what I hope is the first nail in the coffin of libertarianism

[RandomGuy]

How Jerry Brown Scared California Straight


A lot of people are saying that, now that he’s done what was long assumed impossible: balance the California budget. This is California, the Greece of America, the liberal state that wants to spend on everything and the libertarian state that won’t pay for anything. Californians are so committed to their faulty economic theory that they built laws to enshrine it: The legislature has to pass tax hikes by a two-thirds vote, and citizens can put new laws on the ballot as propositions. When Brown took office two years ago, the state had a $27 billion deficit. Standard & Poor’s (MHP) rated California’s credit the worst of the 50 states, and 24/7 Wall St. ranked it as the worst-run state in its 2011 and 2012 surveys.

This year, California will have an $850 million budget surplus in the coming fiscal year. Unemployment, which peaked at 12.4 percent just before Brown took office, is 9.4 percent. S&P has upgraded its outlook on the state. Confidence remains fragile, according to a survey of 1,142 large and small business leaders conducted by the California Business Roundtable: More than six out of 10 say it’s still harder to do business in California than in other states. But 24 percent of businesses say they plan to add jobs this year, compared with 16 percent that intend to cut them.

...

Brown needed money. He couldn’t borrow much more due to the Standard & Poor’s credit rating. Worse, the Supreme Court decided in May 2011 that California’s overcrowded prisons provided such bad health care that it was cruel and unusual punishment. Unable to spend to improve care, Brown used the ruling as an excuse to save cash. He pushed “realignment,” in which non-violent criminals who would have served time in prison were moved to local jails, which has reduced the inmate population by 29,700. An additional 64,000 have been realigned straight to probation. Republicans freaked out. Brown saved $1.5 billion.

Then he did some real cutting. “We cut child care—I’m sorry to say—old age pensions, the disabled, the elderly, and the blind. You can’t get any more sympathetic than that,” he says. The only cuts left to make, Brown claimed, were to public schools and, most significantly, the state’s universities and community colleges, which Californians—especially California’s many immigrants—consider a key part of the American meritocratic system.

The only way to save them was a tax increase. To get it, Brown used what he had learned from Howard Jarvis. In the Great Recession, the fervor isn’t antitax, but anti-rich. If President Barack Obama could have put the Buffett Rule to a public ballot, he probably would have gotten it approved. So Brown just wrote a proposition and gathered enough signatures from the public to get it on the ballot.

In June 2011 he tried to call a special election to ask voters to decide on a tax hike, but failed to gather support in time. He was lucky it didn’t work out: The special election would have had low turnout, which favors Republicans. By waiting for last November, Brown got the advantage of a new law that allowed online registration, which created 1 million young, liberal voters, who turned out in huge numbers. He also got lucky that a group of Orange County Republicans put an anti-union proposition on the November ballot, mobilizing union voters.

Brown had originally proposed a car tax, a 1 percent hike in the sales tax, and removing the tax credit for having children. In the end, Proposition 30 raised taxes only on incomes higher than $250,000 a year, after deductions, and increased the sales tax by 0.25 percentage point. “It’s more like a tip,” Brown says. “When you take polls, the only people you can tax are the very wealthy. Liberals say, ‘Tax the oil companies.’ You can’t tax them. They’ll spend $50 million to stop it. Look what happened when they tried to pass those soda taxes.”


Photograph by Mark Peckmezian
To get tax-hating Californians to vote to raise their own taxes, Brown became Governor Gloom. If the tax-cutters’ theory was to cut taxes so much we’d have to shrink government, he was going to shrink government so much that people would raise taxes. In addition to schools and community colleges, he would cut medical programs, aid to the disabled, and child health care. “Our breakthrough came because of the breakdown,” he says. “There were more layoffs, more pink slips, more agitation. Cutting was very conducive to the success of Prop 30.” In short: Jerry Brown scared the crap out of people.

It worked. The proposition passed by more than 10 percent. After taxes went up, so did approval ratings for Brown and the state legislature: Brown to 57 percent, the legislature to 36. Even the opposition is digging him. “When Governor Brown released his proposal for this year’s state budget, I couldn’t believe my ears,” says Assembly Republican Leader Connie Conway. “It truly sounded as though the governor channeled his inner Republican.” He’s also won over much of the business community, though he raised their personal taxes. “He comes at things differently than Arnold Schwarzenegger,” says Allan Zaremberg, chief executive officer of the California Chamber of Commerce, who worked with Brown on his first, abandoned tax hike. “You better be damn well prepared when you talk to him.” Zaremberg is pleased with Brown’s work to lower health-care costs to businesses and reform the state’s environmental quality act, which he says can be burdensome.
http://www.businessweek.com/printer/articles/112324-how-jerry-brown-scared-california-straight

To be sure, liberals in california deserve blame for making the state's regulatory environment fucked up and anti-thetical to business. This is pointed out if you read the whole article. I think one should have a balance, and California is moving closer to that. Texas is at the other end of the scale, and it will cost us in the long run.

The big thing I got out of this that he raised taxes on the rich... and the economy got better.

This guy actually did in Cali, what we as a nation need to do. Cut, tax, and invest in infrastructure.

(un)Shockingly enough, it seems to be working.

The big thing here is that, even with the increases that make creepy shits like Norquist squirm (fecking awesome), businessness were coaxed into investing by having a bit more predictable and favorable environment.

[Wild Cobra]

To be sure, liberals in california deserve blame for making the state's regulatory environment fucked up and anti-thetical to business.

So why is the title "what I hope is the first nail in the coffin of libertarianism"

[boutons_deux]

"liberals in california deserve blame for making the state's regulatory environment fucked up and anti-thetical to business."

very progressive California has always led the country forward with mileage requirements, pollution rules, etc, etc, and business and innovations are booming.

Brown's tax hike on $250K+ didn't start a mass exodus as fear-mongered by the Repugs and 1%.

The housing prices are sky high because people WANT to live there. Some people are leaving but that always happen on the low-end in states or in cities. The well-off live in the best places, housing/living prices rise, and the less well off move out. Happens everywhere, ain't specific to CA. And it's right-wing fringe OC that spent $Ms with the very progressive brown water recycling plant. I figure CA will do a Melbourne AU and build the first massive sea water desalination plants.

If they can figure out how not to fuck up the Monetery area and can find the shale gas, there will be another "There Will Be (Money)" carbon boom. Monterey shale estimates are several times Bakken's.

[RandomGuy]

So why is the title "what I hope is the first nail in the coffin of libertarianism"

Because, when the good governor finally spelled out all the cuts he would have to make to actually meet your libertarian ideal of a government, people realized how full of shit and immoral the whole ideology is in practice.

Shocking, eh?

[DarrinS]

Yes, the final nail. :lmao

[Drachen]

it says first

[DarrinS]

My bad

[DarrinS]

I lived in SoCal in the late 80's. it's a great place to live, if you can afford it.

[Winehole23]

for better and for worse, not only are disputes not settled rationalistically, if they ever were, others would be forced to swiftly abandon their own opinions.

as it is, definitive and factual outcomes have little effect if any on opinion. people do not remember them, not even when they are pointed out repeatedly.

[BobaFett1]

"liberals in california deserve blame for making the state's regulatory environment fucked up and anti-thetical to business."

very progressive California has always led the country forward with mileage requirements, pollution rules, etc, etc, and business and innovations are booming.

Brown's tax hike on $250K+ didn't start a mass exodus as fear-mongered by the Repugs and 1%.

The housing prices are sky high because people WANT to live there. Some people are leaving but that always happen on the low-end in states or in cities. The well-off live in the best places, housing/living prices rise, and the less well off move out. Happens everywhere, ain't specific to CA. And it's right-wing fringe OC that spent $Ms with the very progressive brown water recycling plant. I figure CA will do a Melbourne AU and build the first massive sea water desalination plants.

If they can figure out how not to fuck up the Monetery area and can find the shale gas, there will be another "There Will Be (Money)" carbon boom. Monterey shale estimates are several times Bakken's.

Cali sucks,

[FuzzyLumpkins]

for better and for worse, not only are disputes not settled rationalistically, if they ever were, others would be forced to swiftly abandon their own opinions.

as it is, definitive and factual outcomes have little effect if any on opinion. people do not remember them, not even when they are pointed out repeatedly.

Speak for yourself.

[Wild Cobra]

Because, when the good governor finally spelled out all the cuts he would have to make to actually meet your libertarian ideal of a government, people realized how full of shit and immoral the whole ideology is in practice.

Shocking, eh?
Not for the entitlement mentality of a society that California has.

[RandomGuy]

it says first

:lmao Darrin can't even be bothered to read the title correctly... wow.

[Sportcamper]

More California Fun Facts

According to an article in the Wall Street Journal, California's unfunded pension liability is estimated to be somewhere between $120 billion and $500 billion.

The number of people unemployed in the state of California is approximately equivalent to the populations of Nevada, New Hampshire and Vermont combined.

Over 20 percent of California homeowners are now underwater on their mortgages.

Large tent cities have been springing up all over the state of California

The "lawsuit climate" in California is ranked number 46 out of all 50 states.

Earlier this year, it was reported that in the area around Sacramento, California there was one closed business for every six that were still open.

California's overstretched health care system is also on the verge of collapse. Dozens of California hospitals and emergency rooms have shut down over the last decade because they could not afford to stay open after being endlessly swamped by illegal immigrants and poor Californians who were simply not able to pay for the services they were receiving. As a result, the remainder of the health care system in the state of California is now beyond overloaded. This had led to brutally long waits, diverted ambulances and even unnecessary patient deaths.

Budget cuts are making life very difficult in many California cities. For example, Oakland, California Police Chief Anthony Batts says that due to severe budget cuts there are a number of crimes that his department will simply not be able to respond to any longer. The crimes that the Oakland police will no longer be responding to include grand theft, burglary, car wrecks, identity theft and vandalism.
Things have gotten so bad in Stockton, California that the police union put up a billboard with the following message: "Welcome to the 2nd most dangerous city in California. Stop laying off cops."

20 percent of the residents of Los Angeles County are now receiving public aid.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Not for the entitlement mentality of a society that California has.

the GOP "CA sucks" meme lacks voracity now that Brown has balanced the budget and demonstrated fiscal responsibility. they raised taxes and the state didn't fall into economic collapse despite the precipice of doom that sportscamper outlined for us.

[TheSanityAnnex]

the GOP "CA sucks" meme lacks voracity now that Brown has balanced the budget and demonstrated fiscal responsibility. they raised taxes and the state didn't fall into economic collapse despite the precipice of doom that sportscamper outlined for us.100 billion dollar high speed rail in the middle of central California disagrees with you.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

100 billion dollar high speed rail in the middle of central California disagrees with you.

And yet the budget is balanced now but what happened to economic armageddon?

[Winehole23]

Speak for yourself.I do.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

definitive and factual outcomes have little effect if any on opinion. people do not remember them

Wine with the pulse of the American people. Go have another drink.

[TheSanityAnnex]

And yet the budget is balanced now but what happened to economic armageddon?explain to me how that 100 billion dollar abortion was Brown demonstrating fiscal responsibility.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

What do balance budget mean?

And I have no idea of the accounting of the project but let's just say I don't take your 'accounting' at face value.

[Sportcamper]

And yet the budget is balanced now but what happened to economic armageddon?

Fuzzy the article is too simplistic…Cali has just kicked the can down the road…The State legislature needs to change the pension system & re negotiate exorbitant salaries for state workers…California's unfunded pension liability of hundreds of billions does not make for a balanced budget…

[TheSanityAnnex]

Of course you have no idea of the accounting aspects of the project and are talking out your ass per par.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

'pensions' are going to be an inherent issue in this country for the next 20+ years no matter what we do if by no other reason than demographics. fiscally, the next decade is going to suck everywhere and you are going to continue seeing us having to make up for 4 decades of self voted free rides and the largest generation in american history sailing off into the entitlement sunset.

it sucks that we have to put our pensions' funing on hold because the outgoing generation defunded theirs for 40 years.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Of course you have no idea of the accounting aspects of the project and are talking out your ass per par.

how is saying that I don't know 'talking out of my ass?' I see that as frank and honest.

My point is that I think you lack critical thinking and basic reading skills and do not trust your account of the rail projects accounts. I already know what manner of sources you rely on.

You are the one proposing the rail as a counter argument. Validate it. If you cannot then stop talking out of you ass, as you are wont to put it.

[coyotes_geek]

You're welcome.

http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=13770

[TheSanityAnnex]

how is saying that I don't know 'talking out of my ass?' I see that as frank and honest.

My point is that I think you lack critical thinking and basic reading skills and do not trust your account of the rail projects accounts. I already know what manner of sources you rely on.

You are the one proposing the rail as a counter argument. Validate it. If you cannot then stop talking out of you ass, as you are wont to put it.I live in CA, I voted against the project, and I was correct in calling it an absolute disaster from the start. You have Internet access, shouldn't take you more than a minute to get the numbers yourself.

[Sportcamper]

.it sucks that we have to put our pensions' funing on hold because the outgoing generation defunded theirs for 40 years.

The pensions are NON funded I.O.U.. . and this needs to change…The CA legislature wont budge on this...State & City workers get to retiree will full pay & benefits after 20 years & then go on to another job & collect pension #2 or #3…The private sector who pays for it no longer can…CA budget is not balanced….

[TheSanityAnnex]

You're welcome.

http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=13770not even close. They are already projected to be over that estimate for phase 1 alone.

[TheSanityAnnex]

Worst part about the whole high speed rail is how that **** Feinstein got her husband the contract for the rail.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

TSA, are you intellectually capable of supporting an argument? It seems you are not.

We already know what your argument is. Now you go about the process of showing proof. Or are you like Darrin in that you are ashamed of your sources so try and hide them?

