This is SJI’s open forum, where comments on any topic are welcome. What’s on your mind?
47 Comments
I posted this and thesanjoseblog and decided to share it here as well.
I agree with the anti-airport crowd in theory. The price San Jose pays to have an airport where it does is far too high. If you take a step back and ask yourself if an airport belongs in the center of a major city, the answer is clear: of course not. The building up of SJC was a short-sighted attempt to enhance San Jose’s prestige, and based on the business numbers it was doubling down on a bad bet.
However, I’m very much a realist on how this will play out. Supporters of moving the airport seem to underestimate the huge amount of effort it’s going to take to make this happen. First of all, politicians are extremely slow to take any drastic action. Closing or moving SJC is a very big deal, and it could even cost money in the short term if developers want infrastructure built before they’ll consider buying the land.
Second of all, high speed rail (which I agree when completed will be the death of SJC) is projected to take ten years to build. This effort not only hasn’t started, but it isn’t even clear where most of the funds will come from (10B from the bond measure plus 2.25B in federal dollars does not equal 42B). Throw in the government’s track record with big projects and I think a realistic estimate of when we’ll have trains running is 15 to 20 years.
So here’s my humble prediction: SJC will limp along for another 20 years. Please forgive me if I don’t get excited about the prospect of it’s closure.
> Second of all, high speed rail (which I agree when completed will be the death of SJC) is projected to take ten years to build. This effort not only hasn’t started, but it isn’t even clear where most of the funds will come from (10B from the bond measure plus 2.25B in federal dollars does not equal 42B).
Not you too!
Get over it. High speed rail is cloud cuckoo land.
42 billion dollars for a Disneyland ride that doesn’t carry anything but people’s butts?
Most of what gets carried on highways is cargo. Most of what gets carried on railroads is cargo.
Most of what gets carried on airplanes (out of sight, under your feet) is … CARGO.
Or, do you think a twenty-first century economy runs on just iPhones and tofu?
A 42 billion dollar people-butt mover is just plain nuts.
For the record, I was against the HSR bond because I don’t think the state can afford it. However, this is a seemingly rare case where the state and the people to agree on something. I have full faith California will find ways to beg, borrow, and steal the funds for this project.
Now, an honest question: why can’t the trains carry cargo?
I’m sure California industry will routinely be shipping scrap iron, coal, and army tanks to and from LA on the high speed rail and really stimulating the level of business activity.
California will lead the world in how fast it can get a ton of pig iron to consumers in Haight Ashbury.
Hyperbole is fun and all, but that’s not a logical answer. All your examples are for local transport. Amtrak runs freight. Why are you assuming HSR can’t do the same?
I’m asking questions because you’re a bit of an oddity. Most people who don’t support HSR agree the trains would be great, just that the state can’t afford it. You seem to think passenger trains are a poor choice in general, apparently because they won’t carry cargo.
My question isn’t unreasonable. You said yourself passenger planes carry people and cargo. Amtrak carries people and cargo. HSR could carry people and cargo.
Next time I ask an honest question, please give the honest answer. Namely: you don’t have any facts to back up what you’re saying, you’re just making assumptions because you have lots of opinions about how things work in this world and it’s fun to spew them out.
> I’m asking questions because you’re a bit of an oddity. Most people who don’t support HSR agree the trains would be great, just that the state can’t afford it. You seem to think passenger trains are a poor choice in general, apparently because they won’t carry cargo.
Well, if you know what I think, you don’t need to ask me what I think or listen to my answer.
I think high speed rail is a stupid idea because:
A. it is insanely expensive. Before they have even completed the EIR or turned a shovel of dirt, it is ALREADY $43 billion dollars. EVERYONE knows that the final construction cost will be MUCH higher.
What was the initial cost estimate for the “Big Dig” in Boston? What was the final actual cost? Duh?
Even at “only” $43 billion dollars, it will be the most expensive transportation project in the U.S., and only connecting to destinations, and ONLY carrying passegers.
B. High speed rail only carries passengers. Look it up! It’s a fricking PASSENGER TRAIN!!!! That’s what it is! It doesn’t carry cargo not because I don’t want it to. I doesn’t carry cargo because it CAN’T!
C. We ALREADY have trains that carry passengers. We already have trains that carry cargo. Why in the world build another train—FOR FORTY THREE BILLION DOLLARS—that can only carry passengers? Because people who don’t pay taxes want a shiny new Disneyland ride? Let ‘em go to Disneyland.
D. THERE IS NO MONEY! The federal government is out of money. The state government is out of money. The local government is out of money. The moonbats who think they are going to pay for this by borrowing money from China are nuts. China is spending all it’s money on power plants to run factories to make things to sell to countries that have money and can pay their bills. The Chinese are not stupid. They are not going to pay for rich fat American trust fund children to have amusement park rides on shiny new billion dollar trains.
This “argument” we’re having is pretty humorous given that we mostly agree. In particular, I’m with you on points A and D. We only disagree on whether HSR will eventually happen anyway.
Now for point B, here’s an excerpt from the 2008 CHSRA business plan, Chapter 1:
“While the high-speed train system is not compatible with typical U.S. freight equipment and operations, the proposed high-speed train system could be used to carry small packages, letters, or any other freight that would not exceed typical passenger loads. This service could be provided either in specialized freight cars on passenger trains or on dedicated freight trains. Moving medium-weight high-value, time-sensitive goods (such as electronic equipment or perishable items) on the high-speed train tracks would also be a possibility but would need to be operated overnight when it wouldn’t interfere with passenger operations and would require additional facilities for loading and unloading.”
I guess next time I’ll use Google instead of asking you a question. I just thought you knew what you were talking about because you seemed so confident.
We could discuss point C, but this is all getting very dull, especially since my initial post was really about the airport.
I can understand that it would not carry cargo to intermediate stops; but why can’t it carry cargo on separate cars from terminus to terminus? The cars could be detached and offloaded at the destination.
I’m not sure that is economically feasible; but that’s far different from CAN’T.
> but why can’t it carry cargo on separate cars from terminus to terminus? The cars could be detached and offloaded at the destination.
Because trucks can do exactly the same thing, and you don’t have to spend 43 billion dollars to build an entirely new system that serves only two distinations.
> I’m not sure that is economically feasible; but that’s far different from CAN’T.
If it is NOT economically feasible, then they won’t build the special cars, special terminals, special freight handling equipment, special operating capabilities, special marketing plans, etc. etc. etc. to handle freight.
NOT economically feasible means that it won’t happen, which ultimately means the same thing as CAN’T.
> Moving medium-weight high-value, time-sensitive goods (such as electronic equipment or perishable items) on the high-speed train tracks would also be a possibility but would need to be operated overnight when it wouldn’t interfere with passenger operations and would require additional facilities for loading and unloading.
UPS and Fedex already do this.
They can move anything you want overnight between LA and San Francisco, they can do it NOW and not in twenty years, and they can do it FAR, FAR cheaper than high speed rail ever will be able do it.
No businessman in his right mind would every consider building a $43 billion train system to do the same thing that UPS and Fedex are doing.
The only people who think this makes sense are lunatic politicians spending other people’s money —A LOT of other people’s money.
> I just thought you knew what you were talking about because you seemed so confident.
I’m confident that I know that $43 billion dollars is a vast amount of money, that could be used for something far more useful and valuable than an extended Disneyland to Great America amusement park ride.
Just because trucks do it, HSR can’t? Huh? Besides, trucks are far more polluting than anytrain, and trains haul much more goods on a gallon of fuel than trucks do.
> Just because trucks do it, HSR can’t? Huh? Besides, trucks are far more polluting than anytrain, and trains haul much more goods on a gallon of fuel than trucks do.
In the real world, high speed rail doesn’t carry cargo. Even if the California high speed rail were ever built—which it won’t be—it wouldn’t carry cargo. It is economically impractical.
Just as it’s economically impractical to carry cement on rickshaws. You COULD carry cement in buckets on rickshaws, and it would be far less polluting than carrying cement on trucks, or trains, or on high speed rail. But you would need a LOT of rickshaws.
But don’t let me discourage you. If you want to believe that the high speed rail is going to carry cargo, be my guest.
Since you like googling, why not do some googling to find out how many tons of steel girders, or coal, or grain are carried per year on the Japanese or European high speed rail systems.
When Texas was about to build High Speed Rail linking Austin-Dallas-Houston the folks from the commuter airline leaned on it hard, writing checks on the floor of the state legislature to actually swing votes at the last minute. Led to a mini-scandal when they realized that this was actually legal under existing rules, so they cleaned up a little.
Fast forward to CA in 2006-2010 and lets just say that in order to get this thing built deals have already been cut to let private interests run the system (commuter airline company?) and that the seed money from the taxpayers and feds will basically build a system that will be handed over to the private interests who will run it for a profit. I don’t like it, but that’s the way you have to do business in California to get things built.
Like a breath of fresh air, someone had the guts to challenge the political machine which is losing steam in the 23rd AD. Check out the powerful and well-liked Patricia Martinez-Roach’s who has the heart of a fighter and the mind of a scholar with a strong voting block in the 23rd AD. This should be fun…
SJR,
I guess if it ever came down to it, you could transform the current Mineta site into a massive mello-roos district for infrastructure improvements.
I agree with J. Santos that any current SJ pol who came out in favor of closing SJC, especially with the current improvements, would be committing political suicide. But what about 10 years from now?
High-speed rail between SJ and SF could be up and running by 2015. The entire line to Anaheim? Hopefully by 2020. Believe it or not, the airlines may become investors in the rail line ala Air France and the TGV (French high-speed rail lines).
Lastly, check out http://www.thesanjoseblog.com from 3/12/10 for “The Vision.”
Will the the Mercury News ever fix it’s pathetic web site?
Pre Media News they had a pretty good site that was easy to navigate. Now it seems like every time I move the mouse I cross over something that will the pop up and not go away.
Why do they provide multiple links to the same story? Is it to fool people into thinking they generate more content than the increasingly few stories they actually write? And how do they get the Netflix ad to defeat popup blockers?
If newspapers are migrating to the Internet, the Merc has a lot of work to do to catch up. Silicon Valley’s largest newspaper should reflect the community it serves by having a world class (or at least a decent) web site.
The Mercury also does something else with it’s articles, which I don’t know is done purposely or not. Articles are posted, readers comment on the articles, and it seems if the comments are particularly critical of the writer or the Mercury, the article is re-posted and all previous comments wiped out. I have no way to prove this, of course, but it does seem to happen fairly often.
It is true Steve. I’ve seen them do that almost every single time. Negative posts aren’t something they want advertisers to see. Would you want a paid customer seeing how badly people think of your writers? I wouldn’t!
California recently passed a budget that borrows and takes approximately $5 billion in city, county, transit, redevelopment and special district funds this year.
This is the equivalent of the school bully who takes your kid’s lunch money.
The League of California Cities is sponsoring an initiative to outlaw the States raiding of city and county budgets to make up for its shortfall. Be sure to sign the petition to get his on the November ballot. And vote YES in November.
We need to take back our government at all levels.
I’d wholeheartedly agree with you but for one reason. After reading Pier’s column today, I have to believe that San Jose is every bit as guilty as the State when it comes to pissing away taxpayer’s money. I really don’t care a whit who fritters it away – I just would like to see it stopped.
Annuities are much discussed these days, and the Obama Administration and assorted ivory-tower academics are busily planning to help you manage your 401(k) funds. This is a complicated story, so let’s begin at the beginning, namely, how annuities played a huge role historically in what has become known as the “closing of the frontier.”
American Indian Lands Bought With Annuities
Most Americans today are unaware that, throughout the 19th Century, it was quite common for Washington, DC, to offer annuities to American Indian nations (“tribes”) to purchase territory thought to be the shared property of the members of that particular Indian nation. The result was that the common property of the various Indian nations was deemed divested, and they were usually apportioned a small section of their prior lands or relocated.
Inasmuch as I am not a Left-Wing Tory, my purpose in telling you this is not to embarrass readers by a mournful recital of historical tragedy, but to inform readers about plans to shear today’s Americans of their retirement funds. And interestingly enough, it is annuities, the same tool employed throughout the 19th Century, that will be used in the 21st Century.
Background
Washington badly needs an infusion of cash to buy the things it wants, and it appears that there are three bundles of cash that can be tapped by the Obama Administration.
First, seizure of your tax-deferred funds on the two-fold theory (a) that it will help you and (b) that the federal government already has some claim on it because of the tax-deferred feature. FDR managed a similar feat on April 5, 1933, when he seized all the gold in the USA except for coin collections and industrial gold.
Second, using the US Supreme Court’s ruling in Nola, recognize a public purpose in the federal government to impose a mortgage-like lien on some or all real property in the US to guarantee the value of Treasury bills purchased by foreign governments, banks, hedge funds, and sovereign funds. Impossible? Not at all. Just bold.
Third, on some theory of federalism, seize all or part of the value or value-added of material extractions from the earth. This could even be dressed up as a pro-environmental, value-added tax, although almost confiscatory in nature.
Method
It appears that Washington has decided to use the first approach, namely, to convert your tax-deferred accounts into a debt (“annuity”) guaranteed by Washington for your benefit, and into cash to run the government. This supposition is based on a recent and largely unreported flurry of Internet talk that has emerged among the urban-coastals about annuities to guarantee readers a life-time income, and the conversion of 401(k) funds to annuities.
Naturally this has whetted the appetites of the financial firms that brought us the exciting variety of “investment opportunities” that helped trigger the job losses we have at hand. They seem to be joyfully supporting what they see as a huge new chunk of cash to “manage” and “invest.” Even AIG is touting this proposal eagerly. The greedy and lawless investment banks and hedge funds seem to see this development as similar to President George W. Bush’s failed initiative to fold some Social Security contributions into private investments in stocks and bonds.
But I suspect that President Obama will pull the rug out from under the hopes of the large, unregulated money managers, and bring the tax-deferred funds straight into a Gore-style lock box where the cash value will undoubtedly be safe-guarded just like Social Security contributions that are stored in the lock box that former Vice President Al Gore explained to us.
You’re right Tony—on weekends we don’t have anyone full-time at a desk moderating, so there can be a lag. Most weekdays we check in every 30 minutes or so during business hours and when we can during early mornings and evenings. I have to admit that over the past week we’ve been particularly busy with a special project and may have been overlooking SJI a bit. We’ll try and get back on the ball next week.
I think this site would be better served, and provoke more discussion of issues, by just allowing posts to appear as they are submitted. Then the moderator’s job would be to remove any inflammatory, racial, spam, and other posts which do not meet the forum rules.
Having real-time posting will certainly improve the site, and drive up the visitors to this site.
Good idea. The current system pretty much kills the opportunity for any discussion. It has gotten so that it is not really worthwhile checking this site more than every other day or so due to the lag in putting the postings up.
Hope the constructive criticism will be listened to and changes will be made so this site is more timely.
That is an interesting idea and one we have considered. I am reluctant because there are a handful of unprincipled posters who need to be policed. I’m afraid that if we opened the board up, they would go hog-wild, and we’d be spending all of our time removing the malicious posts.
I do hear what you are saying though and will try and ramp up our moderating system.
The way this works on another blog I follow is in this manner. To post you must first register with a valid email address. After the blog verifies the email address, one can start posting. You need to acknowledge you have read the rules, and will abide by the rules. If you violate the rules you are either given a warning, a short term ban, or a permanent ban.
By and large, it keeps discussions civil, even if people are using psuedo names. Every once in a while a spammer joins, but their spam posts are immediately reported, the post is removed, and the spammer banned.
I just received htis email, and am happy to share it with you.
Cultural Vision Plan:
Community Study Session
Please join members of the Arts Commission in a Community Study Session about the draft Cultural Vision Plan.
Date: Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Time: 6:00 – 7:30 p.m.
Location: Roosevelt Community Center – Community Room
901 East Santa Clara Street at S.19th Street, San Jose
(NOTE: Roosevelt Community Center is just .9 mile east of City Hall, at S. 19th Street. Parking is in the rear; please note that the entrance to the parking lot is on S. 21st Street.)
The City of San Jose is preparing a Cultural Vision Plan to guide the community’s cultural development in the coming decade. This plan will inform Envision San Jose 2040, the update to the City’s general plan, and will also function as a stand alone plan for the Office of Cultural Affairs, City government and our partners in the community. It is a noteworthy milestone that, for the first time in San Jose’s history, the City’s general plan will include an arts and culture element that will serve as a blueprint for cultural development for the next 10-15 years.
The Cultural+Planning Group consultants David Plettner and Victoria Saunders have completed work on the draft Cultural Vision Plan. At this study session they will present the key elements of the draft plan. Arts Commissioners Walter Soellner, Jessica Zenk, Lisa Gonzales and Charles Lauer will invite input and discussion.
Community input and participation has been invaluable in the development of the Cultural Vision Plan. Many community members provided input through the Cultural Vision Plan online survey. The Cultural Vision Plan Town Hall Meeting on November 14 was a rich source of input to the planning process. The consultants have conducted meetings and focus groups with a wide range of key stakeholders across the community. The Arts Commission has convened a public study session, and the Cultural Vision Plan Team has made presentations to the Envision 2040 Task Force and maintained ongoing engagement with the Task Force’s work through their representatives on the Arts Commission. To date there have been hundreds of people involved in the development of the draft Cultural Vision Plan.
Community participation in this Study Session is important to finalizing the Cultural Vision Plan. Your voice will enrich this discussion. All are welcome. Please share this information and forward this e-mail to others in our community.
We hope to see you there.
Please RSVP to [email protected] or by calling 408.277.5144 ext. 31.
Thank you,
Kerry Adams Hapner,
Cultural Affairs Director
Office of Cultural Affairs/Office of Economic Development
City of San Jose
Well, $52M of that $72M came with “our” stamp of approval – Prop P in 2000. Bonds are free, right?
I’m not entirely sure where the rest of the money came from. I’m assuming we’re reading the same Merc article, and they only mention “aggressive fundraising” as another source of income. Could they really have raised $20M from the community?
The money came from a parks bond passed by voters in 2000. They delayed reopening by 6 months in order to save operating expenses this past year. Much of Happy Hollow is paid for by memberships, admission (which has increased to $12 for adults) and contributions.
As a taxpayer, I feel that I should be getting SOME benefit from The Obamagogue’s mammoth “health reform” boondoggle. God knows it won’t be healthcare.
For the moment, at least, I am enjoying the pain and suffering of many Democrat members of Congress as they have their arms, legs, necks, and every other body part twisted, yanked, squeezed and crushed as the Pelosi thugs try to round up the votes to pass their sacred turkey.
Democrat Representatives are being hounded by whips, watched 24 hours a day, pummeled with questions by obnoxious, dim-witted spittle-spraying journalists with bad breath, denied the time and space to use the potty facilities, and confronted by naked White House poobahs in the Congressional gymnasium showers.
They can’t get out of Washington, can’t go back to their districts, can’t even go home to their mistresses in Georgetown or wherever. They are Nancy Pelosi’s prisoners.
They are caught in a never ending purgatory as they wait for “the vote” which, they are cynically promised, is “scheduled”, but the schedule keeps getting delayed, and delayed, and delayed.
The are lied to by their leaders, but they cannot protest the lies, or rebel at the repression because they are ultimately sheep. They are in a bad dream and can’t get out.
I love the smell of suffering Democrats in the morning.
Apparently you just love the smell of suffering, Democrats or otherwise. Why else would you blather on about this bill as if improving our badly damaged health care system were a bad thing.
I can only guess that those who love trash-talking about health care reform have never had to use the system for anything serious. I guess you have never seen a $70,000 hospital bill for a 6-day stay. I guess you have never had to be an advocate for someone in a hospital because they were not getting sufficient care, etc., etc.
Instead of your childish rants about Democrats and the process, what is your solution to the current health care mess? Do nothing? Good plan.
> Apparently you just love the smell of suffering, Democrats or otherwise.
Democrats specifically. They are such phony hypocrites. Sensible, rational people everywhere are refreshed and inspired by Democrat suffering.
> Instead of your childish rants about Democrats and the process, what is your solution to the current health care mess?
A. Defeat The Obamagouge’s deceptive, dishonest “health care reform”.
B. Educate people on how to take personal responsiblity for their lives, be productive citizens, produce goods and services that other people value and are willing to pay for, and make wise choices in selecting and buying their own health insurance and their own healthcare services.
Not difficult at all—now, maybe you could actually answer the question. Your cliche-ridden response would do nothing to solve the problem of uninsured folks, people who are working but can’t afford health care, etc.
If you are successful in achieving your goal as stated in “A” how could you possibly expect to achieve “B”?
My initial comments still stand.
> Not difficult at all—now, maybe you could actually answer the question.
I answered your question, but you obviously didn’t notice. So I’ll repeat.
Personal responsibility.
People have to take responsibility for feeding themselves.
People have to take responsibility for their own potty training.
People have to take responsibility for getting up in the morning and dressing themselves.
People have to take responsibility for and feeding themselves, taking a shower now and then, using deoderant, going to school, and getting a job.
People have to take responsibiity for providing health insurance and healthcare for themselves.
If you don’t accept the responsibility of providing health insurance and health care for yourself and your offspring, both legitimate and illegitimate, then you’ll just have to do without health insurance and health care.
Nancy Pelosi may have promised you that she was going to make me pay for your health insurance and health care, but she lied to you.
If you believed her, you shouldn’t be so gullible.
How about people working who can’t afford a roof over their head or food on the table? These are arguably as important to health as insurance.
Or how about keeping libraries open longer so that people can learn how to live a healthy life style, so that they can be healthy with very little health care? Oh, wait, it’s more important that government employees are well paid and have great health insurance!
> I hope no one you love or care for ever has to deal with our current health care system in spite of your opposition.
I’m doing everything I can to keep ignorant, dishonest, and mendacious politicians and their ignorant suckling clients from destroying our health care sytem and denying quality healthcare to me and to those I love and care for.
If you believe you are not paying for all those who are currently uninsured then you are the one who shouldn’t be so gullible.
Who do you think is paying for the people who are filling up our emergency rooms—the health care fairy?
Personal responsibility is great but it doesn’t replace having health care but you will never understand that based on your comments. I hope no one you love or care for ever has to deal with our current health care system in spite of your opposition.
2 things that you don’t want to see how they are made: laws and sausages. The shenanigans used to pass the Senate version of health insurance reform and today’s machinations (arm twisting, Slaughter Rules, water for votes, etc.) prove this out.
I posted this and thesanjoseblog and decided to share it here as well.
I agree with the anti-airport crowd in theory. The price San Jose pays to have an airport where it does is far too high. If you take a step back and ask yourself if an airport belongs in the center of a major city, the answer is clear: of course not. The building up of SJC was a short-sighted attempt to enhance San Jose’s prestige, and based on the business numbers it was doubling down on a bad bet.
However, I’m very much a realist on how this will play out. Supporters of moving the airport seem to underestimate the huge amount of effort it’s going to take to make this happen. First of all, politicians are extremely slow to take any drastic action. Closing or moving SJC is a very big deal, and it could even cost money in the short term if developers want infrastructure built before they’ll consider buying the land.
