Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (601255)	2/20/2011 1:05:22 PM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 1571608

lol Yes. AMTRAK has been such a stunning success....lol How did you get to be as stupid as you are?

To: tejek who wrote (601255)	2/20/2011 1:23:40 PM
From: Brumar89	3 Recommendations Respond to of 1571608

If the planes are full between Chicago and St. Louis, so then will be HSR. Think about it. Air flights are flexible, they can add flights or cut flights to respond to changes in demand. Airlines always shoot for full flights, so you're always going to see full flights. And HSR will never compete with flight on speed or cost - barring subsidization. you haven't met a new idea that you could ever like. Passenger rail is NOT a new idea, its 150+ years old. If it was a GOOD idea, it wouldn't need billions from the government to build the lines. And if it was a good idea, you backwards socialists probably wouldn't like it.

To: tejek who wrote (601255)	2/20/2011 2:17:55 PM
From: i-node	3 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571608

>> Obama isn't pushing to connect Fargo with Rapid City.....he's pushing in corridors where highway and/or plane travel is heaviest. Yeah, like Little Rock to Dallas and Tulsa to OKC? While leaving out LA-Vegas? I'm really tired of this idiot in the WH squandering the futures of my kids and grandkids. The first trillion he wasted was unconscionable. Now, it is trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see, and this fool wants to blow money on transportation facilities the country does not need and does not want. God, I'll be glad when that bastard is voted out.

To: tejek who wrote (601255)	2/21/2011 9:40:26 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1571608

If the planes are full between Chicago and St. Louis, so then will be HSR. That doesn't logically follow. Planes are flexible, you need the airports at both locations, and aircraft to service the route, but if the route doesn't fill all the planes scheduled for it, they airlines will shift them to other routes. Rail doesn't just need the stations and rolling stock, you have to specifically lay out all the rail between the two locations. If a route doesn't get as much use as expected the passenger miles per dollar invested in setting up that route go down. Also aircraft are faster, even with time for security checkpoints the trip takes less for many of the longer routes (while on the shorter routes trains compete with cars). It might makes sense for some routes. The north east corridor (if it would actually be high speed rail, rather than "just slightly faster rail) in particular, maybe connecting CA's larger cities. But for most locations it doesn't make sense with our population density and existing interstate highway system. (China not only has higher population density, and a clustering of its large cities that fits rail travel better, it also has a lot less highway and air infrastructure and equipment per person.) The plan isn't for Fargo to Rapid City, but it does have a a Cleveland-Columbus-Cincinnati-Indianapolis corridor, a connection from Buffalo to Albany, one from New Orleans to Meridian Mississippi to Birmingham to Atlanta (with only the last being a fairly major city). fra.dot.gov and fra.dot.gov are also questionable. LA to Vegas might possibly make sense, but isn't included in the initial list of routes.