[TheSanityAnnex]

http://californiahighspeedrailscam.com/

[FuzzyLumpkins]

That is a link and not an argument. It looks like we can add independent thought to critical thinking and reading skills.

[coyotes_geek]

not even close. They are already projected to be over that estimate for phase 1 alone.

You very well could be right. Not a Cali resident. I only know about the project because I work in the transportation industry, and when someone is going to spend billions of dollars on transportation, we all hear about it. I don't know much on the specifics, I just know where to find the website.


Worst part about the whole high speed rail is how that **** Feinstein got her husband the contract for the rail.

I'm assuming you're referring to the recently awarded design-build package. No idea what the Feinstein ties are, but looking at the bid results the joint venture that won was low bidder on cost by $100 million (http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=2147483806). Looks to me like the team that won was the team that should have won.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The pensions are NON funded I.O.U.. . and this needs to change…The CA legislature wont budge on this...State & City workers get to retiree will full pay & benefits after 20 years & then go on to another job & collect pension #2 or #3…The private sector who pays for it no longer can…CA budget is not balanced….

That does seem a legitimate concern. The boomers should not have been allowed to vote themselves in such a gravy train. 20 years and you don't even have to go to work anymore to get paid does seem a fat fat deal. Where do you think the electoral inertia is coming from? I am guessing it is because of the huge active voting block that wants it to stay the same.

I keep saying things won't change until the boomers are not the dominant plurality.

[DarrinS]

Lol, Sportcamper just shit all over the OP. Good thread though. Yes, California is a shining example of what can happen when liberals have a supermajority for a generation or two.

[TheSanityAnnex]

That is a link and not an argument. It looks like we can add independent thought to critical thinking and reading skills.Let me know what you learned from the link you pretended to not click.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Let me know what you learned from the link you pretended to not click.

I clicked it and never fronted like I hadn't. I am not going to make your argument for you though. In your own words explain why their accounting adjustment is more valid than the official accounting. Can you do it?

All you are doing here is showing that you are comfortable about making statements on things you don't understand or understand poorly. Given your intellect I suppose you have to live like that but it is what it is.

[Sportcamper]

That does seem a legitimate concern. The boomers should not have been allowed to vote themselves in such a gravy train. 20 years and you don't even have to go to work anymore to get paid does seem a fat fat deal. Where do you think the electoral inertia is coming from? I am guessing it is because of the huge active voting block that wants it to stay the same. I keep saying things won't change until the boomers are not the dominant plurality.

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy.

The American Republic will endure until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money.

Alexander Fraser Tytler, Lord Woodhouselee (October 15, 1747 – January 5, 1813) was a Scottish-born British lawyer and writer.

I am pretty sure that sums up California....:lol

[TheSanityAnnex]

In your own words explain why their accounting adjustment is more valid than the official accounting.:lol that about sums it up for me.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

TSA, are you intellectually capable of supporting an argument? It seems you are not.

[TheSanityAnnex]

There is nothing to argue here, I was right from the get go.

[Sportcamper]

California on the Brink: Pension Crisis About to Get Worse

http://www.foxbusiness.com/government/2013/06/11/california-on-brink-pension-crisis/?test=latestnews

[angrydude]

Infrastructure projects are great....when you've saved up money first.

Otherwise, it's like buying a Lamborghini when you have a 25K/year job and saying look how great my personal GDP is this month!

[RandomGuy]

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy.

The American Republic will endure until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money.

Alexander Fraser Tytler, Lord Woodhouselee (October 15, 1747 – January 5, 1813) was a Scottish-born British lawyer and writer.

I am pretty sure that sums up California....:lol

The "temporary" form of government has outlived the guy who said that by 200 years.

Two words.

Vacuous
Platitude

Not exactly something to base any real world policy on, IMO.

[RandomGuy]

California on the Brink: Pension Crisis About to Get Worse

http://www.foxbusiness.com/government/2013/06/11/california-on-brink-pension-crisis/?test=latestnews

Fox business "news"? Finding something horribly wrong in a state that votes for Democrats?


Say it ain't so....

(rolls eyes)

Every state and almost every city has pension foibles, and they are all going to get worse.

[RandomGuy]

Infrastructure projects are great....when you've saved up money first.

Otherwise, it's like buying a Lamborghini when you have a 25K/year job and saying look how great my personal GDP is this month!

Not really.

Infrastructure contributes to economic activity when it is being built, and long after it is constructed, when businesses and individuals use it to conduct their own business.

It is much more akin to an investment, with a return on equity.

Your analogy is not only wrong, it demonstrates something that is pretty much the opposite of what is actually happening when governments build needed infrastructure, or repair existing infrastructure.

[RandomGuy]

Let me know what you learned from the link you pretended to not click.

I learned the people running the website either dont' understand inflation or are deliberately misleading, when they try to monkey with time value of money assumptions. At first glance, they essentially make the amatuers mistake of bringing future dollars to the present and making them equivalent.

Further, the links that the 'scam' website themselves post don't always exactly say what they think it says.

One good example is the GAO analysis they posted, claiming it "criticizes" the figures used to cost the project.

Technically yes, it is critical of the cost analysis used by the Cali authority, in the way that any honest critical analysis is.

Here is the summary:

High-Speed Passenger Rail:
Preliminary Assessment of California's Cost Estimates and Other Challenges



Based on an initial evaluation of the California High Speed Rail Authority's (Authority) cost estimates, GAO found that they exhibit certain strengths and weaknesses when compared to best practices in GAO's Cost Guide. Adherence with the Cost Guide reduces the risk of cost overruns and missed deadlines. GAO's preliminary evaluation indicates that the cost estimates are comprehensive in that they include major components of construction and operating costs. However, they are not based on a complete set of assumptions, such as how the Authority expects to adapt existing high-speed rail technology to the project in California. The cost estimates are accurate in that they are based on the most recent project scope, include an inflation adjustment, and contain few mathematical errors. And while the cost estimates' methodologies are generally documented, in some cases GAO was unable to trace the final cost estimate back to its source documentation and could not verify how certain cost components, such as stations and trains, were calculated. Finally, the Authority evaluated the credibility of its estimates by performing both a sensitivity analysis (assessing changes in key cost inputs) and an independent cost estimate, but these tests did not encompass the entire cost estimate for the project. For example, the sensitivity analysis of the construction cost estimate was limited to 30 miles of the first construction segment. The Authority also did not conduct a risk and uncertainty analysis to determine the likelihood that the estimates would be met. The Authority is currently taking some steps to improve its cost estimates.
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-13-163T

In short: "They appear to have gotten a reasonable estimate, but it could be better."

I haven't bothered with reading the full report. The summaries for GAO reports tend to be spot-on though.

Not quite as damning as you want it to be.

High speed rail is simply an investment in long-distance transportation. No more, no less. Either spend money on it, or spend money about on the same scale to expand airports, or deal with congestion at those airports.

Quite frankly, I think that since the TSA's long lines and pat downs for planes have made that so problematic, that the option to take a train that can avoid the security lines, and can be routed to go directly to a city center, would seem to be a very demanded product.

Why do you prefer to spend massivel amounts of tax money on airports?

[TeyshaBlue]

Fox business "news"? Finding something horribly wrong in a state that votes for Democrats?


Say it ain't so....

(rolls eyes)

Every state and almost every city has pension foibles, and they are all going to get worse.
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21579463-states-cannot-pretend-be-good-financial-health-unless-they-tackle-pensions-ruinous-promises
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-16/california-pension-may-ask-for-50-boost-to-close-gap.html
http://www.contracostatimes.com/editorial/ci_23268860/contra-costa-times-editorial-california-lawmakers-must-address
http://www.sacbee.com/2013/04/28/5377472/dan-walters-california-legislature.html
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/feb/24/opinion/la-oe-malanga-pensions-california-20130224

I hope this meets the RG threshold for media cites.:rolleyes

A discussion of California is particularly germane considering the trumpeting of their budget successes over the last few months.

[TeyshaBlue]

I learned the people running the website either dont' understand inflation or are deliberately misleading, when they try to monkey with time value of money assumptions. At first glance, they essentially make the amatuers mistake of bringing future dollars to the present and making them equivalent.

Further, the links that the 'scam' website themselves post don't always exactly say what they think it says.

One good example is the GAO analysis they posted, claiming it "criticizes" the figures used to cost the project.

Technically yes, it is critical of the cost analysis used by the Cali authority, in the way that any honest critical analysis is.

Here is the summary:

High-Speed Passenger Rail:
Preliminary Assessment of California's Cost Estimates and Other Challenges



http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-13-163T

In short: "They appear to have gotten a reasonable estimate, but it could be better."

I haven't bothered with reading the full report. The summaries for GAO reports tend to be spot-on though.

Not quite as damning as you want it to be.

High speed rail is simply an investment in long-distance transportation. No more, no less. Either spend money on it, or spend money about on the same scale to expand airports, or deal with congestion at those airports.

Quite frankly, I think that since the TSA's long lines and pat downs for planes have made that so problematic, that the option to take a train that can avoid the security lines, and can be routed to go directly to a city center, would seem to be a very demanded product.

Why do you prefer to spend massivel amounts of tax money on airports?

Exactly. Build rail or build freeways and airports. Rail seems to satisfy Ockham.

[boutons_deux]

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21579463-states-cannot-pretend-be-good-financial-health-unless-they-tackle-pensions-ruinous-promises
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-16/california-pension-may-ask-for-50-boost-to-close-gap.html
http://www.contracostatimes.com/editorial/ci_23268860/contra-costa-times-editorial-california-lawmakers-must-address
http://www.sacbee.com/2013/04/28/5377472/dan-walters-california-legislature.html
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/feb/24/opinion/la-oe-malanga-pensions-california-20130224

I hope this meets the RG threshold for media cites.:rolleyes

A discussion of California is particularly germane considering the trumpeting of their budget successes over the last few months.

their hole is shallower but still a hole, and they've pretty much destroyed the advantages of their once-magnificent, free/low-cost education system that was the foundation of their success from the 50s to the 2000s.

[Capt Bringdown]

Infrastructure projects are great....when you've saved up money first.

Otherwise, it's like buying a Lamborghini when you have a 25K/year job and saying look how great my personal GDP is this month!

The US is a currency issuer of a non-convertible fiat currency, has a floating exchange rate, and incurs no debts in any currency except US dollars. So, the US Government can issue whatever financial resources it needs to carry out its obligations without raising any solvency issues. The only problems involved in carrying out these obligations are problems of political will, not problems of financial incapacity, which is why, from an economic point of view, they are faux problems.

[RandomGuy]

The US is a currency issuer of a non-convertible fiat currency, has a floating exchange rate, and incurs no debts in any currency except US dollars. So, the US Government can issue whatever financial resources it needs to carry out its obligations without raising any solvency issues. The only problems involved in carrying out these obligations are problems of political will, not problems of financial incapacity, which is why, from an economic point of view, they are faux problems.

Except we are talking about a sub-unit of the US that doesn't issue it's own currency.

States and cities operate under more constraints.

That said, the US government should be throwing some serious $$ at the states, so that we can collectively leverage our economic union's strengths to build the infrastructure that just about every expert on the subject is saying we desperately need.

[Capt Bringdown]

Except we are talking about a sub-unit of the US that doesn't issue it's own currency.

States and cities operate under more constraints.

That said, the US government should be throwing some serious $$ at the states, so that we can collectively leverage our economic union's strengths to build the infrastructure that just about every expert on the subject is saying we desperately need.

Yes, I know that re the states/cites. I thought it was obvious were I was going, but thanks anyhoo.

[johnsmith]

You very well could be right. Not a Cali resident. I only know about the project because I work in the transportation industry, and when someone is going to spend billions of dollars on transportation, we all hear about it. I don't know much on the specifics, I just know where to find the website.



I'm assuming you're referring to the recently awarded design-build package. No idea what the Feinstein ties are, but looking at the bid results the joint venture that won was low bidder on cost by $100 million (http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=2147483806). Looks to me like the team that won was the team that should have won.


100 million....yikes...who was it?

[TSA]

100 million....yikes...who was it?

Feinstein's husband.

[BobaFett1]

California can go back to Mexico.

[TSA]

RG, the high speed rail is an absolute waste of money. No way around it. The people were duped when the first voted for it and Brown knew it and hurried along the first phase before the gov money was withdrawn.

LA to San Francisco is a pipe dream, it will never get that far along before the project is shut down. You'll basically have a high speed train zipping around in shithole central Cali.

[BobaFett1]

RG, the high speed rail is an absolute waste of money. No way around it. The people were duped when the first voted for it and Brown knew it and hurried along the first phase before the gov money was withdrawn.

LA to San Francisco is a pipe dream, it will never get that far along before the project is shut down. You'll basically have a high speed train zipping around in shithole central Cali.




TSA it is sad that a state like Cali with its resources is broke. If they quit wasting money they would be rolling like Texas.

[RandomGuy]

RG, the high speed rail is an absolute waste of money.

Give me a reasonable cost/benefit analysis, and I might agree with you.

Air travel as a whole is projected to bump into some serious capacity constraints, and I can give you some background articles on that if you wish.
Here is a start:
http://www.faa.gov/airports/resources/publications/reports/media/NAS_needs.pdf

How is this any different than spending an equivalent amount of money on airports? roads?

[RandomGuy]

TSA it is sad that a state like Cali with its resources is broke. If they quit wasting money they would be rolling like Texas.

You didn't actually read the OP did you?

(shakes head)

It isn't broke, that is the point, goober.

[RandomGuy]

Feinstein's husband.


Right-wing bloggers have had a glorious time bashing California Senator Dianne Feinstein for months over the blatant crony capitalism of having the front-runner for the state’s first big high-speed rail contract be principally controlled by her husband, financier Richard Blum.

