• 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!

Florida scraps high-speed rail plan pushed by Obama

phattonez said:
Fighting fire with fire only gives you a bigger fire.
Click to expand...

Not always. Fire fighters literally fight fire with fire all the time, especially to control wildfires. Ever heard of a controlled burn?

phattonez said:
No. I want an entirely free transportation industry.
Click to expand...

Well, you can wish in one hand and you know what you can do in the other.

phattonez said:
Mind elaborating on where you think the government should grow or at least not shrink?
Click to expand...

I think it should primarily shrink. We should shrink the corporate welfare-state.

phattonez said:
So the 1800s, when we had a relatively free market, that wasn't the result of people sticking to their principles and advocating small government anywhere and everywhere? It wasn't when we started making exceptions that we began our precipitous decline to economic fascism?
Click to expand...

There is no such thing as a relatively free market. A market is either free or it isn't. It does not take a numerically large number of government regulations to radically alter the course of a market. Only a few minor instance of government intervention, in the wrong places, can have unjust consequence on a tremendous scale. Just witness all the free enterprise that is being held back by special interests as we speak.

phattonez said:
Obviously, you don't seem to read my posts much. I'm saying that this corporatist economy came about because we had a free market system and made a ton of exceptions for the common good. It was this compromise that brought us to the system we have today.
Click to expand...

Easy, tiger. I'm familiar with your posts, I think you have a good head on your shoulders. But I think you have also swallowed a little bit too much of the Republicans-coopting-Libertarians kool-aid.

Libertopia ain't happening. Compromise is all we've got. So instead of holding our breath for a pure free market, and instead of buying into Republican talking points that promise a free market that isn't really free at all, why not observe the situation objectively, and apply the noncoercion maxim to all the factors.

phattonez said:
Murray Rothbard (yeah, I read him too) had a quote in For a New Liberty about how Libertarians to reach their goal should always talk about their ultimate goals, and always support goals toward that end and never in the opposite direction.
Click to expand...

I agree. One of those ultimate goals needs to be keeping corporations in check with an eye toward breaking their corrupt hold on government.
 
Guy Incognito said:
Not always. Fire fighters literally fight fire with fire all the time, especially to control wildfires. Ever heard of a controlled burn?
Click to expand...

The analogy is starting to outlive its usefulness. Let's move on to the real discussion.

Well, you can wish in one hand and you know what you can do in the other.
Click to expand...

There is no way to calcualte whether something is worth it or not in this transportation industry.

I think it should primarily shrink. We should shrink the corporate welfare-state.
Click to expand...

But not the programs that you like? What about the programs that Bob likes, and Jim likes, etc. Why should the exception be made for you and not them?

There is no such thing as a relatively free market. A market is either free or it isn't. It does not take a numerically large number of government regulations to radically alter the course of a market. Only a few minor instance of government intervention, in the wrong places, can have unjust consequence on a tremendous scale. Just witness all the free enterprise that is being held back by special interests as we speak.
Click to expand...

Arguably it got worse and worse after the 1800s.

Easy, tiger. I'm familiar with your posts, I think you have a good head on your shoulders. But I think you have also swallowed a little bit too much of the Republicans-coopting-Libertarians kool-aid.

Libertopia ain't happening. Compromise is all we've got. So instead of holding our breath for a pure free market, and instead of buying into Republican talking points that promise a free market that isn't really free at all, why not observe the situation objectively, and apply the noncoercion maxim to all the factors.
Click to expand...

That "non-coercion maxim" would tell me to never support any kind of government growth.

I agree. One of those ultimate goals needs to be keeping corporations in check with an eye toward breaking their corrupt hold on government.
Click to expand...

And it should involve never supporting new government programs even if they would imitate a free market. Government growth just means more coercion.
 
phattonez said:
The analogy is starting to outlive its usefulness. Let's move on to the real discussion.
Click to expand...

It's only outlived it's usefulness to you, buddy. It makes my point quite clearly. Corporatist corruption is running our economy into the ground, and some of its grotesque manifestations can be seen in its manipulation of government to favor obsolete technology like gas. As a result truly efficient technology like solar, wind and high speed rail fall by the wayside. Once again, this is not the result of a free market, or a semi-free market, but a totally corrupt market. That's the fire.

Now, it is a compromise on libertarian principles to use tax money for a high speed rail system, but minarchy itself is a compromise. If you are not willing to compromise on the noncoercion principle then you are an anarcho-capitalist, not a minarchist. If you are are minarchist, then you are necessarily a compromiser. Now that that's out of the way, we can see that rationally, a 10 billion or so investment in high speed rail is nothing compared to the trillions that corporatists thugs loot every year from us. If we can fight back using the fire of government to get high speed rail, it is a net gain for liberty.
 
phattonez said:
That "non-coercion maxim" would tell me to never support any kind of government growth.
Click to expand...

Right, but that isn't your choice. This is a binary decision. Either support corporatist corruption by denying high-speed rail, or oppose it.

It's like the famous hypothetical from Phillipa Foot with the runaway train. You're standing at the switch. On the route the train is on now, it will kill two innocent people tied to the track. If you throw the switch, the train will take another route and hit only one person tied to the track. The train is coming at you too fast for you to untie anybody. What do you do?
 
If it was as lucrative as some have claimed, why no private interest in the job?
 
phattonez said:
And it should involve never supporting new government programs even if they would imitate a free market. Government growth just means more coercion.
Click to expand...

Government coercion is of the same moral weight as corporate coercion. Like I said, slightly more government coercion will mean significant reduction in corporate coercion. Net gain for liberty.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
If it was as lucrative as some have claimed, why no private interest in the job?
Click to expand...

Because the private sector has all their investments tied up with oil, and is exert corrupt influence over the government to support the old fashioned, oil based economy. Similar to the situation with those antique lightbulbs you love so much.
 
Guy Incognito said:
Because the private sector has all their investments tied up with oil, and is exert corrupt influence over the government to support the old fashioned, oil based economy. Similar to the situation with those antique lightbulbs you love so much.
Click to expand...



Conspiracy nonsense.
 
phattonez said:
But not the programs that you like? What about the programs that Bob likes, and Jim likes, etc. Why should the exception be made for you and not them?
Click to expand...

I don't like any sort of corporate welfare.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
If it was as lucrative as some have claimed, why no private interest in the job?
Click to expand...

It's hard to know how "lucrative" it can be. Plus the scale in both physical dimension, monetary investment, and time make it not too appealing to private industry. Though they could do what the airlines do, run you're business poorly and when you're hemorrhaging money; get a government bailout.

I mean people want to bitch about the money on this, but look at some of the stuff we spend our money on. Of all the things we're throwing money at, a high speed rail system is the least egregious.
 
Ikari said:
It's hard to know how "lucrative" it can be. Plus the scale in both physical dimension, monetary investment, and time make it not too appealing to private industry. Though they could do what the airlines do, run you're business poorly and when you're hemorrhaging money; get a government bailout.

I mean people want to bitch about the money on this, but look at some of the stuff we spend our money on. Of all the things we're throwing money at, a high speed rail system is the least egregious.
Click to expand...



but it should be comprehensive, I mean florida to maine to start, you can't expect FL to go it alone. you need to have it make sense.
 
Ikari said:
A true, national high speed rail would be well worth the investment of money in addition to providing many jobs to see people through the economic turndown. I mean, that's if you care about the average American instead of sending the billions upon billions of dollars to bailouts of the banks and CEOs who made the mess.
Click to expand...

I pretty much support the rail system. I used to live in Germany, and high speed rails are nice. I really miss getting my work done on my way to work, or relaxing and taking a nap on the way... It seems a lot easier to get things done when you have a rail. You can pay bills and be on the way to work or a friends. :)

A high speed rail system isn't big government IMO, and the rails in Germany are really nice and efficient. I am sure the government makes some money off them by charging fare too..

Every time the price of fuel increases I groan and want that rail system...
 
Temporal said:
The high speed rail is definitely worth the investment, but ultimately Florida has to support it, and it doesn't. I don't think this is about money as much as it is about Florida giving Obama the finger. Also, think about how many cars will be taken off the road by a light rail. Can't threaten the automobiles and the fossil fuels now can we.
Click to expand...