Second of all, high speed rail (which I agree when completed will be the death of SJC) is projected to take ten years to build. This effort not only hasn’t started, but it isn’t even clear where most of the funds will come from (10B from the bond measure plus 2.25B in federal dollars does not equal 42B). Throw in the government’s track record with big projects and I think a realistic estimate of when we’ll have trains running is 15 to 20 years.
So here’s my humble prediction: SJC will limp along for another 20 years. Please forgive me if I don’t get excited about the prospect of it’s closure.
> Second of all, high speed rail (which I agree when completed will be the death of SJC) is projected to take ten years to build. This effort not only hasn’t started, but it isn’t even clear where most of the funds will come from (10B from the bond measure plus 2.25B in federal dollars does not equal 42B).
Not you too!
Get over it. High speed rail is cloud cuckoo land.
42 billion dollars for a Disneyland ride that doesn’t carry anything but people’s butts?
Most of what gets carried on highways is cargo. Most of what gets carried on railroads is cargo.
Most of what gets carried on airplanes (out of sight, under your feet) is … CARGO.
Or, do you think a twenty-first century economy runs on just iPhones and tofu?
A 42 billion dollar people-butt mover is just plain nuts.
For the record, I was against the HSR bond because I don’t think the state can afford it. However, this is a seemingly rare case where the state and the people to agree on something. I have full faith California will find ways to beg, borrow, and steal the funds for this project.
Now, an honest question: why can’t the trains carry cargo?
> Now, an honest question: why can’t the trains carry cargo?
For the same reason that light rail trains, city buses, taxi cabs and limosuines don’t carry cargo.
Dear SJ Resident:
You’re right. I was wrong.
I’m sure California industry will routinely be shipping scrap iron, coal, and army tanks to and from LA on the high speed rail and really stimulating the level of business activity.
California will lead the world in how fast it can get a ton of pig iron to consumers in Haight Ashbury.
Hyperbole is fun and all, but that’s not a logical answer. All your examples are for local transport. Amtrak runs freight. Why are you assuming HSR can’t do the same?
How disappointing.
I’m asking questions because you’re a bit of an oddity. Most people who don’t support HSR agree the trains would be great, just that the state can’t afford it. You seem to think passenger trains are a poor choice in general, apparently because they won’t carry cargo.
My question isn’t unreasonable. You said yourself passenger planes carry people and cargo. Amtrak carries people and cargo. HSR could carry people and cargo.
Next time I ask an honest question, please give the honest answer. Namely: you don’t have any facts to back up what you’re saying, you’re just making assumptions because you have lots of opinions about how things work in this world and it’s fun to spew them out.
> I’m asking questions because you’re a bit of an oddity. Most people who don’t support HSR agree the trains would be great, just that the state can’t afford it. You seem to think passenger trains are a poor choice in general, apparently because they won’t carry cargo.
Well, if you know what I think, you don’t need to ask me what I think or listen to my answer.
I think high speed rail is a stupid idea because:
A. it is insanely expensive. Before they have even completed the EIR or turned a shovel of dirt, it is ALREADY $43 billion dollars. EVERYONE knows that the final construction cost will be MUCH higher.
What was the initial cost estimate for the “Big Dig” in Boston? What was the final actual cost? Duh?
Even at “only” $43 billion dollars, it will be the most expensive transportation project in the U.S., and only connecting to destinations, and ONLY carrying passegers.
B. High speed rail only carries passengers. Look it up! It’s a fricking PASSENGER TRAIN!!!! That’s what it is! It doesn’t carry cargo not because I don’t want it to. I doesn’t carry cargo because it CAN’T!
C. We ALREADY have trains that carry passengers. We already have trains that carry cargo. Why in the world build another train—FOR FORTY THREE BILLION DOLLARS—that can only carry passengers? Because people who don’t pay taxes want a shiny new Disneyland ride? Let ‘em go to Disneyland.
D. THERE IS NO MONEY! The federal government is out of money. The state government is out of money. The local government is out of money. The moonbats who think they are going to pay for this by borrowing money from China are nuts. China is spending all it’s money on power plants to run factories to make things to sell to countries that have money and can pay their bills. The Chinese are not stupid. They are not going to pay for rich fat American trust fund children to have amusement park rides on shiny new billion dollar trains.
This “argument” we’re having is pretty humorous given that we mostly agree. In particular, I’m with you on points A and D. We only disagree on whether HSR will eventually happen anyway.
Now for point B, here’s an excerpt from the 2008 CHSRA business plan, Chapter 1:
“While the high-speed train system is not compatible with typical U.S. freight equipment and operations, the proposed high-speed train system could be used to carry small packages, letters, or any other freight that would not exceed typical passenger loads. This service could be provided either in specialized freight cars on passenger trains or on dedicated freight trains. Moving medium-weight high-value, time-sensitive goods (such as electronic equipment or perishable items) on the high-speed train tracks would also be a possibility but would need to be operated overnight when it wouldn’t interfere with passenger operations and would require additional facilities for loading and unloading.”
I guess next time I’ll use Google instead of asking you a question. I just thought you knew what you were talking about because you seemed so confident.
We could discuss point C, but this is all getting very dull, especially since my initial post was really about the airport.
“It doesn’t carry cargo because it CAN’T!”
Who says so, and why not?
I can understand that it would not carry cargo to intermediate stops; but why can’t it carry cargo on separate cars from terminus to terminus? The cars could be detached and offloaded at the destination.
I’m not sure that is economically feasible; but that’s far different from CAN’T.
> but why can’t it carry cargo on separate cars from terminus to terminus? The cars could be detached and offloaded at the destination.
Because trucks can do exactly the same thing, and you don’t have to spend 43 billion dollars to build an entirely new system that serves only two distinations.
> I’m not sure that is economically feasible; but that’s far different from CAN’T.
