getting educated or others.
We are getting way off subject here. I will say no more.


----------



## Ryan

George Harris said:


> We are bugged by those that are scamming the system, and the able but unwilling.


Actually, that's the first time that point has been raised.

How much money do you think is wasted going to those that are scamming the system and how does it compare to the 1.1 trillion dollar hole in the budget?



Ryan said:


> Answer me this, Henry - you said yourself we're in the hole 1.1 trillion and posted a link to the Federal budget. Go ahead and make a list of the "worthless departments" and how much their budgets are, and show us how we can close that hole.


Still waiting, Henry...


----------



## Trogdor

There are lots of popular myths out there which, unfortunately, taint the public view. I'd wager that a good chunk of the population truly believes that if we eliminated "foreign aid" and "welfare" we'd save enough money to not only cut the deficit, but be able to cut taxes further.

They watched some 20/20 or 60 Minutes special 15 years ago that showed a handful of welfare recipients driving Cadillacs and immediately assume that everybody is like that, and that it must be costing us hundreds of billions of dollars to pay for people who are too lazy to work.

Then they keep that belief because it makes it easier to blame _someone else_ for their problems.


----------



## jis

henryj said:


> Fellow train advocates. You can trash me or the government or whatever all you want, but it still doesn't solve the problem. If you make the defense budget zero you still have a deficit. Social Security whatever it's problems, is still covered by the 940 billion in payroll taxes so it's not loosing money. I assume payroll taxes are also covering most of medicare also. The government only has three main sources of revenue, income taxes, payroll taxes and corporate taxes. They are just not enough to pay the bills. In my opinion because we have just sent too many jobs overseas. We are just hemoraging jobs now every year. That is causing the governments revenue to not keep up with expenditures. We either will have to cut expenses drastically or increase taxes drastically or both. Either option is going to cause major upheaval to the economy. That is why our representatives hesitate to take the necessary actions. It will be death warrant for them. So we stumble on in the dark. Some day in the near future we will have to pay up. And the longer we wait the worse it's going to be. I don't have the answers. I don't know anyone that does.


I can generally agree with quite a bit of that line of thought. Avoiding incendiary phrases like "Seig Heil" in one's own posts would however reduce the chances of being gratuitously trashed considerably 

I'd point out that there is a fourth form of tax that the we use too, and that is excise and customs taxes. For example the so called "gas tax" is an excise tax, which is used for funding a significant proportion of highway costs.

Also, one of the reasons that jobs get off-shored is because our elected representatives in their infinite wisdom, in order to keep the riches rolling in to themselves from the corporations, have set tax laws in such a way that corporations can reduce their overall tax bill by exporting the jobs. Go figure.

I agree with the notion that there will be at least a notional upheaval when we finally get around to try to fix the problem. We still collectively believe that the laws of simple arithmetic are a myth or a vast conspiracy or something.  It is amazing how many people believe that if you keep cutting taxes more money will get collected. While this may be true in a small area of the so called Laffer Curve, taken to an extreme it makes as much sense as believing in perpetual motion machines. OTOH, very few people are ready to give up anything on the receiving (expenditure) side of the equation.

At some point these two opposing forces will run into each other and that is when the real upheavals will happen. A possibly good proxy to sense how bad things are is to look at what the highest earner's income is as a proportion of the lowest earner's. Historically, the larger it is the closer a society has been to upheavals - even ones that finally pretty much destroyed the society. This ratio unfortunately has been growing alramingly fast in the US, and also in places like India and China too, and much less so in Europe. This will have its inevitable consequence.

In the past we (in the US) have been good at making incremental fixes that keeps the upheaval under control, but there is no saying whether we will succeed in doing so going forward. Considering that most of our proposed fixes at present tends to be based on actions that actually widen this gap, I am currently in a pessimistic bent of mind on this matter. But one thing that at least I am certain about is that creating artificial divides like young and old, or haves and have nots, which split society along fissures, and pits one half against the other, is not helpful in coming to a collective solution to a collective problem that we face.

Bringing this back to the original subject, well sort of, infrastructure is one of the lubricants that enables society to produce and trade efficiently. These are the activities that produce the riches, that is ultimately the engine that raises standards of living. Contrary to certain popular believe just trading stocks does not. Short changing productive infrastructure to fund all sorts of other activities is IMHO a fools errand, and we seem to indulge in a lot of that these days. We think that if we label something mindlessly as "pork" that makes it so, while if we keep ignoring pointless expenditures they are not harmful.

OK enough ranting from me a for a day. So now I shall descend from the soap box


----------



## mercedeslove

George Harris said:


> mercedeslove said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> George Harris said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I already get social security and medicare both of which I paid for all my life so I am against cutting that.
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, "screw you guys, I got mine". Looks like GML was right.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The logic of this response escapes me completely. From the perspective of someone drawing social security or anticipating drawing same, it is no different from withdrawing your savings or receiving the payments due from an annuity. *It is not welfare, it is something that we have paid into.* If you younger guys want to collect, WORK and PAY IN.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ok...well what if you can't work. Thanks to cancer I am physically unable to work, and it might be like that for the rest of my life. So what about me and others like me (I am not the only one you know) she we all rot in in hell so you can save a few dollars or whatever?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Don't really understand your rant. No one here is complaining about disability for the *truly* disabled. We are bugged by those that are scamming the system, and the able but unwilling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When I was able to work I had to pay takes, the boy friend has to pay property taxes and stuff. We have no kids in the school system yet I am paying for other peoples brats so they can become better people. Sadly in this area most are about 3 grades below their reading level and end up dropping out. We all have to pay for things we don't like or don't use. It's life.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The basic rationale behind publically funded education is that an educated populance is of benefit to everybody, whether it is your kids getting educated or others.
> We are getting way off subject here. I will say no more.
Click to expand...

Unless you have proof people are "unwilling to work" you can't say they scamming the system. I know a lot of people do that I have seen it my self, they go to walmart buy all the food they need pull out the food stamps, then suddenly pull out a couple 100 dollars to pay for the big screen TV and Playstation they just bought. They take their stuff and load it and their ten kids into the hummer and drive off into the sunset. But not everyone does that, and because there are people like us who don't like the food stamp hummer family. They shouldn't have to suffer, it's not fair.

Honestly I still don't understand where people like the "food stamp hummer family" get their extra money from, I have a few ideas but I won't mention them.


----------



## henryj

Here is a link to steel production by country. There is also one by company. Just go on online and look up any product you want. Try and find one that is still made in this country. How about Levis? Cell phones? TV's? You won't find many. Automobiles are assembled here, but they are not made here. The parts all come form somewhere else. No country can survive like this. Even rail parts now come from offshore. It's just amazing. Our country is just shutting down piece by piece, bit by bit, industry by industry. Soon there will be nothing left but the moochers and looters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_steel_production


----------



## mfastx

Considering that transportation is only ~2% of the federal budget, the idea that our defecit is stemmed by rail projects is laughable. Besides, a large portion of that 2% goes to highway and airport projects.


----------



## Ryan

Are you going to rant and rave about

, Henry or are you going to answer my question?


----------



## jis

:lol: Good one Ryan


----------



## Green Maned Lion

People are stupid. All else logically flows from this point.


----------



## mercedeslove

Ryan said:


> Are you going to rant and rave about




*gets some popcorn and waits*


----------



## Ryan

You may as well get a snickers bar, 'cause I think it's going to be a long wait.

It's very easy to throw stones and complain, yet those who complain the loudest usually have the most difficultly providing a solution. To be fair, it's a difficult question. When you actually look at the numbers, the problem becomes impossible to solve when you take the defense budget and increased tax rates off of the table.


----------



## jis

Ryan said:


> To be fair, it's a difficult question. When you actually look at the numbers, the problem becomes impossible to solve when you take the defense budget and increased tax rates off of the table.


This fact is something that most people seem to be in complete denial about. Hence I suspect that people are not very good at arithmetic.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

jis said:


> This fact is something that most people seem to be in complete denial about. Hence I suspect that people are not very good at arithmetic.


Since I was the only person in my college class that knew how to do long division, I'd say that is a generally certifiable fact. The nitwit fighting Pallone in our district actually put an ad out that could be summarized as:

"I will not cut any services or projects, will cut all wasteful spending, will cut taxes, and will balance our budget problem!"

Since wasteful is such a debatable subject, she is clearly looking to add to the larger number, subtract from the smaller number, and somehow arrive at an equal sign. Fortunately for all involved, she did not win the election.