I thought the rail would be good for the tourist to use to get to FL or travel around FL. Most people want to go to Orlando, but if they had a rail.. people might actually go to Miami and Tampa for a few days too.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
but it should be comprehensive, I mean florida to maine to start, you can't expect FL to go it alone. you need to have it make sense.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. When this economic depression hit us and we were giving away money to the companies and banks which caused the collapse like candy; I said that instead of doing so we should do two things. One would be to build a true national high speed rail. The second was to lay a high speed internet backbone across the country. Both of those have positive consequences that we can take advantage of in addition to providing many many jobs while the economy recovers. I think the plan is too small scale, it needs to link major cities together across states.
 
Ikari said:
I agree with you. When this economic depression hit us and we were giving away money to the companies and banks which caused the collapse like candy; I said that instead of doing so we should do two things. One would be to build a true national high speed rail. The second was to lay a high speed internet backbone across the country. Both of those have positive consequences that we can take advantage of in addition to providing many many jobs while the economy recovers. I think the plan is too small scale, it needs to link major cities together across states.
Click to expand...




stop it, you are ruining the view that we libertarians are simplistic anarchists. :ssst:
 
SheWolf said:
I thought the rail would be good for the tourist to use to get to FL or travel around FL. Most people want to go to Orlando, but if they had a rail.. people might actually go to Miami and Tampa for a few days too.
Click to expand...

Most people go to Orlando because there is actually things to do there. Fun for the family and singles. Miami and Tampa dont appeal to tourist as much and taking a rail rather then your own vehicle would ultimately be a waste of money. You can pack as much as possible when taking your own transportation but in a rail, pay fees for extra baggage, people and food/beverage. Plus I dont know to many people who can deal much longer with the groping that would come along with the screening you would HAVE to have before taking the rail.
 
apdst said:
During the Iraq war, were we in the middle of a depression? As far as the banks are concerned, I said let them fold.
Click to expand...

Just to remind you... he asked you about your concern government waste regarding the Iraq War and this how you response.

"were we in the middle of a depression?"

We aren't in the middle of depression right now... but your response really bothers me. Are Conservatives acting like they care about the debt right now, just because we are in an economic slump???

Are you guys willing to give us GWB II after this recession is over?

:doh
 
SheWolf said:
Just to remind you... he asked you about your concern government waste regarding the Iraq War and this how you response.

"were we in the middle of a depression?"

We aren't in the middle of depression right now... but your response really bothers me. Are Conservatives acting like they care about the debt right now, just because we are in an economic slump???

Are you guys willing to give us GWB II after this recession is over?

:doh
Click to expand...

The new conservatives don't care about the debt. They'll just use it as a political tool when it's convenient. Did we hear bitching when Bush wasted all that money and added tremendously to the debt? Nope. But we do when Obama does the same thing. It's crap partisanship and the reason why the Republic is going down the drain. People refuse to actually think anymore, and it's becoming harmful to the Republic. The GOP today is a big government, big spending, big brother, big war, big debt party. Don't let their lies and propaganda fool you.
 
Gapeach said:
Most people go to Orlando because there is actually things to do there. Fun for the family and singles. Miami and Tampa dont appeal to tourist as much and taking a rail rather then your own vehicle would ultimately be a waste of money. You can pack as much as possible when taking your own transportation but in a rail, pay fees for extra baggage, people and food/beverage. Plus I dont know to many people who can deal much longer with the groping that would come along with the screening you would HAVE to have before taking the rail.
Click to expand...

Extra Baggage: When I was on HSR in Italy, no one bothered to count how many bags I had. There's plenty of space.

People: True. You do pay per person, which makes the auto more desirable with the more people you have (provided gas remains cheap), but HSR is meant to compete with/compliment airlines. You pay per person there too.

Food/Beverages: You pay for food on the road as well. Or you can bring food on the train. I did.

Screening: One might think you would have to screen passengers, but it just isn't done. A high speed train just isn't the same threat as a flying missile full of jet fuel. Is there a danger of a terrorist attack? Yes. But no more than on packed commuter rail or subway trips that occur daily. You'll never see those with TSA agents and body scanners. We seem to be pretty good/lucky with relying on intelligence to prevent these types of attacks. And that can prevent more than just attacks on transportation targets (Portland, Rockford, Times Square, Fort Dix).