If it is NOT economically feasible, then they won’t build the special cars, special terminals, special freight handling equipment, special operating capabilities, special marketing plans, etc. etc. etc. to handle freight.
NOT economically feasible means that it won’t happen, which ultimately means the same thing as CAN’T.
> Moving medium-weight high-value, time-sensitive goods (such as electronic equipment or perishable items) on the high-speed train tracks would also be a possibility but would need to be operated overnight when it wouldn’t interfere with passenger operations and would require additional facilities for loading and unloading.
UPS and Fedex already do this.
They can move anything you want overnight between LA and San Francisco, they can do it NOW and not in twenty years, and they can do it FAR, FAR cheaper than high speed rail ever will be able do it.
No businessman in his right mind would every consider building a $43 billion train system to do the same thing that UPS and Fedex are doing.
The only people who think this makes sense are lunatic politicians spending other people’s money —A LOT of other people’s money.
> I just thought you knew what you were talking about because you seemed so confident.
I’m confident that I know that $43 billion dollars is a vast amount of money, that could be used for something far more useful and valuable than an extended Disneyland to Great America amusement park ride.
Just because trucks do it, HSR can’t? Huh? Besides, trucks are far more polluting than anytrain, and trains haul much more goods on a gallon of fuel than trucks do.
johnmichael:
> Just because trucks do it, HSR can’t? Huh? Besides, trucks are far more polluting than anytrain, and trains haul much more goods on a gallon of fuel than trucks do.
In the real world, high speed rail doesn’t carry cargo. Even if the California high speed rail were ever built—which it won’t be—it wouldn’t carry cargo. It is economically impractical.
Just as it’s economically impractical to carry cement on rickshaws. You COULD carry cement in buckets on rickshaws, and it would be far less polluting than carrying cement on trucks, or trains, or on high speed rail. But you would need a LOT of rickshaws.
But don’t let me discourage you. If you want to believe that the high speed rail is going to carry cargo, be my guest.
Since you like googling, why not do some googling to find out how many tons of steel girders, or coal, or grain are carried per year on the Japanese or European high speed rail systems.
When Texas was about to build High Speed Rail linking Austin-Dallas-Houston the folks from the commuter airline leaned on it hard, writing checks on the floor of the state legislature to actually swing votes at the last minute. Led to a mini-scandal when they realized that this was actually legal under existing rules, so they cleaned up a little.
Fast forward to CA in 2006-2010 and lets just say that in order to get this thing built deals have already been cut to let private interests run the system (commuter airline company?) and that the seed money from the taxpayers and feds will basically build a system that will be handed over to the private interests who will run it for a profit. I don’t like it, but that’s the way you have to do business in California to get things built.
Like a breath of fresh air, someone had the guts to challenge the political machine which is losing steam in the 23rd AD. Check out the powerful and well-liked Patricia Martinez-Roach’s who has the heart of a fighter and the mind of a scholar with a strong voting block in the 23rd AD. This should be fun…
SJR,
I guess if it ever came down to it, you could transform the current Mineta site into a massive mello-roos district for infrastructure improvements.
I agree with J. Santos that any current SJ pol who came out in favor of closing SJC, especially with the current improvements, would be committing political suicide. But what about 10 years from now?
High-speed rail between SJ and SF could be up and running by 2015. The entire line to Anaheim? Hopefully by 2020. Believe it or not, the airlines may become investors in the rail line ala Air France and the TGV (French high-speed rail lines).
Lastly, check out http://www.thesanjoseblog.com from 3/12/10 for “The Vision.”
Here’s a rant:
Will the the Mercury News ever fix it’s pathetic web site?
Pre Media News they had a pretty good site that was easy to navigate. Now it seems like every time I move the mouse I cross over something that will the pop up and not go away.
Why do they provide multiple links to the same story? Is it to fool people into thinking they generate more content than the increasingly few stories they actually write? And how do they get the Netflix ad to defeat popup blockers?
If newspapers are migrating to the Internet, the Merc has a lot of work to do to catch up. Silicon Valley’s largest newspaper should reflect the community it serves by having a world class (or at least a decent) web site.
The Mercury also does something else with it’s articles, which I don’t know is done purposely or not. Articles are posted, readers comment on the articles, and it seems if the comments are particularly critical of the writer or the Mercury, the article is re-posted and all previous comments wiped out. I have no way to prove this, of course, but it does seem to happen fairly often.
It is true Steve. I’ve seen them do that almost every single time. Negative posts aren’t something they want advertisers to see. Would you want a paid customer seeing how badly people think of your writers? I wouldn’t!
Good point which I hand’t thought of Kathleen. Kinda of ironic they should be the guardians of free speech though!
California recently passed a budget that borrows and takes approximately $5 billion in city, county, transit, redevelopment and special district funds this year.
This is the equivalent of the school bully who takes your kid’s lunch money.
The League of California Cities is sponsoring an initiative to outlaw the States raiding of city and county budgets to make up for its shortfall. Be sure to sign the petition to get his on the November ballot. And vote YES in November.
We need to take back our government at all levels.
JMO,
I’d wholeheartedly agree with you but for one reason. After reading Pier’s column today, I have to believe that San Jose is every bit as guilty as the State when it comes to pissing away taxpayer’s money. I really don’t care a whit who fritters it away – I just would like to see it stopped.
Annuities are much discussed these days, and the Obama Administration and assorted ivory-tower academics are busily planning to help you manage your 401(k) funds. This is a complicated story, so let’s begin at the beginning, namely, how annuities played a huge role historically in what has become known as the “closing of the frontier.”
American Indian Lands Bought With Annuities
Most Americans today are unaware that, throughout the 19th Century, it was quite common for Washington, DC, to offer annuities to American Indian nations (“tribes”) to purchase territory thought to be the shared property of the members of that particular Indian nation. The result was that the common property of the various Indian nations was deemed divested, and they were usually apportioned a small section of their prior lands or relocated.
Inasmuch as I am not a Left-Wing Tory, my purpose in telling you this is not to embarrass readers by a mournful recital of historical tragedy, but to inform readers about plans to shear today’s Americans of their retirement funds. And interestingly enough, it is annuities, the same tool employed throughout the 19th Century, that will be used in the 21st Century.
Background
Washington badly needs an infusion of cash to buy the things it wants, and it appears that there are three bundles of cash that can be tapped by the Obama Administration.
First, seizure of your tax-deferred funds on the two-fold theory (a) that it will help you and (b) that the federal government already has some claim on it because of the tax-deferred feature. FDR managed a similar feat on April 5, 1933, when he seized all the gold in the USA except for coin collections and industrial gold.
Second, using the US Supreme Court’s ruling in Nola, recognize a public purpose in the federal government to impose a mortgage-like lien on some or all real property in the US to guarantee the value of Treasury bills purchased by foreign governments, banks, hedge funds, and sovereign funds. Impossible? Not at all. Just bold.
Third, on some theory of federalism, seize all or part of the value or value-added of material extractions from the earth. This could even be dressed up as a pro-environmental, value-added tax, although almost confiscatory in nature.
Method
It appears that Washington has decided to use the first approach, namely, to convert your tax-deferred accounts into a debt (“annuity”) guaranteed by Washington for your benefit, and into cash to run the government. This supposition is based on a recent and largely unreported flurry of Internet talk that has emerged among the urban-coastals about annuities to guarantee readers a life-time income, and the conversion of 401(k) funds to annuities.
Naturally this has whetted the appetites of the financial firms that brought us the exciting variety of “investment opportunities” that helped trigger the job losses we have at hand. They seem to be joyfully supporting what they see as a huge new chunk of cash to “manage” and “invest.” Even AIG is touting this proposal eagerly. The greedy and lawless investment banks and hedge funds seem to see this development as similar to President George W. Bush’s failed initiative to fold some Social Security contributions into private investments in stocks and bonds.
But I suspect that President Obama will pull the rug out from under the hopes of the large, unregulated money managers, and bring the tax-deferred funds straight into a Gore-style lock box where the cash value will undoubtedly be safe-guarded just like Social Security contributions that are stored in the lock box that former Vice President Al Gore explained to us.
More later in Part Two.
Question: why does it take so damn long for posts to appear on this site? Especially on weekends?
You’re right Tony—on weekends we don’t have anyone full-time at a desk moderating, so there can be a lag. Most weekdays we check in every 30 minutes or so during business hours and when we can during early mornings and evenings. I have to admit that over the past week we’ve been particularly busy with a special project and may have been overlooking SJI a bit. We’ll try and get back on the ball next week.
I think this site would be better served, and provoke more discussion of issues, by just allowing posts to appear as they are submitted. Then the moderator’s job would be to remove any inflammatory, racial, spam, and other posts which do not meet the forum rules.
Having real-time posting will certainly improve the site, and drive up the visitors to this site.
Good idea. The current system pretty much kills the opportunity for any discussion. It has gotten so that it is not really worthwhile checking this site more than every other day or so due to the lag in putting the postings up.
Hope the constructive criticism will be listened to and changes will be made so this site is more timely.
That is an interesting idea and one we have considered. I am reluctant because there are a handful of unprincipled posters who need to be policed. I’m afraid that if we opened the board up, they would go hog-wild, and we’d be spending all of our time removing the malicious posts.
I do hear what you are saying though and will try and ramp up our moderating system.
The way this works on another blog I follow is in this manner. To post you must first register with a valid email address. After the blog verifies the email address, one can start posting. You need to acknowledge you have read the rules, and will abide by the rules. If you violate the rules you are either given a warning, a short term ban, or a permanent ban.
By and large, it keeps discussions civil, even if people are using psuedo names. Every once in a while a spammer joins, but their spam posts are immediately reported, the post is removed, and the spammer banned.
I just received htis email, and am happy to share it with you.
Cultural Vision Plan:
Community Study Session
Please join members of the Arts Commission in a Community Study Session about the draft Cultural Vision Plan.
Date: Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Time: 6:00 – 7:30 p.m.
Location: Roosevelt Community Center – Community Room
901 East Santa Clara Street at S.19th Street, San Jose
(NOTE: Roosevelt Community Center is just .9 mile east of City Hall, at S. 19th Street. Parking is in the rear; please note that the entrance to the parking lot is on S. 21st Street.)
The City of San Jose is preparing a Cultural Vision Plan to guide the community’s cultural development in the coming decade. This plan will inform Envision San Jose 2040, the update to the City’s general plan, and will also function as a stand alone plan for the Office of Cultural Affairs, City government and our partners in the community. It is a noteworthy milestone that, for the first time in San Jose’s history, the City’s general plan will include an arts and culture element that will serve as a blueprint for cultural development for the next 10-15 years.
The Cultural+Planning Group consultants David Plettner and Victoria Saunders have completed work on the draft Cultural Vision Plan. At this study session they will present the key elements of the draft plan. Arts Commissioners Walter Soellner, Jessica Zenk, Lisa Gonzales and Charles Lauer will invite input and discussion.
Community input and participation has been invaluable in the development of the Cultural Vision Plan. Many community members provided input through the Cultural Vision Plan online survey. The Cultural Vision Plan Town Hall Meeting on November 14 was a rich source of input to the planning process. The consultants have conducted meetings and focus groups with a wide range of key stakeholders across the community. The Arts Commission has convened a public study session, and the Cultural Vision Plan Team has made presentations to the Envision 2040 Task Force and maintained ongoing engagement with the Task Force’s work through their representatives on the Arts Commission. To date there have been hundreds of people involved in the development of the draft Cultural Vision Plan.
Community participation in this Study Session is important to finalizing the Cultural Vision Plan. Your voice will enrich this discussion. All are welcome. Please share this information and forward this e-mail to others in our community.