The only problem: Feinstein’s office says Blum has no financial ties to the company in question, Sylmar-based Tutor Perini Corp.

U-T San Diego cited an unnamed aide in the senator’s office as asserting that neither Blum nor companies he controls maintain any financial investment in or affiliation with Tutor Perini.

While there are literally hundreds of stories online castigating Feinstein for Blum’s alleged control of Perini—the word “alleged” is never in them—there are admittedly few mentions, like this Forbes story in March 2007 or this story, that Blum had sold his stake. Blum first became involved with what is now Tutor Perini in 1998 when he joined with Ronald Tutor to help recapitalize the troubled company. He reportedly sold his stock at a substantial profit in 2005.

I smell forwarded email bullshit.

You can prove this right? It should be relatively straightforward to do so.

[Th'Pusher]

:lol TSA not a conservative

[TSA]

Give me a reasonable cost/benefit analysis, and I might agree with you.

Air travel as a whole is projected to bump into some serious capacity constraints, and I can give you some background articles on that if you wish.
Here is a start:
http://www.faa.gov/airports/resources/publications/reports/media/NAS_needs.pdf

How is this any different than spending an equivalent amount of money on airports? roads?

People here in CA actually use airports and roads.

[RandomGuy]

U-T San Diego cited an unnamed aide in the senator’s office as asserting that neither Blum nor companies he controls maintain any financial investment in or affiliation with Tutor Perini.

While there are literally hundreds of stories online castigating Feinstein for Blum’s alleged control of Perini—the word “alleged” is never in them—there are admittedly few mentions, like this Forbes story in March 2007 or this story, that Blum had sold his stake. Blum first became involved with what is now Tutor Perini in 1998 when he joined with Ronald Tutor to help recapitalize the troubled company. He reportedly sold his stock at a substantial profit in 2005.

Unshcockingly, since it is a publicly traded company, I just straight up confirmed it is bullshit that the contract "was awarded to Feinsteins husband".
http://investor.perini.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=106886&p=irol-sec&secCat01.1_rs=371&secCat01.1_rc=10&control_searchbox=&control_selectgroup=5

On December 20, 2005, they sold 85% of their shares in the company. (the form 4 is dated the 21st) This dropped Blum Capital Partners below the threshold for further reporting (10% ownership).

While I cannot confirm the remaining 15% were disposed of in this manner, I can say it is a good possibility that they were disposed of, liklely in my opinion.

[RandomGuy]

People here in CA actually use airports and roads.

What data do you have on high-speed rail usage?

[TSA]

I smell forwarded email bullshit.

You can prove this right? It should be relatively straightforward to do so.

I'm not on any email list. Just what I've read/heard living here. Never really looked into it so you could be right. That isn't really the issue here though, the issue is a project that's projected budget has risen every single year, for a service that isn't worth it, especially considering it's slim chance of ever reaching completion.

[TSA]

http://www.mercurynews.com/california-high-speed-rail/ci_23357569/california-high-speed-rail-faces-delays-high-stakes

California high-speed rail faces delays as high-stakes trial begins Friday
By Mike Rosenberg


[email protected]


mercurynews.com

Posted: 05/31/2013 07:16:21 AM PDT
May 31, 2013 2:16 PM GMTUpdated: 05/31/2013 07:16:26 AM PDT


SACRAMENTO -- High-speed rail officials acknowledged Thursday that they almost certainly won't break ground on the $69 billion project as planned in July after hitting some last-minute bumps in the road. And even more delays are possible as a court battle begins that could wipe out voters' approval of the bullet train.

On Friday morning, opponents from the Bay Area and Central Valley, led by the former chairman of the project, will begin arguing in Sacramento Superior Court that the train has run so far off-track that a judge should take the extraordinary step of hitting the brakes on construction plans. They want to invalidate the $10 billion bond measure voters approved in November 2008 because the project has since doubled in cost while ridership estimates have dwindled and ticket price projections have shot up.

What's more, Gov. Jerry Brown and other Democratic heavyweights are hurriedly lobbying an obscure federal agency to approve high-speed rail construction -- an unexpected obstacle that also threatens to slow the bullet train. And the state must soon finish navigating a delicate process to award the first lucrative construction bid and buy out several unhappy property owners along the route.

"We certainly know that there are challenges that we're facing, but we've been able to make significant progress," said Annie Parker, a spokeswoman for the California High-Speed Rail Authority, noting that the agency has in recent months


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Advertisement

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
swatted away other lawsuits and identified a preferred contractor to build the first segment near Madera.

The project is already a year behind schedule. But Parker said they hope bulldozers will reach the Central Valley by late summer.

Further delays, however, could jeopardize $3 billion in funding from the federal government, which has required that the first leg of construction be finished by September 2017. More delays could also push back the start of initial Merced-to-San Fernando Valley service targeted for the end of this decade.

Opponents say they don't see construction starting anytime soon.

"It's a fiction to say, 'Oh, maybe late summer.' They don't know," said former state Sen. Quentin Kopp of San Francisco, the rail authority's former longtime chairman who has turned against the project and is the star witness in the upcoming trial. "They're going to have a heck of a time with all these legal obstacles."

The most pressing matter right now is the trial beginning Friday that questions the legality of the voter-approved bond measure, Proposition 1A.

The rail authority argues that it is carrying out the will of the voters, starting with $1 billion to lay the groundwork upon which the first

Artist's conception of high-speed train in the Transbay Terminal (NC3D)tracks will be laid.

But there are several provisions within the voter-approved bond act that opponents argue have not been met, such as securing enough money and environmental clearances before starting to build a project that currently has a $55 billion shortfall. Also in dispute are provisions of the bond act guaranteeing the train will run without a taxpayer subsidy and that it can speed between San Francisco and Los Angeles in 2 hours and 40 minutes.

"We want to make sure that we as Californians don't end up with something we didn't ask for," said Kings County rail opponent Aaron Fukuda, one of two people joining the county in the suit.

Opponents fear the state won't be able to find the rest of the money needed to build the full rail line, leaving the first $6 billion, 130-mile stretch of track approved last year by Brown and the Legislature as an abandoned eyesore.

The rail authority declined to comment on the case, but it has managed for five years to repeatedly sidestep other lawsuits that have focused on the negative environmental impacts of the bullet train.

Still, the Bay Area attorneys representing the plaintiffs in the latest case note that this is the first time anyone has gone to court to challenge the 2008 bond measure.

"This is not the terminator, (but) if we win on Friday, it will certainly stall this project for a while," said Oakland-based attorney Stuart Flashman, lead attorney for the plaintiffs.

"I think our case is ... potentially a real blockbuster in terms of testing the validity of this project," said Redwood City-based co-counsel Mike Brady.

A ruling on the latest legal showdown is not expected until next week at the earliest. But even if the state wins, it faces more obstacles.

First among them is a bureaucratic review recently filed with the federal Surface Transportation Board, made up of three presidential appointees used to dealing with small freight projects.

The board must approve all new railroad projects in the country before construction can begin and can take months or even years to make rulings. But despite the bullet train's long-planned groundbreaking, California only filed for approval in March after being prompted by opponents led by House railroad committee Chairman Jeff Denham, R-Modesto.

While 13 Republican House members have lobbied against federal approval, Brown and U.S. Sens. Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein have quietly asked for an exemption from the federal agency's lengthy review process. And a ruling is expected within the next two weeks.

Parker, the rail authority's spokeswoman, said officials aren't sweating out the federal review. "I wouldn't say there is a high anxiety level," she said.

The rail authority next week is expected to begin negotiations with Sylmar-based Tutor Perini on the first $985 million construction contract, which is expected to take several weeks. And the authority must buy up 345 parcels along the bullet train path before building -- and property owners that refuse will force the state into an eminent domain legal process that typically takes months.

"The status of this project," Fukuda said, "is that it's fighting to keep itself moving forward."

[Th'Pusher]

I'd kill for a high speed rail line from SA to Dallas with stops in Austin Waco, etc. That is the absolute worst drive. SWA wouldn't allow the competition but I sure would use it.

[TSA]

What data do you have on high-speed rail usage?

Here is the best I could find. Pretty damn detailed.
Full cost of high speed rail: an engineering approach

http://nexus.umn.edu/papers/HighSpeedRail.pdf

In summary, high-speed rail is the costliest of the three modes we examined,
largely because of its high capital costs relative to the number of anticipated
riders. It has the highest costs to the service provider, presumably the
state of California, because other modes spread their costs among private sector
owners and operators of vehicles and parts of the infrastructure system.
Conclusion
It is doubtful that without considerable subsidy high-speed rail could be
constructed, much less profitable in California. These subsidies are anticipated
to be higher than those required in other countries. The conditions in
Europe and Japan during the early stages of high-speed rail are significantly
different than most parts of the United States. Land uses are denser
and cities are closer together. Furthermore, constraints on federal spending
in the 1990’s hinder the development of new infrastructure. A last key distinction
is that the regulated transportation sectors in Japan and Europe prevented
competition from air travel to the same degree as in the United
States when the HSR lines were planned and deployed. Had air travel been
deregulated and privatized at the time, the decision to proceed with highspeed
rail, particularly in Europe, may have been different. As an illustration
of this, Southwest Airlines is a major opponent of high-speed rail in
Texas (Krumm 1994). As with all rail modes, there is a significant amount
of inflexibility associated with the system design. The high-speed networks
are limited, and the rails require very specific vehicles. Compared with the
greater flexibility afforded the untracked air travel system or the ubiquitous
highway system, high-speed rail faces serious difficulties.
However, should such a system be built, it can be expected to increase
the commuter sheds of both the San Francisco Bay area and Los Angeles
to include Central Valley cities. A one hour commute, while on the long
end of acceptable, would now be much farther away through the use of local
high-speed trains. On the other hand, total travel between the two metropoles
would likely increase very little, since the time and cost savings of
even non-stop high-speed rail against the existing frequent air service from
the three Bay area and five Los Angeles airports are minimal.

[RandomGuy]

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21579463-states-cannot-pretend-be-good-financial-health-unless-they-tackle-pensions-ruinous-promises
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-16/california-pension-may-ask-for-50-boost-to-close-gap.html
http://www.contracostatimes.com/editorial/ci_23268860/contra-costa-times-editorial-california-lawmakers-must-address
http://www.sacbee.com/2013/04/28/5377472/dan-walters-california-legislature.html
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/feb/24/opinion/la-oe-malanga-pensions-california-20130224

I hope this meets the RG threshold for media cites.:rolleyes

A discussion of California is particularly germane considering the trumpeting of their budget successes over the last few months.

It is germane, but the problem Fox "news" noted is not unique to California.

Given that Cali got shockingly realistic and solved their budget foibles temporarily gives me hope that other things can be fixed, as the pension funds need to be.

The guy who did it though was a Democrat, and that is, to me, very important.

I dont' see Republicans in general as giving their leaders enough leeway to actually do things like this. Considering raising taxes is heresy, and anyone who even hints at it gets burned at the stake, figuratively.

I think centrists of conscience have left the GOP and will continue to do so.

But that could simply be my own version of confirmation bias.

[RandomGuy]

Here is the best I could find. Pretty damn detailed.
Full cost of high speed rail: an engineering approach

http://nexus.umn.edu/papers/HighSpeedRail.pdf

hmmm. 1997 = prior to the TSA pat downs, and well before the 2003 air travel capacity study.

Useful as a starting metric, but I think enough has happened in the intervening to change somoe of their starting assumptions.



This research employed demand forecasts for the California Corridor (Leavitt
et al. 1993; Vaca et al. 1994). Because the cost estimates are integrally
related to demand, some discussion of demand is warranted. The method
for forecasting which provides the results reported here was based on growing
existing air and highway ridership to the year 2010, and then apportioning
the trips between the three modes, including the new mode of highspeed
rail, air and highway, based on a logit mode choice model.
The logit model structure selected was a multinomial choice model with
three choices representing the three modes. The factors considered were (1)
access, egress and terminal time for air and high-speed rail, (2) travel time
by each mode, (3) the cost or fare of each mode, and (4) the service headway
of air and rail. The coefficients for each factor were the same across
modes, while the data varied by mode and origin-destination market. Detailed
results are shown in an end note1.
The model was estimated on air and highway modes on the Caltrans
state model 1987 networks and automobile vehicle trip tables, and the 1992
CalSpeed Air Passenger Survey. Air trips were grown at 3% per year,
which is consistent with other studies (Vaca 1994) to obtain 2010 forecasts,
auto trips were forecasted by the Caltrans Statewide model.

Given the overall congestion on both airports and California freeways, it becomes tenuous to suggest that this will not require any more subsidies than any other mode of travel.

People just don't like this, beacuse it is big and up front.

Just like in health care, we want the full costs buried in annual budget and piecemeal bond issues, IMO.

Pick one, pick the other. You still need to spend the money, and the people opposing this have already shown a streak of intellectual dishonesty.

[TeyshaBlue]

It is germane, but the problem Fox "news" noted is not unique to California.

Given that Cali got shockingly realistic and solved their budget foibles temporarily gives me hope that other things can be fixed, as the pension funds need to be.

The guy who did it though was a Democrat, and that is, to me, very important.

I dont' see Republicans in general as giving their leaders enough leeway to actually do things like this. Considering raising taxes is heresy, and anyone who even hints at it gets burned at the stake, figuratively.

I think centrists of conscience have left the GOP and will continue to do so.

But that could simply be my own version of confirmation bias.

I'm sure that having a Dem accomplish this is very important to you. Go Go Team Red!

I agree, centrists have completely vacated the GOP which is, I hope, an important step in the eventual collapse of the party. Let the social retrogrades form their own party, or failing that, let them have the corpse of the GOP and let's see what the fiscal concervatives/centrists can put together.

[TSA]

hmmm. 1997 = prior to the TSA pat downs, and well before the 2003 air travel capacity study.

Useful as a starting metric, but I think enough has happened in the intervening to change somoe of their starting assumptions.




Given the overall congestion on both airports and California freeways, it becomes tenuous to suggest that this will not require any more subsidies than any other mode of travel.

People just don't like this, beacuse it is big and up front.

Just like in health care, we want the full costs buried in annual budget and piecemeal bond issues, IMO.

Pick one, pick the other. You still need to spend the money, and the people opposing this have already shown a streak of intellectual dishonesty.As have those that are in favor of it.

People don't like it because it has changed drastically since they voted for it. That was the most detailed report I could find for you. Have you found anything saying the high speed rail will be beneficial to CA?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Infrastructure projects are great....when you've saved up money first.

Otherwise, it's like buying a Lamborghini when you have a 25K/year job and saying look how great my personal GDP is this month!

This not only is incredibly naive but moreso its flat out stupid.

Infrastructure is no more luxury than a commuter car so you can get to work. That is what roads primarily do. Even for vacation drivers it means tourism dollars for the destination. It is the embodiment of the transfer of goods and services.

So you think you should save up for a car before you get one to drive to work and rather take a cab?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I agree, centrists have completely vacated the GOP which is, I hope, an important step in the eventual collapse of the party. Let the social retrogrades form their own party, or failing that, let them have the corpse of the GOP and let's see what the fiscal concervatives/centrists can put together.

Interesting take that I happen to completely agree with.

[RandomGuy]

As have those that are in favor of it.

People don't like it because it has changed drastically since they voted for it. That was the most detailed report I could find for you. Have you found anything saying the high speed rail will be beneficial to CA?

I have not, nor have I looked for such a study. Kudos to you for providing the study, when asked, I appreciate it.

I would assume the rail authority has done some financial projections that are more current.

To be clear:

I am not *for* this specifically, although I think the advantages of rail over airtravel are enough to make me want to spend a bit more on rail capacity for transportation than simply throwing more money into freeways, airports, planes and so forth, just because that is what we have always done.

Rail can be built to go straight into the center of a city, without regards to air travel corridors, and they sure don't charge you by the bag to travel, since trains are pretty much built to haul heavy things. A dedicated passenger rail line would thus offer a benefit of diversifying transportation options.

There appear to be arguments for and against, and I do find the arguments for spending dollars on rail transit a bit more compelling than "more of the same" at the moment.

[Homeland Security]

I'm sure that having a Dem accomplish this is very important to you. Go Go Team Red!

I agree, centrists have completely vacated the GOP which is, I hope, an important step in the eventual collapse of the party. Let the social retrogrades form their own party, or failing that, let them have the corpse of the GOP and let's see what the fiscal concervatives/centrists can put together.

The fiscal conservatives/centrists will end up as the leading coalition in the Democratic Party after the GOP declines into irrelevance as a white nationalist party and the progressives/socialists split off from the Democrats to form the new second party.

[TSA]

I have not, nor have I looked for such a study. Kudos to you for providing the study, when asked, I appreciate it.

I would assume the rail authority has done some financial projections that are more current.

To be clear:

I am not *for* this specifically, although I think the advantages of rail over airtravel are enough to make me want to spend a bit more on rail capacity for transportation than simply throwing more money into freeways, airports, planes and so forth, just because that is what we have always done.

Rail can be built to go straight into the center of a city, without regards to air travel corridors, and they sure don't charge you by the bag to travel, since trains are pretty much built to haul heavy things. A dedicated passenger rail line would thus offer a benefit of diversifying transportation options.

There appear to be arguments for and against, and I do find the arguments for spending dollars on rail transit a bit more compelling than "more of the same" at the moment.

Don't get me wrong, I love trains. I take the train from N.County San Diego down to Petco park almost every weekend. I don't like the idea of spending billions and billions of dollars to zip around from Palmdale to Bakersfield.

I've heard rumors about a possible train from Orange County to Vegas, using the old freight tracks. Now that is something I could get behind as the drive back from Vegas to CA is a bitch.

[boutons_deux]

(regional) rail transport is another huge area where Old Europe with its Eurostar, channel tunnel train, French TGV, etc has US left way behind. That happens when for-profit transport/fuel corporations buy influence to block competitors, like Southwest did to block Texas TGV.

[TeyshaBlue]

lol
The US is currently #1 in freight tonnage, just ahead of China. Ye Olde Europe is a distant 5th, with about 13% of the US tonnage.

Europe, with it's comparatively underdeveloped roadways, do carry more passengers. If only they had an Interstate System....

[RandomGuy]

The fiscal conservatives/centrists will end up as the leading coalition in the Democratic Party after the GOP declines into irrelevance as a white nationalist party and the progressives/socialists split off from the Democrats to form the new second party.

I can see that happening.

I think the fiscals are moving into the Dems now, taking them to the center.

[RandomGuy]

Don't get me wrong, I love trains. I take the train from N.County San Diego down to Petco park almost every weekend. I don't like the idea of spending billions and billions of dollars to zip around from Palmdale to Bakersfield.

I've heard rumors about a possible train from Orange County to Vegas, using the old freight tracks. Now that is something I could get behind as the drive back from Vegas to CA is a bitch.

We've spent billions and billions in subsidized roads an airports to be able to zip around (as much as traffic in some cities zips)

Thing is that we have been underinvesting in transportation of all kinds for about 20 years now, and are beginning to have to pay the piper for that.

Traffic in LA and Austin, the collapse of bridges, and airport congestion, are simply the canary in the coalmine.

THere were people who questioned the buildign of the freeway system as a boondoggle at the time Eisenhower built his freeway system.


The initial cost estimate for the system was $25 billion over 12 years; it ended up costing $114 billion (adjusted for inflation, $425 billion in 2006 dollars[4]) and took 35 years
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System

The freeways that enable the commerce we all depend on went over time and over budget, and were opposed by the same language as is being used in teh "scam".

THere is a reason why I tend to treat such concerns with some large amount of skepticism. Benefits of such projects don't manifest themselves in a readily apparent fashion, and the costs are easy targets for people who can't think of things in complex ways.

[RandomGuy]

lol
The US is currently #1 in freight tonnage, just ahead of China. Ye Olde Europe is a distant 5th, with about 13% of the US tonnage.

Europe, with it's comparatively underdeveloped roadways, do carry more passengers. If only they had an Interstate System....

Germany does. They just tax the shit out of gasoline to build and maintain it. We subsidize ours.

Perhaps Nono has a point after all....

[TeyshaBlue]

Germany is certainly the European outlier.:lol

[Wild Cobra]

Germany does. They just tax the shit out of gasoline to build and maintain it. We subsidize ours.

Perhaps Nono has a point after all....

No idea what it is today, but when I lived in Germany, the tax was DM 1.01/liter. That was about $2.50/gal. I was there from '86 to '92.

