-
There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.
high speed rail fail
- Thread starter enki
- Start date
Climber
Well-known member
We should have High Speed Rail....but not at the cost that it's going to end up being for this project. I predict greater than $150 Billion before it's done, more likely over $200 Billion.
There is a shitload of money for the pigs that the trough to consume, they've all already lined up and are just waiting to slurp up their fat from this.
Then there is going to be all of the fuck-ups, when companies are chosen for their political connections rather than their ability to do it well, and do it right, fuckups like the ones on the Bay Bridge are guaranteed to happen.
So while I agree with you that we should have one, California can't afford to build the one with the current setup. Too many fingers in the cake getting 'theirs'.
The problem is that by your measure we can’t afford to build anything. It’s not that I disagree with your sentiment, I just question what can be done about the “current setup” and if it is just the new reality. It isn’t just public projects that cost a lot more than they used to, and it isn’t just corrupt bureaucrats taking a piece of the pie.
Last edited:
once you start adding stops, the whole "high speed" part largely goes away
Didn’t that go away with blending the rails with other trains?
I don't think I've added any stops. They wouldn't build it without stopping in SJ. I've simply deleted everything south of SJ.
LA can have their own line to Vegas.
Joining NorCal and SoCal isn't justified, IMO
Climber
Well-known member
The term 'more than they used to' is not really the issue here, of course things cost more than they used to, wages are higher, material costs are higher, transportation costs are higher, etc.
It's not that, it's the exploding budgets, how much 'fat' gets paid out and how shitty the jobs are done because the contractors know that they'll never be held accountable for their fuck-ups.
It's not the (reasonable) cost that I object to, and quite frankly I don't think anybody else would object to a well built high speed rail built at a reasonable, by todays reality, amount. It's all of the corruption, graft and incompetency that comes to play with these enormous projects by the kinds of vultures they attract. It's been repeatedly called a boondoggle for very good reason, the public simply does not want to pay 4 times (or more) than the project is worth, there are far better uses for the money than to fatten a bunch of greedy assholes bank accounts.
afm199
Well-known member
The sad truth about gubmint contracts is that change orders are built in and "TBD" is an accepted phrase in plans and bids. (To be determined).
When you bid on one, it is pretty typically done with the knowledge that you make your money on the change orders.
When you bid on one, it is pretty typically done with the knowledge that you make your money on the change orders.
Climber
Well-known member
I've seen that in action many times when I was in the defense industry working for contractors. I left the industry for exactly that kind of shit that was rampant back in the early 90's.
sadly funny.
All the more reason to cut california off at the 36.45’ N lattitude.
Give the rest to Arizona so they can fight over Lake Mead and the Colorado and we can be done with high speed rail once and for all.
Last edited:
Eldritch
is insensitive
This seems to me to be true for all large, "prevailing wage" jobs.
tuxumino
Purrfect
Kinda like downtown Backo, Fresno not so much.
The issue is risk. Nobody wants to make a fixed cost bid when there is significant chance something could go wrong and bankrupt you. Its always been that way, but has increased accordingly with complexity
Umm missed my point. Also as for eminent domain. It can be as bad here as there, but for different reasons. Ask people at the border how it turned out for them when Bush 2.0 decided to build a wall in certain parts.
msethhunter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2011
- Location
- SoCal
- Moto(s)
- '98 VTR1000F, she's a fatty! '89 YSR 50 with a 150, she said "it's so cute!"
- Name
- Mikey
This project needs to be killed. I've said it before, when an airline ticket costs less, and takes less time, this project is DOA. The large majority of people who make the trip are business people who need it fast, and yesterday. They aren't booking these trips because they want to go get some Pho from the bay. They are doing it because they need to be there now to close a deal. They either charter (which I used to do), or they fly the airlines (which I do now). They typically fly with zero checked bags, and just need a quick ride somewhere, in a suit, with a brief case and a laptop. The large majority of them also have status with their preferred airline. They aren't going to give that up.
DTM74
It's not my fault...
Snaggy
New member
What I think is the stupidest? Building along the 99 corridor is going to make 300 miles of 99 even worse than it already is, probably for the rest of my life.
Many thousands of life years are going to be wasted in traffic, and billions of dollars spent on just keeping 99 open. This highway just cant handle that kind of traffic safely. My area alone had an overpass closed when a truck hauling heavy equipment damaged it. The poxed exit tips trucks regularly including the tanker that burned McDonald’s. We get crashes here all the time now.
Hard to imagine the benefits are going to offset the horror for decades. Did they even budget that?
Many thousands of life years are going to be wasted in traffic, and billions of dollars spent on just keeping 99 open. This highway just cant handle that kind of traffic safely. My area alone had an overpass closed when a truck hauling heavy equipment damaged it. The poxed exit tips trucks regularly including the tanker that burned McDonald’s. We get crashes here all the time now.
Hard to imagine the benefits are going to offset the horror for decades. Did they even budget that?
GAJ
Well-known member
High Speed rail has always been a fail, anyone could see that, just like the ill conceived SMART train up here in Sonoma/Marin.
Editorial on its collosal failure here but you just know it will keep running and draining money to service the 550 rush hours riders per day because it "feels" good. Never mind that the SMART trains are diesel!
"The Press Democrat reported that SMART took 723,000 riders in its first year of operation.
That sounds like a lot, doesn’t it? It isn’t.
By comparison, average annual ridership for the 25 other commuter rail transit systems was more than 19 million riders in 2017."
https://www.pressdemocrat.com/opinion/8956534-181/close-to-home-smart-still
Editorial on its collosal failure here but you just know it will keep running and draining money to service the 550 rush hours riders per day because it "feels" good. Never mind that the SMART trains are diesel!
"The Press Democrat reported that SMART took 723,000 riders in its first year of operation.
That sounds like a lot, doesn’t it? It isn’t.
By comparison, average annual ridership for the 25 other commuter rail transit systems was more than 19 million riders in 2017."
https://www.pressdemocrat.com/opinion/8956534-181/close-to-home-smart-still