• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

California Senate vote keeps bullet train alive(edited)

Re: California bullet train still a go

TitusAndronicus said:
Within the very quote you cite, I posted the numbers and the performance report. What more could you possibly want? It's there in black and white. Acela is the profitable wing of Amtrak.
Click to expand...

IFF you do not count the capital costs of equipment and track maintanence costs yes. This is true of many transporation systems. AMTRAK plays accounting games to MAKE this "true", as it puts ALL of the equipment and track costs in OTHER budgets, making this "miracle" happen. Were the tracks really free? Did the trains come from Santa Claus? The fares do cover the bare minimum "operating" costs for ONLY this train, yet what maintains the SHARED tracks that it rides on? Do the basic math, including buying the land, building the tracks, buying the trains and operating and maintaining them, then compute the REAL fare required to pay ALL of those costs. Hmm...
 
Last edited:
Re: California bullet train still a go

TitusAndronicus said:
Within the very quote you cite, I posted the numbers and the performance report. What more could you possibly want? It's there in black and white. Acela is the profitable wing of Amtrak.
Click to expand...

$449,900,000 (YOUR reported monthy revenue) divided by the $115 per person fare, means that MONTHLY ridership of 3,913,174 round trip passengers must use it, which I really doubt. ;-)
 
Last edited:
Re: California bullet train still a go

TitusAndronicus said:
The ridership and revenue data is all reported on their website. They anticipate an operational profit.

The need is 23M more people in California by 2050.
Click to expand...

No ding on you, but I couldn't find where they anticipate an operational profit. And again,, more people coming to the state is not an adequate indicator of need. Are there sufficient people who need to get there from here (wherever here and there are) and will the HSR rail be less or more convenient/expensive to do so?

Our experience with commuter rail shows us (at least here in the West where we're a little more spread out) that people take into account convenience as well as the cost of ridership. For instance, I can drive to downtown Portland (where many folks work) in under 25 minutes (figuring time for parking), and I can leave anytime I wish. If I want to take MAX, I have to drive (or walk) 5 miles to the nearest Park & Ride, catch the right train (every 30 minutes during the work day) and the total trip takes nearer to 45 minutes to an hour. Then I have to walk from the terminal to wherever I'm going.

Add to this, the cost of the fare pretty much exceeds the gallon of gas I would have to buy if I drove. Parking fees are the difference, but most employers provide free parking for employees.

So, altogether, pretty much a wash - and that's why people only take the MAX when they don't have a car. Alot of those folks take the bus instead as there is no need of going to Park & Ride and the stops are more varied. MAX is always running severely in the red and is heavily subsidized.

Now, if you're a night or swing shift worker relying upon MAX, you're boned.
 
Re: California bullet train still a go

ttwtt78640 said:
IFF you do not count the capital costs of equipment and track maintanence costs yes. This is true of many transporation systems. AMTRAK plays accounting games to MAKE this "true", as it puts ALL of the equipment and track costs in OTHER budgets, making this "miracle" happen. Were the tracks really free? Did the trains come from Santa Claus? The fares do cover the bare minimum "operating" costs for ONLY this train, yet what maintains the SHARED tracks that it rides on? Do the basic math, including buying the land, building the tracks, buying the trains and operating and maintaining them, then compute the REAL fare required to pay ALL of those costs. Hmm...
Click to expand...

The the support for your contentions is where?
 
Re: California bullet train still a go

ttwtt78640 said:
$449,900,000 (YOUR reported monthy revenue) divided by the $115 per person fare, means that MONTHLY ridership of 3,913,174 round trip passengers must use it, which I really doubt. ;-)
Click to expand...

The figure I cited was year to date, not monthly. Divide that by nine, please.
 
Re: California bullet train still a go

clownboy said:
No ding on you, but I couldn't find where they anticipate an operational profit. And again,, more people coming to the state is not an adequate indicator of need. Are there sufficient people who need to get there from here (wherever here and there are) and will the HSR rail be less or more convenient/expensive to do so?
Click to expand...

See 5-18 and 6-5. In the 2012 business plan, the revenue and operations/maintenance are listed in separate chapters. But for example, the 2035 medium level projection for revenue is $1,717M and for O&M is $744M. This leaves $973M left over to pay back on the initial investment.

The idea that in 40 years the transportation capacity of California will be the same seems unlikely. There is demand. SFO-LAX is the busiest air passenger route in the country. I see no reason that demand wouldn't increase significantly with a 62% increase in population.

As for the expense of HSR, the projection scenarios I saw in their documents was for 55% or 77% of average airfare cost. As for convenience, I find a scenario in which it is less preferable to air travel hard to fathom. More station locations, frequent service, larger windows, larger seats, room to move, last minute ticket purchases...
 
Last edited:
Re: California bullet train still a go

TitusAndronicus said:
Why? The California HSR system isn't a commuter rail system. Commuter rail is 20-50 miles long and radiates from downtown to the suburbs. It is just as profitable as the highways that parallel it.

Now...a high speed rail system in the United States that makes a profit, sure. Out of the one we have, one is profitable...Acela.

From one of their monthly performance reports (C-1):

For September 2010 YTD:
Revenue: $449.9M
Expenses: $349.3M
Profit: $100.6M

You'll find the same thing in Spain, Germany, Taiwan, Japan...
Click to expand...

Amtrak Office of Inspector General

EVALUATION REPORT E-08-02

Public Funding Levels of European Passenger Railroads

April 22, 2008

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

There have been numerous claims made about the relative financial performance of European Passenger Train Operations and the amount of Public Funding they require to remain operationally viable. This review examines the Public Subsidies that have been provided for European Passenger Train Operations and then compares these funding levels to that of Amtrak.

