Would you ride the "Sin Express"?

[SzczerbiakManiac]

Evidently (http://www.lvrj.com/news/40074502.html) there are competing plans for rail lines between Anaheim (or LA, depending on which part of the article is referenced) and Las Vegas. Now I'd rather have an LA to LV line, but any good rail transport between here and Vegas sounds like a good idea to me. For years I have wondered why one doesn't already exist. So Cal has a lot of people who take quick excursions to Sin City to part with some of their hard earned money. Why* not make getting from one place to the other faster, cheaper, and less of a hassle than plane travel?

This just kills me though:"Tell me how spending $8 billion in this bill to have a high-speed rail line between Los Angeles and Las Vegas is going to help the construction worker in my district," said House Republican leader John Boehner, whose district is just north of Cincinnati.So I guess Obama is not allowed to budget any constructions projects that fall outside of the Cincinnati city limits? WTF?


*Yes, I am still a Libertarian. I'm not suggesting the government spend money to do this, but it seems like a no-brainer for private enterprise. I would think it would make Big Bucks once the cost of construction has been paid for over time.

[Not Afraid]

I'd rather be able to get to Santa Monica or other Westside locals.

[BarTopDancer]

Well, I doubt we're ever going to see that damn train. But construction can help the economey... Let's use Caterpillar as an example they (are my old company's largest client...and as I mentioned elsewhere, their slow down directly effected us.)

Construction work uses Caterpillar equipment. Caterpillar is a company that has been seriously hit by the downturn in building and construction. CAT lays people off and they aren't hiring. In turn, companies like my old one have a slowdown in work, as they are no longer needed to relocate employees. Employees aren't being relocated, therefore movers, storage facilities and real estate agents aren't getting work. These companies have to start letting people go. Since those people no longer have income to spend, and stop going going out, and buying cars.

Now Toyota or Honda (or Ford, Chevy, etc...) start letting people go. Cars aren't being made, so the suppliers of parts (steel, rubber, electronics) have a slowdown, start laying people off and stop hiring.

In turn, companies like my old one have a slowdown in work, as they are no longer needed to relocate employees for companies like Toyota and Honda. Employees aren't being relocated, therefore movers, storage facilities and real estate agents aren't getting work. These companies have to start letting people go... later, rinse, repeat.

The rail line in CA can help the construction worker in CT through the trickle down effect. When CAT starts hiring people, they hire all over. People start moving, people start making money, they want things requiring construction.

[Ghoulish Delight]

It would of course depend on what ticket pricing ended up being, but I'd most assuredly put a train like that high on my list of options for getting to Vegas, the few times I do actually make it there. With it starting in Anaheim, we could walk to the Orange station, ride for 1 stop and make it to Vegas without ever getting in a car. That would be quite nice.

I've long suspected that the biggest hurdle to the plan has been cities like Victorville, Barstow, and Baker. Any route would surely need to pass through one or all of those cities. And all of them, I imagine, depend pretty heavily on the auto traffic along the 15 heading in and out of Vegas. So I wouldn't suppose they've been particularly helpful in the area of granting the rights to lay tracks.

[JWBear]

The Vegas version of "sin" doesn't intrest me all that much. I'd rather see a high-speed train from LA to San Francisco.

[Ghoulish Delight]

This just kills me though:So I guess Obama is not allowed to budget any constructions projects that fall outside of the Cincinnati city limits? WTF?


It's the same faulty logic used by the people who say, "Why should I, as someone who's owned their home without getting myself a bad mortgage that I can't afford, pay for the mistakes of people who made bad decisions on their homes."

Umm, gee, maybe because if we take a few billion dollars (which, divided across all tax payers, is MAYBE $1000/person) and spend it correctly, the value of YOUR home won't continue to drop by tens of thousands of dollars. The city and state YOU live in will be able to continue collecting property taxes from more people instead of losing it as people forclose, forcing them to raise YOUR property taxes. People can afford to both live in their homes and purchase things, stemming the recession and possibly preserving YOUR jobs.

I'm not saying there's a gurantee that's going to happen, but geebus the "I shouldn't have to pay for their mistakes," is such a blind, infantile response. As if they live in the vacuum and the bucketloads of foreclosures down the street has nothing to do with them whatsoever.

Sure we'd all have preferred that the idiots didn't put themselves in that situation to begin with, and we'd all prefer to not have to bail them out, but if the price for bailing them out hurts MY bottom line, then yes, I consider it a perfectly reasonable move to invest some tax dollars to salvage the value of my investment.

[Ghoulish Delight]

The Vegas version of "sin" doesn't intrest me all that much. I'd rather see a high-speed train from LA to San Francisco.
Agreed. But the SoCal to Vegas version is the smart first step. It's shorter, and would be traveling through far fewer populated areas, thus will need to jump fewer hurdles to get built. If it proves doable and profitable, then LA-SF would be the next logical step.

Plus, that way the LA-SF version will be 2nd generation and they'll have hopefully learned from whatever mistakes they're going to make.

[Stan4dSteph]

It would depend on price, but it's definitely a good alternative.

[BarTopDancer]

Pricing is a factor, but it is a good alternative. I still don't think we're going to see it. I wonder where it would let out in Vegas.

[Andrew]

Also, Boehner is (as usual) talking out his ass. There is no LA-LV high-speed rail in ARRA. There was discussion of adding existing LA-LV high-speed rail plans to ARRA but it did not happen.

[Capt Jack]

Im game, but it should start from san diego, not LA.

:D

[innerSpaceman]

Emminent Domain.


Works like a charm.


Or should.

[Alex]

Building efficient high speed trains will take the steam out of research into teleportation technology.

Therefore I can not support it.

[Snowflake]

The Vegas version of "sin" doesn't intrest me all that much. I'd rather see a high-speed train from LA to San Francisco.

Hear hear!

[Ghoulish Delight]

I don't think I'd trust any teleportation technology that relied on steam anyway, so I'm okay with that.

[JWBear]

SciFi writer Larry Niven wrote a series of short stories (in the 80’s IIRC) about a future where cheap, reliable teleportation is commonplace. His predictions of how it would change our culture are very interesting (“flash mobs” anyone?).

[Betty]

It's the same faulty logic used by the people who say, "Why should I, as someone who's owned their home without getting myself a bad mortgage that I can't afford, pay for the mistakes of people who made bad decisions on their homes."

Umm, gee, maybe because if we take a few billion dollars (which, divided across all tax payers, is MAYBE $1000/person) and spend it correctly, the value of YOUR home won't continue to drop by tens of thousands of dollars. The city and state YOU live in will be able to continue collecting property taxes from more people instead of losing it as people forclose, forcing them to raise YOUR property taxes. People can afford to both live in their homes and purchase things, stemming the recession and possibly preserving YOUR jobs.

I'm not saying there's a gurantee that's going to happen, but geebus the "I shouldn't have to pay for their mistakes," is such a blind, infantile response. As if they live in the vacuum and the bucketloads of foreclosures down the street has nothing to do with them whatsoever.

Sure we'd all have preferred that the idiots didn't put themselves in that situation to begin with, and we'd all prefer to not have to bail them out, but if the price for bailing them out hurts MY bottom line, then yes, I consider it a perfectly reasonable move to invest some tax dollars to salvage the value of my investment.

I hear what you're saying - but at the same time - we didn't buy a home because we couldn't afford it. Not because we couldn't get a loan - but it would have been an ARM. So we continue to rent. Why should I pay for the other person who now gets to keep their home? Yes - I know how it all "trickles down" like happy little pennies jingling their way from the heavens into everyone's homes... And really I don't wish that I would have gone ahead and overpaid for a home with a mortgage that didn't make sense. It just bugs me that if those homeowners get bailed out, I pay for their house which they get to keep and I'm renting.

Would I pay for the sin city train. At least once for the experience of going to Vegas on it. But we don't go to Vegas all that often - or actually at all since my husband quit smoking. (all that casino smoke.) If we head out that direction again it will be for off roading on the way and not for actually going to Vegas.

[alphabassettgrrl]

Absolutely I'd ride the train to Vegas. I love Vegas, but I despise that drive.

[Alex]

I love the drive and I love Vegas (gambling being my only vice).

But if a fast train were available for less than the cost of two tanks of gas (the current fare from the Bay Area and back) I'd probably take it most of the time.

[Kevy Baby]

I hope to ride the Sin Express tonight when I get home.