[Th'Pusher]

We've spent billions and billions in subsidized roads an airports to be able to zip around (as much as traffic in some cities zips)

Thing is that we have been underinvesting in transportation of all kinds for about 20 years now, and are beginning to have to pay the piper for that.

Traffic in LA and Austin, the collapse of bridges, and airport congestion, are simply the canary in the coalmine.

THere were people who questioned the buildign of the freeway system as a boondoggle at the time Eisenhower built his freeway system.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System

The freeways that enable the commerce we all depend on went over time and over budget, and were opposed by the same language as is being used in teh "scam".

THere is a reason why I tend to treat such concerns with some large amount of skepticism. Benefits of such projects don't manifest themselves in a readily apparent fashion, and the costs are easy targets for people who can't think of things in complex ways.

This is a nice post :tu

And the bold is particularly descriptive of TSA among other regular posters...

[johnsmith]

Well, other than the fact that RG's main complaint over nuclear power is the cost of construction.

[coyotes_geek]

100 million....yikes...who was it?

Some joint venture. Zachary & Parsons being the big names.

[TSA]

This is a nice post :tu

And the bold is particularly descriptive of TSA among other regular posters...

The butthurt runs deep.

I just linked the most unbiased comprehensive study you'll find on this high speed train.

Prove me wrong on this, PM your daddy Fuzzy if you need help.

Always funny when someone from out of state knows what is really going on.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Germany is certainly the European outlier.:lol

Sure but at the same time it makes a good case study.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The butthurt runs deep.

I just linked the most unbiased comprehensive study you'll find on this high speed train.

Prove me wrong on this, PM your daddy Fuzzy if you need help.

Always funny when someone from out of state knows what is really going on.

Hung up on me much?

:lol unbiased
:lol comprehensive

[TSA]

The link is public fuzzy, you too can read it.

[Th'Pusher]

The butthurt runs deep.

I just linked the most unbiased comprehensive study you'll find on this high speed train.

Prove me wrong on this, PM your daddy Fuzzy if you need help.

Always funny when someone from out of state knows what is really going on.

:lol butthurt. God bless you are a stupid human being.

1. Bobafet (troll)
2a. WC
2b. TSA

Smarter than the troll, but likely not the person behind the troll and a little smarter than WC, but still stupid as fuck. :tu

[TSA]

Would you like to discuss the report or just throw insults?

[Th'Pusher]

Would you like to discuss the report or just throw insults?
Tough decision tbh. Discuss the 16 year old study that I didn't bother to look at or throw insults? Can I get back to you on that?

[TSA]

You don't bring much to the table these days.

[RandomGuy]

Well, other than the fact that RG's main complaint over nuclear power is the cost of construction.

Has been. Lots of promising new technologies have popped up that would make that a lot cheaper.

New technologies have changed the calculus for me.

[RandomGuy]

Positive benefits of high-speed rail:

Less reliance on airports and roads.
Increased real estate values near stations, with the attendant growth in population.
Businesses able to hire from a wider geographic area for talent.
Businesses able to move to areas economically unfeasible.
Workers able to afford housing father from work.

FWIW, this is what I came up with off the top of my head. Basically it is the kind of hard to define economic synergy that comes with any transportation infrastructure spending.

[TSA]

http://www.dailynews.com/opinion/20140211/new-plan-same-problems-for-california-bullet-train-editorial

The people in charge of high-speed rail in California put out a new business plan last week. New-ish, anyway. Gov. Jerry Brown’s pet project, the one everybody calls the $69 billion bullet train or the $68 billion bullet train? The estimated construction cost has shrunk — to $67 billion.

To be precise, the estimated cost to build the route linking the Los Angeles and San Francisco areas is down from $68.4 billion in the previous business plan to $67.6 billion now, mainly because of lower inflation.




Not much of a change. Which is the story of this fresh snapshot of where the California High-Speed Rail Authority thinks it stands: Some numbers are up, others down, but nothing here makes the proposal any less wasteful and speculative than it has appeared since voters discovered the truth about what they set in motion.

The business plan’s forecasts contain some sort-of-good news: Those construction costs are down a bit ($800 million is a bit when seen next to $67.6 billion). More riders are expected, and fares are estimated to be lower than in the 2012 plan.




And it includes some sort-of-bad news: Although there might be more riders, they’d be taking shorter trips than once thought, not the 200-mph express trips from L.A. to the Bay Area that gave the idea its futuristic charm. More riders will mean more trains and higher overall operating costs, up about 14 percent in the period from 2022 to 2060. And lower fares would mean the system would generate about 10 percent less revenue in 2040.

Operating costs up, revenue down. Yet the High-Speed Rail Authority still claims the bullet train will sustain itself and even become such an attractive financial proposition that private investors will clamber aboard.




Don’t forget how much these plans have changed since California voters passed Proposition 1A in 2008. Notwithstanding last week’s adjustments, the price tag is higher and the construction timeline longer even though the route is shorter, the ticket prices are higher and ridership projection is lower, and the legal and environmental obstacles are towering.

Forget private investors down the line if Brown and the rail authority can’t nail down the financing now. The failure to do so has put bond money and federal help in jeopardy.




The new business plan notes the bullet train “is facing — and will continue to face — many challenges.” Another thing that hasn’t changed much.

The plan is up for public comment for 60 days before going to the Legislature. Take advantage (via hsr.ca.gov). Tell the state its plans still don’t add up.

[TSA]

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/02/jerry-brown-california-high-speed-train-103266.html#.Uvv-21iYa71

[TSA]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/25/california-high-court-asked-to-take-up-high-speed-rail/

[boutons_deux]

Pew: What If The Libertarian Movement Doesn't Really Exist?


That was the question posed by the Pew Research Center in a Monday blog post (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/08/25/in-search-of-libertarians/). And their findings could create some skepticism about whether there actually is any libertarian movement to speak of.

"There are still many Americans who do not have a clear sense of what 'libertarian' means," Pew's Jocelyn Kiley wrote, "and our surveys find that, on many issues, the views among people who call themselves libertarian do not differ much from those of the overall public."

Libertarians weremore likely than the general U.S. population to say that it is better for the United States to have an active role in world affairs, according to the Center.

They even favored stop-and-frisk -- the controversial policing tactic -- a touch more than the average American, despite civil rights supposedly being one of the cornerstones of the libertarian movement.

Pew dug further into the numbers by looking back at its political typology report (http://www.people-press.org/2014/06/26/the-political-typology-beyond-red-vs-blue/) from June. Tellingly, out of the seven typologies that Pew identified within U.S. politics, "none closely resembled libertarians, and, in fact, self-described libertarians can be found in all seven," Kiley wrote. In some of the early versions of the report, there was a group that looked like libertarians. They made up about 5 percent of the U.S. population.

That group was later discarded under Pew's methodology, in part because the sample size was too small. But even that group was not a perfect manifestation of libertarians, Kiley noted.

"Many members of this group diverge from libertarian thinking on key issues," she wrote, "including about half who say affirmative action is a good thing and that stricter environmental laws are worth the cost."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/pew-research-libertarian-study