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 : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (36647)	5/8/2014 4:01:44 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

>> That's why we have so much of it! We don't have much of it because HSR doesn't make economic sense in most areas of this country. Our debt will nearly double in the next ten years. The American People cannot even agree on how to subsist without new debt let alone pay down the existing debt. And you want to blow money on transportation that no one will take advantage of. >> President Lincoln should have gone to the capital markets to build the transcontinental I suppose. If you want to see if you can sell bonds to private investors to do it, backed by private companies, more power to you. If you can find a few billionaires to put their fortunes on the line as was done in the 1860s, go for it. Feel free to use the right-of-way granted by the Federal government. Government bonds (and private debt backed by future profits) jumpstarted the railroad industry at a time when there was no competing mode of transportation. It was a legitimate function of government at that time because it was essential. Today it is not. There is a difference. As a nation, we chose decades ago to develop the Interstate Highway System at great cost. That was our choice; we could have build rail lines instead. That is not what people wanted. So we have what we have today and people don't want high speed rail. No matter how "cool" it is.

To: Road Walker who wrote (36647)	5/8/2014 5:16:21 PM
From: TimF	2 Recommendations Recommended By FJB i-node Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

Not Lincoln. Private railway owners and investors. Like those that built and funded the Great Northern Railway.

To: Road Walker who wrote (36647)

5/8/2014 7:11:23 PM

From: John Koligman

1 Recommendation

Recommended By
gg cox

Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 42652

It's no use arguing, RW, this is the 'cut taxes and let the free market have it's way thread! <ggg>.

Best regards,
John

home

Without the assistance of the U.S. government, railroad construction between 1860 and 1900 would have been greatly curtailed. Building a railroad was an expensive venture. Private banks, fearing the railroad companies would need a long time to pay off their debts, were reluctant to loan money to the companies. To remedy the situation, Congress provided assistance to the railroad companies in the form of land grants. The land grant railroads, receiving millions of acres of public land, sold the land to make money, built their railroads, and contributed to a more rapid settlement of the West. In the end, four out of the five transcontinental railroads were built with help from the federal government.

The following are a map of land Congress turned over to the railroads in the form of land grants and an announcement for the sale of railroad lands. Why do you think Congress made land available to the railroads in the places and configurations shown on the map? What incentives did the Burlington and Missouri River Railroad Company offer to potential land buyers? Why do you think the company chose to use the poster as a marketing device? Do you think it is effective?

The document on the left is from American Landscape and Architectural Design, 1850-1920. The document on the right is from American Time Capsule: Three Centuries of Broadsides. Click on the images below to view a larger image. Use your browser's Back Button to return to this point.