Miami/Tampa: I would contend that there are plenty of people interested in going to Tampa and South Beach. And not just tourists. 1.35M passengers a year fly between Orlando and Miami. Another 1.35M fly between Tampa and Miami. And they don't even need to be heading to the cities. If Orlando offers a flight that Tampa does not, a person could take the train from downtown Tampa to the Orlando airport and fly from there.

http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Fi..._tomer_puentes/1008_air_travel_appendix_3.pdf
 
TitusAndronicus said:
Extra Baggage: When I was on HSR in Italy, no one bothered to count how many bags I had. There's plenty of space.

People: True. You do pay per person, which makes the auto more desirable with the more people you have (provided gas remains cheap), but HSR is meant to compete with/compliment airlines. You pay per person there too.

Food/Beverages: You pay for food on the road as well. Or you can bring food on the train. I did.

Screening: One might think you would have to screen passengers, but it just isn't done. A high speed train just isn't the same threat as a flying missile full of jet fuel. Is there a danger of a terrorist attack? Yes. But no more than on packed commuter rail or subway trips that occur daily. You'll never see those with TSA agents and body scanners. We seem to be pretty good/lucky with relying on intelligence to prevent these types of attacks. And that can prevent more than just attacks on transportation targets (Portland, Rockford, Times Square, Fort Dix).

Miami/Tampa: I would contend that there are plenty of people interested in going to Tampa and South Beach. And not just tourists. 1.35M passengers a year fly between Orlando and Miami. Another 1.35M fly between Tampa and Miami. And they don't even need to be heading to the cities. If Orlando offers a flight that Tampa does not, a person could take the train from downtown Tampa to the Orlando airport and fly from there.

http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Fi..._tomer_puentes/1008_air_travel_appendix_3.pdf
Click to expand...

For one, you were in Italy when your bags weren't counted. Plenty of space is irrelevant when the gov't is trying to make money one way of another off people.
Yes, we pay per person on a plane but most of us cant even afford that anymore so we use our OWN vehicles to get around or travel.
Food or beverage yes we pay on the road but at our own cost. We choose to get our food from the dollar general to walmart even a gas station. It isn't just one set price we must shell out just to eat or drink. (I personally dont want to pay $5 for a coke) And as for taking the food or drink on the rail...once again it will be screened just to make sure someone isnt going to blow anyone else up. No open containers is most likely.
Saying the screening ISNT done...well thats sorta jumping the gun isnt it? You dont believe they will make you get screened once they put out all that money. No its prob. not the norm now like in Amtrak but come on..be realistic. As for tourism, you might have me there but I do NOT believe spending all this money to save a little time commuting is helping anyone out but the FEDERAL GOV'T.
 
I have also ridden on trains in the United States. On commuter rail they don't count your bags. On Amtrak you can have 3 checked bags and 2 carry on bags. After that you have to start paying.

Amtrak - Baggage Policy and Information

Air Travel: If no one can afford to fly, how come so many airports are at capacity? 6.3M people fly between the Bay Area and LA...I should think enough of those people would prefer to travel more comfortably in the same amount of time. And even if they don't, the population of California will grow by over 50% by 2050. Some of them should want to use the system, seeing as how the roads and airports have no extra capacity for them.

Food: I've brought food onto American trains.

Security: You don't need a train to find an enclosed space with people in it. Mumbai showed us that. No one waits for an hour to get through security at the London tube or Madrid Metro, years after their bombings. At Amtrak, they screen your checked baggage and conduct random searches. I don't know why you are so certain things will change once a HSR line is built.
 
VanceMack said:
I simply cannot fathom people are buying into this just because the president said it would be a good idea.
Click to expand...

This is nonsense. This isn't the president's idea; before this thread I didn't even know Obama had an opinion on the issue. This is a Florida issue. There has been talk of bullet trains connecting the major Floridian cities for decades. It's never been implemented because small minded Republicans are always there to shoot it down. But anybody who truly has the best interest of the Florida economy at heart, rather than special interests, supports high speed rail.
 
Ikari said:
It's hard to know how "lucrative" it can be. Plus the scale in both physical dimension, monetary investment, and time make it not too appealing to private industry.
Click to expand...

Still going on with this nonsense even though I already disproved it when I explained about the railroads that were built by private enterprise?
 
hazlnut said:
How is that comment related to the story... except to say the GOP scores a political victory at the expense of their unemployed constituents.

Well done GOP!! Way to represent!
Click to expand...

Kinda like the political victory that Obama scored when he killed all those oilfield jobs? Oh, wait, those jobs weren't paid off with tax money. My bad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom