Texans Against High-Speed Rail
 

Texans Against High-Speed Rail | Texans Against High-Speed Rail. Bad for Property Owners. Bad for Tax Payers. Bad for Texas.

There is a group that wants to stop a bullet train connecting Dallas to Houston from being built.
210 mph, it will cover the distance of 200 miles in @ 90 minutes.
In the interest of being carfree/carlight, this train seems like a big help.
What y"all think...?
http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=502654

+ + + + 1 ^ ^ ^ ^

The group probably represents the people who own the roadside services which includes fast food garbage.

I am old enough to remember the elaborate processes and court hearings that allowed the train transportation system to shut down. Shouldn't the problems that killed most of the nations train transportation systems be fixed.... before government buys into this scheme???

Follow the money.

I would have to do a lot more research of both sides before I can say how I feel about this project. It looks like one problem they have is the same one we have in California. That problem is no ROW agreement. The advantage they do have is they are going from and to places people really go to and from. Unlike in my state where they want to build a train that goes from no place special to heck no I don't want to go there.

The real problem may be forcing people to give up property rights to create a ROW.

Firsthand Look at High-Speed Train Planned for Texas | NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth

We made the decision a long time ago to invest in the interstate highway system and the automobile at the expense of rail. It's hard to go back.

Of course Texans don't want to give up their "way of life", which last I observed included very large air-conditioned homes and use of an F350 to go everywhere. They will cling to their "way of life" as will many Americans, until it turns into a living hell of climate change - from mosquito born disease, floods, drought, super tornadoes, etc. Then they will of course expect disaster relief from the government. Nothing new here.. just don't challenge their right to "live free or die", lol.

:thumb:

In the 1950s Eisenhower shifted funds supporting the (passenger) railroads over into highway construction and the passenger railways went to hell thereafter.

+ + + 1 ^ ^ ^

That isn't exactly how it looked in the 1950's!!!!! What people saw as a result of that highways system was a flood of interstate trade. It was NOT about "cars". Farmers saw prices for their products rise... and at the same time... consumers saw prices for food drop in the stores. The highway system took the control over shipping out of the hands of the few... and put travel and market forces into the hands of a free nations population.

So.... the plan would be to plow-up Eisenhower's Interstate Highways? Sounds like a pretty time consuming and costly plan to me.

I think everyone has caught on. Trains have a place. But that place isn't economical or even viable except where we have very dense areas of populations. This is nothing more than an old late 19th century political maneuver that moves federal dollars into the hands of party loyalist. Kick-back funds for "projects"..... that turn out to be nothing more than a paperwork shuffle of studies, property leases, and lost money.

Wow. I read a lot of car-hate posts here. But this post seems to REEK of hatred for our Texas friends. You appear to have a problem.

Much of this is right, but don't criticize "living free." It doesn't take much analysis to figure out the ideology of freedom has been co-opted in the interest of subjugating people to marketing and economic pressures. If you've bought into the belief that responding to marketing and economic pressure is not the opposite of freedom, you've become one of them.

Why was this effect anything more than another fiscal stimulus project. Anything that involves spending has a fiscal stimulus effect on the economy. Every form of consumer waste, trade in illegal drugs and other contraband, ISIS terror, and anything else that causes people to spend money creates fiscal stimulus. The money circulates and makes people happy. That doesn't mean any of it is truly good for anything except generating monetary transfers.

You can't be serious! Fiscal stimulus project**********? You have to be kidding! Either that or you're posting from some European nation.... and/or have no knowledge of America... or American history.

Maybe... you would enjoy reading a little bit about how Eisenhower got his idea for an National Interstate System. You see when Ike was just a Lt in the Army Corp of Engineers..........

(spoiler alert) The Army excursion across America by road... traveled over 10 hours a days for 56 days.

No. That isn't true. Any politician that tells you that... is picking your pocket. Government spending.... is like making noise in the kitchen. No guarantee of a fine dinner to follow... could just be kids playing.

And... throwing a hook into the water doesn't put fish on the dinner table either. MOST modern government spending projects do NOTHING to help provide a better or healthier economy.

Spending money on roads/highways generates revenues and jobs. People use the money to buy cars and fuel. They drive around and wear out the roads to generate more road-spending that creates more jobs and revenues to buy new cars. It's fiscal stimulus.

Unfortunately they fund a lot of driving and tree-removal to build and widen roads for all the driving.

Your post reminds me of an awful old 1950's joke about a blonde that thought she had money.... because she still had checks in her checkbook.

Printing money does NOT create wealth (it actually does just the opposite). Taking money from your brother... and giving it to your sister does NOT create wealth. Taking your brothers money away from your sister, and paying someone to do something that doesn't need done.... DOES NOT CREATE WEALTH.

The Interstate Highway System made America wealthier. It allowed market forces to work for people. Those hardworking people created wealth through the sweat of their efforts. Products that previously could never be shipped to market... were. And the shipping prices for many (previously rail shippable) products plummeted.

You really have no idea how markets and economy's work.... not that that is surprising.... as many people really don't. It is similar to the old saying: Teach a man to fish.... you feed him for life. Give a man a fish... and you create a lifelong welfare dependent.

Read "Railroaded" by Richard White. I see nothing that would prevent this from happening again. Everyone points to Europe and their railway system. Well, all of Europe would fit east of the Mississippi.

No, excluding the western portion of Russia. Ya got me.

However I believe most of Russa is in Asia only a small part is considered Europe. At least that is what we have been told.

What's your point?

This is about Eminent Domain. As a north Texan I would love to see this high speed rail project happen, but I empathize with land owners who will be "obliged" to give up a chunk of their properties to support the new rail line.

When it comes to railways, the fact that part of Russia is in Europe and another part is in Asia is a matter of little importance, as Europe and Asia are connected by rail.

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yiwu%E...d_railway_line

Funny how they always seem to work such problems out when a major highway project is in the works.

http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/tra...le3654287.html

It doesn't look like a very good value to me, $10B for 240 miles of track ($41M/mile) to connect 2 cities. How many possible commuters would use it daily?