We hope to see you there.
Please RSVP to [email protected] or by calling 408.277.5144 ext. 31.
Thank you,
Kerry Adams Hapner,
Cultural Affairs Director
Office of Cultural Affairs/Office of Economic Development
City of San Jose
Incredible – the much hallowed Cultural Affairs Office lives on, even in the face of a $100M+ budget deficit.
With core services – e.g. infrastructure maintenance, safety and libraries – being cut, I simply cannot imagine fluff like this!
JMO, this is why I don’t care whether the State or the City pisses away taxpayers’ money – it’s all piss… it just happens in different places.
hey JMO, wonder how much this is will cost San Jose taxpayers?
Happy Hollow is a great place, but how can the city justify spending $72 million to fix it up?
Well, $52M of that $72M came with “our” stamp of approval – Prop P in 2000. Bonds are free, right?
I’m not entirely sure where the rest of the money came from. I’m assuming we’re reading the same Merc article, and they only mention “aggressive fundraising” as another source of income. Could they really have raised $20M from the community?
The money came from a parks bond passed by voters in 2000. They delayed reopening by 6 months in order to save operating expenses this past year. Much of Happy Hollow is paid for by memberships, admission (which has increased to $12 for adults) and contributions.
As a taxpayer, I feel that I should be getting SOME benefit from The Obamagogue’s mammoth “health reform” boondoggle. God knows it won’t be healthcare.
For the moment, at least, I am enjoying the pain and suffering of many Democrat members of Congress as they have their arms, legs, necks, and every other body part twisted, yanked, squeezed and crushed as the Pelosi thugs try to round up the votes to pass their sacred turkey.
Democrat Representatives are being hounded by whips, watched 24 hours a day, pummeled with questions by obnoxious, dim-witted spittle-spraying journalists with bad breath, denied the time and space to use the potty facilities, and confronted by naked White House poobahs in the Congressional gymnasium showers.
They can’t get out of Washington, can’t go back to their districts, can’t even go home to their mistresses in Georgetown or wherever. They are Nancy Pelosi’s prisoners.
They are caught in a never ending purgatory as they wait for “the vote” which, they are cynically promised, is “scheduled”, but the schedule keeps getting delayed, and delayed, and delayed.
The are lied to by their leaders, but they cannot protest the lies, or rebel at the repression because they are ultimately sheep. They are in a bad dream and can’t get out.
I love the smell of suffering Democrats in the morning.
Apparently you just love the smell of suffering, Democrats or otherwise. Why else would you blather on about this bill as if improving our badly damaged health care system were a bad thing.
I can only guess that those who love trash-talking about health care reform have never had to use the system for anything serious. I guess you have never seen a $70,000 hospital bill for a 6-day stay. I guess you have never had to be an advocate for someone in a hospital because they were not getting sufficient care, etc., etc.
Instead of your childish rants about Democrats and the process, what is your solution to the current health care mess? Do nothing? Good plan.
> Apparently you just love the smell of suffering, Democrats or otherwise.
Democrats specifically. They are such phony hypocrites. Sensible, rational people everywhere are refreshed and inspired by Democrat suffering.
> Instead of your childish rants about Democrats and the process, what is your solution to the current health care mess?
A. Defeat The Obamagouge’s deceptive, dishonest “health care reform”.
B. Educate people on how to take personal responsiblity for their lives, be productive citizens, produce goods and services that other people value and are willing to pay for, and make wise choices in selecting and buying their own health insurance and their own healthcare services.
There. That wasn’t so hard, was it.
Not difficult at all—now, maybe you could actually answer the question. Your cliche-ridden response would do nothing to solve the problem of uninsured folks, people who are working but can’t afford health care, etc.
If you are successful in achieving your goal as stated in “A” how could you possibly expect to achieve “B”?
My initial comments still stand.
> Not difficult at all—now, maybe you could actually answer the question.
I answered your question, but you obviously didn’t notice. So I’ll repeat.
Personal responsibility.
People have to take responsibility for feeding themselves.
People have to take responsibility for their own potty training.
People have to take responsibility for getting up in the morning and dressing themselves.
People have to take responsibility for and feeding themselves, taking a shower now and then, using deoderant, going to school, and getting a job.
People have to take responsibiity for providing health insurance and healthcare for themselves.
If you don’t accept the responsibility of providing health insurance and health care for yourself and your offspring, both legitimate and illegitimate, then you’ll just have to do without health insurance and health care.
Nancy Pelosi may have promised you that she was going to make me pay for your health insurance and health care, but she lied to you.
If you believed her, you shouldn’t be so gullible.
How about people working who can’t afford a roof over their head or food on the table? These are arguably as important to health as insurance.
Or how about keeping libraries open longer so that people can learn how to live a healthy life style, so that they can be healthy with very little health care? Oh, wait, it’s more important that government employees are well paid and have great health insurance!
> I hope no one you love or care for ever has to deal with our current health care system in spite of your opposition.
I’m doing everything I can to keep ignorant, dishonest, and mendacious politicians and their ignorant suckling clients from destroying our health care sytem and denying quality healthcare to me and to those I love and care for.
If you believe you are not paying for all those who are currently uninsured then you are the one who shouldn’t be so gullible.
Who do you think is paying for the people who are filling up our emergency rooms—the health care fairy?
Personal responsibility is great but it doesn’t replace having health care but you will never understand that based on your comments. I hope no one you love or care for ever has to deal with our current health care system in spite of your opposition.
2 things that you don’t want to see how they are made: laws and sausages. The shenanigans used to pass the Senate version of health insurance reform and today’s machinations (arm twisting, Slaughter Rules, water for votes, etc.) prove this out.
Sausage making looks better by comparison.
Just wondering.
Who does Zoe Lofgren work for?
A. President Barack Obama
B. Speaker Nancy Pelosi
C. Rahm Emanuel
D. SEIU and NEA government unions
E. People of the 16th Congressional District