Major NYT piece on Cal HSR Plans

RickRackstop wrote:Actually a Chevy suburban is terrific for running errends, particularly full size sheets of sheet rock or plywood. My wife's VW cabriolet is about useless as grocery getter. What we need in this country is the right to drive what we think we need without any interference. Its called freedom.

I dont think anyones trying to take away your freedom to drive what you like , just you will pay more to drive a bigger vechicle (wether it be through gas tax or tolls or whatever ) . for what its worth i own a van , a truck , and 3 motorcycles .
not having decent public transport options limits your choice , therefore limiting your freedom .

2nd trick op , our entire country could probably be classed as rural . ( only one city , wellington has anything like European population density , due to topography ) . i live in a small town , public transport is severly limited .

I grew up in California. I've been watching their budget cycle and taxation issues from afar for a while.

All I am going to ask in all that hope is:

Whither the funding?

RickRackstop wrote:Actually a Chevy suburban is terrific for running errends, particularly full size sheets of sheet rock or plywood. My wife's VW cabriolet is about useless as grocery getter. What we need in this country is the right to drive what we think we need without any interference. Its called freedom.

Why not follow the China model and tax SUVs like the Suburban at a much, much higher rate than small hybrid cars and use these fees to subsidize the cost of public transportation projects such as CASHR? That way having a Suburban will be even cooler because it is exclusive.

Why don't we have those that want this project cough up the $35,000 a year to fund it while those that don't will have to provide their own transportation. Its only fair.

The problem is that we subsidize highways and air travel heavily, while we need to radically reduce our carbon emissions and we are funding our enemies whose funding depends on oil. I wouldn't say that driving a big car like a suburban is unpatriot, but I do think that people who keep their carbon footprint small are more patriotic as our soldiers are having to die because of our oil habit and our citizens are attacked by people who fund their efforts with their petrodollars (not to mention Russia's petro economy).

So I challenge you to think more patriotically.

Why don't we have those that want police protection and the fire department cough up the $35,000 a year to fund it while those that don't will have their guns and the backyard garden hose. Its only fair.

*Nobody is going to take your SUV away- but having suburban moms driving them around (driver only in most cases) is unsustainable, and perverse. HSR, as well as a balanced transportation system, is a public service- that benefits everyone, including rural residents- after all, with more people moving back to revitalized urban centers and inner suburbs, there will be fewer people and cleaner air in the countryside.

David Benton wrote:

not having decent public transport options limits your choice, therefore limiting your freedom .

2nd trick op , our entire country could probably be classed as rural . (only one city , wellington has anything like European population density , due to topography ) . i live in a small town , public transport is severly limited .

That's a point I readily acknowledge, but New Zealand is relatively small, most of it is close to tidewater, and I doubt that much of it is as unsuited to public transportation as Nebraska, perhaps one-half of the land mass of California, or large portions of Australia and Canada. And my original point was simply that public transportation, if it's designed and planned by a central agency a great distance removed (both physically and literally!) from the folks who actually have to use it, is more likely to turn into a barrel of pork.

But to put a positive spin back onto this discussion, the fuel-driven component of the market-driven equation by which a free society is supposed to allocate its economic resources has changed substantially in favor of further concentration of those resources where it can be demographically justifed. Private entrepreneurs are unwilling to commit large sums of capital to fixed assets because of the regrettable lack of respect shown them during the last era of faith in central planning, but public-sector agencies should still be able to identify those areas where effective utilization of the investment is more likely. And the less centralized the decision-making process, the better.

And a substantial portion of our economic activity, quite a bit of it in the most basic sector of all -- agriculture -- will remain geared to a lower population density, where public transportation simply isn't workable and refinement of a system geared to private vehicles, possibly with a small, very-localized backup for those truly unable to drive, is a better answer.

2nd trick op wrote: Private entrepreneurs are unwilling to commit large sums of capital to fixed assets because of the regrettable lack of respect shown them during the last era of faith in central planning,

Or, they build a line, it's successful, and Amtrak tries to push their way onto it, or the government builds a parallel line to compete with it. I suspect a lot of folks out there really DID pay attention to the history of the NYC subway, where success was rewarded by the city competing against you and running you out of business...

Also, look at the Texas TGV, FOX, etc. It's amazing any private firms even return phone calls to the government w.r.t. HSR - the states and feds have screwed them so many times over the years.

It's a wonder DessertXpress is getting anywhere, and I suspect it's only because for so long the feds have been totally unable to come up with ANYTHING along the route that made sense. And IMHO, they're looking to ultimately sell the line to Cali for a good profit, anyway - it's being design to be compatible with the Cali HSR (if that ever gets built - it's been a decade plus of hype now, hell, look at the Caltrain electrification...)

As for big cars / small cars, hey I wish Fiat lucky attempting to sell the 500 in the US, but honestly, unless it's Toyota reliable or better and the dealers aren't jerks, they've got no chance. Too many people remember Fiat's last few attempts at automobiles that were foisted on an unsuspecting public here, not to mention the parts availability. In this day and age "it's on the boat and we'll get it....eventually...." doesn't cut it when the car's in the shop. And selling low powered, low feature, low performance small cars in the US has always been a loser. Look how many Mini Cooper S's there are out there, vs the base model...Fiat's in for a rude awakening when they start selling stuff here. I given 'em 5 years, tops, before they go running back to Italy with their tail between their legs. US buyers demand 100,000+ trouble free miles, minimum, today.

You never know...I never thought I'd see these on American roads, yet now I see 'em all the time!

Personally, my Subaru Legacy is the perfect size for me. But as much as I like my car, I like keeping the miles off it and avoiding congested areas if I can. I never drive into the city - I always choose the train when I can!

Matt Johnson wrote:You never know...I never thought I'd see these on American roads, yet now I see 'em all the time!

I've seen a few Smarts. Frankly, for the cost and the mileage they get, they're not all that 'smart'. A diesel VW gets better mileage, and is a real car, too.

Creepy thing? Wheelbase is only 2 inches more than my Harley...

Nasadowsk wrote:I've seen a few Smarts. Frankly, for the cost and the mileage they get, they're not all that 'smart'. A diesel VW gets better mileage, and is a real car, too.

Agree, plus they require premium fuel! Better to buy a Yaris or something and get almost as good mileage on regular gas! (Or, indeed, a diesel Jetta!)

John Ruskin once opined:

“There is hardly anything in the world that some man cannot make a little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who consider price only are this man's lawful prey.”

And the schlockmeisters who think they drive our pop culture have worked hard to create a similar market/societal niche which holds a deep-seated prejudice against the traditional corporate structure and anything it produces. The auto industry's regular flip-flops, caused by irreconcilable differences between a desire for some degree of personal transportation with "status" versus its false public persona of paying lip service to the environmental/countercultural movement which first sprang up in the early 1970's, is largely responsible for its present sorry state.

And the rail industry, now concentrated in a much smaller number of very large players, unable to shield its fixed plant, and forced to acknowledge, and eventually co-operate with what is now apparent as a growing trend toward concentration of centralized state power, is understandably afraid of being driven down the same path.

The private freight rail industry should be taking a much harder look at its perceived "bunker mentality" and begin investigating, to cite one example, some of the milder options allowing "open access", lest a continued swing toward the "new populism" results in harsher, more simplistic measures which could do much greater damage.

What is most needed to head off this threat is both decentralization and innovation --- new trends, services and forms of marketing which can forestall the growing public perception that groups of wealthy, predominately older white male idlers make most of the decisons which affect our daily lives. Unfortunately, that perception is likely to be more heavily sold if the present economic structure continues to melt down.