----------



## Trogdor

Green Maned Lion said:


> Fortunately for all involved, she did not win the election.


Unfortunately, many candidates with the same pledges, did win.


----------



## Anderson

What's really frustrating is that rail got bundled in with a bunch of unrelated stuff. There were more than a few states where voters were frustrated over entirely unrelated things (in Michigan, the economy leaps to mind; if IL had flipped, it would've been because of the corruption scandals tainting the Democratic Party as a whole there; and of course, health care was a biggie across the board, as was a perception of reckless government spending) and sent in an anti-rail candidate. Issue bundling, in general, stinks.


----------



## George Harris

Green Maned Lion said:


> Since I was the only person in my college class that knew how to do long division,


Let us know where you went to college so we can avoid it, and any graduates thereof, well, unless we see if they can pass an arithmatic test. Funny, I would not have graduated from my small town Mississippi high school if my math had been that bad.

Anderson is absolutely right with



> What's really frustrating is that rail got bundled in with a bunch of unrelated stuff.


 Unfortunately, it is unavoidable when you are given a choice between two or at the most threee real candidates. There have been, and I am sure will continue to be, cases where I have not voted for the "pro rail" candidate because the negatives in the person far outweighed the positives. REality says you sometimes end up voting for the least bad because the most good is not on the list of possibilities.


----------



## JayPea

George Harris said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> 
> Since I was the only person in my college class that knew how to do long division,
> 
> 
> 
> Let us know where you went to college so we can avoid it, and any graduates thereof, well, unless we see if they can pass an arithmatic test. Funny, I would not have graduated from my small town Mississippi high school if my math had been that bad.
> 
> Anderson is absolutely right with
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What's really frustrating is that rail got bundled in with a bunch of unrelated stuff.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Unfortunately, it is unavoidable when you are given a choice between two or at the most threee real candidates. There have been, and I am sure will continue to be, cases where I have not voted for the "pro rail" candidate because the negatives in the person far outweighed the positives. REality says you sometimes end up voting for the least bad because the most good is not on the list of possibilities.
Click to expand...


Agreed. I voted for our incumbent Representative, even though she has an anti-rail stance. She has done a good job in represnting our issues locally. Her Democratic opponent wasn't endorsed by Democrats in the primary and has all the personality (and, seemingly, intelligence) of a bag of doorknobs. I could never have voted for him no matter what his stance on Amtrak was (which I don't know).


----------



## Devil's Advocate

Interesting. I wonder how many supposedly "pro-rail" members _proudly_ voted for staunchly anti-rail candidates this past election. Or if any of them bothered to get involved _before_ the primary to promote pro-rail positions or challengers. Or how many have reconciled their decisions by taking extra time to educate the anti-rail politicians they helped elect.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

George Harris said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> 
> Since I was the only person in my college class that knew how to do long division,
> 
> 
> 
> Let us know where you went to college so we can avoid it, and any graduates thereof, well, unless we see if they can pass an arithmatic test. Funny, I would not have graduated from my small town Mississippi high school if my math had been that bad.
Click to expand...

Sad thing is, my college was one of the best colleges in my state, and one of the best colleges in the country in a few majors- including mine, Entrepreneurship.

However, since the NJ HSPT (the test you are required to pass to graduate high school in NJ) allowed the use of calculators for the entirety of its math section, one did not need to know how to do basic arithmetic to pass. As a result, my college (which is a public college) drew kids primarily from NJ, and since they didn't need to know basic math to pass the required testing, the teachers never bothered with reviewing it.

By the way, additionally, I got a 5 on my Calc AP. And I refuse, to this day, to use calculators for basic math problems. Math is one of my (few) strengths.


----------



## Anderson

Well, to point to my district (VA-1), we had a total clown running against the incumbent in the primary named Catherine Crabill: Her biggest platform plank, from what I can tell, was calling for Obama to be tried for treason, and in general, her rhetoric sounded more like an PIRA member than what I'm used to thinking of as a Republican. I wish I was understating, but it took restraint for me not to shout at her when she was speaking to the local Republican committee.

So...the primary didn't feature much of an option, and there wasn't really a choice in the general election (the Democrat went down by close to 2:1, and was unacceptable to me for a number of other reasons).


----------