Overall Conclusions

After examining a representative sample of European Passenger Train Operations over a multi-year period, we found that:

a) When all revenues and expenses for the entire passenger train system are taken into consideration, European Passenger Train Operations operate at a financial loss and consequently require significant Public Subsidies, and

b) The average annual subsidies for European Passenger Train Operations are much higher than those for comparable Amtrak services.

http://amtrakoig.gov/sites/default/files/reports/E-08-02-042208.PDF
Click to expand...

We will make a profit? Is that with or without taxpayer subsidies?
 
Re: California bullet train still a go

justabubba said:
it's quite smart
another french idea which we should adopt
Click to expand...

Yeah cause nuclear reactors along a fault line would be just dandy?!? Cmon.
 
Re: California bullet train still a go

Dittohead not! said:
If it were going to be profitable, investors would pay for it and the taxpayer wouldn't have to.
Click to expand...
Maybe you should tell TitusAndronicus.
 
Re: California bullet train still a go

Matt Foley said:
Way to ignore the tree as you walk into it and smack your head on it.
Click to expand...

That doesn't even make any sense. The Space Program has made countless contributions to society as a whole, and continues to do so. A train is a one trick pony.
 
Re: California bullet train still a go

OpportunityCost said:
Yeah cause nuclear reactors along a fault line would be just dandy?!? Cmon.
Click to expand...
did not realize that there were no locations that were not within the earthquake fault lines
please offer a cite to show us that to be the truth
 
Re: California bullet train still a go

Lokiate said:
That doesn't even make any sense. The Space Program has made countless contributions to society as a whole, and continues to do so.
Click to expand...

No, that's what you've been brainwashed into thinking.
 
Re: California bullet train still a go

Albert Di Salvo said:
How is High Speed Rail doing in China?
Click to expand...

Their test tracks are working fine for the manufacturing companies to ship, you know the test tracks they test their stuff on which is exported and built in America.

"Well let's keep it local then."

Why would I want to fund another affirmative action program as a white?
 
Last edited:
Re: California bullet train still a go

Prof. Peabody said:
We will make a profit? Is that with or without taxpayer subsidies?
Click to expand...

That depends on what you mean by profit.

Should it make an operating profit: YES
Should it make up all the costs of construction: probably NO

Let's consider the logical alternative, widening CA-99 and I-5

Should it make an operating profit: NO
Should it make up all the costs of construction: definitely NO

Why rail is held to such a double standard, I'll never know. But feel free to complain about it while driving on California's 39% user fee paid roads.
 
Re: California bullet train still a go

Matt Foley said:
No, that's what you've been brainwashed into thinking.
Click to expand...

Surely, you jest.

Just in case you're serious, here is some more brainwashing:
So far, NASA has 1,500 spinoff success stories and counting. Even the term "spinoff" was invented to explain the benefits of NASA's contributions to the world at large. NASA publishes an annual publication titled Spinoff that highlights that year's technology that was transferred to and further developed or utilized by the private sector. The free dissemination of information and technologies attained by NASA creates not only practical applications to society but new jobs and industries.
Click to expand...
Read more at Suite101: Practical Applications of Space Technology: Discoveries and Developments by NASA and Their Benefit to Society | Suite101.com Practical Applications of Space Technology: Discoveries and Developments by NASA and Their Benefit to Society | Suite101.com
 
Re: California bullet train still a go

Dittohead not! said:
Surely, you jest.

Just in case you're serious, here is some more brainwashing:

Read more at Suite101: Practical Applications of Space Technology: Discoveries and Developments by NASA and Their Benefit to Society | Suite101.com Practical Applications of Space Technology: Discoveries and Developments by NASA and Their Benefit to Society | Suite101.com
Click to expand...

Oh boy here we go again. The first 4 on the list.

1) CAT scans

WRONG!

"In the early 1900s, the Italian radiologist Alessandro Vallebona proposed a method to represent a single slice of the body on the radiographic film."

2) MRIs

WRONG!

"In the 1950s, Herman Carr reported on the creation of a one-dimensional MRI image.[16] Paul Lauterbur expanded on Carr's technique and developed a way to generate the first MRI images, in 2D and 3D, using gradients. In 1973, Lauterbur published the first nuclear magnetic resonance image.[17][18] and the first cross-sectional image of a living mouse was published in January 1974.[19] Nuclear magnetic resonance imaging is a relatively new technology first developed at the University of Nottingham, England. Peter Mansfield, a physicist and professor at the university, then developed a mathematical technique that would allow scans to take seconds rather than hours and produce clearer images than Lauterbur had.

In the Soviet Union, Vladislav Ivanov filed (in 1960) a document with the USSR State Committee for Inventions and Discovery at Leningrad for a Magnetic Resonance Imaging device,[20] although this was not approved until the 1970s."

2) Kidney dialysis machines

WRONG!

"Dr. Willem Kolff, a Dutch physician, constructed the first working dialyzer in 1943 during the Nazi occupation of the Netherlands."

4) Heart defibrillator technology

WRONG!

"Defibrillators were first demonstrated in 1899 by Jean-Louis Prévost and Frederic Batelli, two physiologists from University of Geneva, Switzerland. They discovered that small electrical shocks could induce ventricular fibrillation in dogs, and that larger charges would reverse the condition."

Thanks for wasting my time, again.
 
Re: California bullet train still a go

Lokiate said:
Yeah, I can't take you seriously.
Click to expand...

ARIENS invented it

ancient-aliens.jpg
 
I would have liked to have seen more of this and less of bailing out auto companies and banks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom