On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 12:38:54 -0400, John H
wrote:

Terrorists have taken the fun out of everything.

===

That was their objective of course.

On 9/3/2013 11:46 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 10:26:00 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute
wrote:

Sure, CT to Long Island can be tough

===

Port Jeff ferry or New London to Orient Point !


Sure, if you can afford it... Had some friends up PJ a couple weeks
back, think they paid over 100 bucks to take the car across the water
iirc, said if they left OP, would have been about 150 iirc...

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 10:26:00 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute
wrote:

Sure, CT to Long Island can be tough

===

Port Jeff ferry or New London to Orient Point !

-----------------------------

Took the New London/Orient Point ferry every weekend for a year back
in the 1980s while working for a defense contractor on Long Island.
It sure beat driving "the long way" around.

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 07:39:51 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...


Kill the bullet train

Yes 4,519,423 63.72%
No 2,573,280 36.28%

Bunch of old retirees that are afraid of change!

A bunch of people old enough to see and recognize a dumb idea.

BTW do you really think 2/3ds of the people who VOTE here are retired?
The snow birds are not here in November.

Oh, for ****s sake, did I say EVERYONE who voted against was old
retirees?? But, you may want to learn about your state's demographic

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 07:43:04 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 02 Sep 2013 14:05:11 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:



Most of our airports are obsolete and our interstate highway system is
crumbling, along with our power grid.

So spend a few billion fixing the airports and interstates, not a
trillion on trains nobody will ride.

Who told you that no one will ride high speed trains in all of the major
corridors?

I have said many times, in a few highly traveled corridors, trains
make sense but that is not 99% of the country.

How does air travel make any more sense than a high speed train???


BTW I am not sure which airports are obsolete. Ours is brand new and
Florida takes pretty good care of their roads. Maybe that is because
they don't siphon highway tax money off for ill thought out mass
transit schemes.

Funny, highly government airports are okay with you, as are tax dollars
to expand roads to them, but subsidized high speed rail is bad.....

What "subsidy". Airlines pay the transit authority to run the airport.
Concessionaires pay for the right to operate there.
The airlines themselves are independent corporations

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_Air_Service




Rail lines need a direct subsidy, just to keep the train moving.

As do planes.

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 07:44:45 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 2 Sep 2013 14:24:12 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

Do you think a train station is any quicker? Wait until you have a 2
hour TSA check point delay there too.

Yes, have you ever travelled via high speed rail in Europe? It's very
efficient.

This is not Europe

The only reason train stations seem quick these days is there are not
that many people boarding and security is virtually non-existant.

See above.

Still not europe

I know! Unlike Europe, a lot of people in the U.S. are afraid of change
and innovation for some reason.

Most train passengers are commuters, no luggage and relatively few
kids.

Horse****!

Most rail passengers are on commuter trains (by number). That is how
places like Penn Station can rack up those huge numbers.
Do you really need me to get the intracity Amtrac stats?

And Amtrak would have WHAT to do with with statistics involving high
speed rail between major cities? Again, take a look at Europe.


This is not Europe, Japan either

True, a lot of people here are backwards thinking instead of forward.

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 07:50:39 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

Uh, highway travel is "subsidized," too. And when you ride your bicycle
on city streets, the cost of those streets, why it is subsidized, too.

Highways are supposed to be funded by gas tax money and most are. It
is when the politicians divert that money to mass transit that we need
additional tax money.

STILL a subsidy.

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 07:52:19 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 9/3/13 12:20 AM, wrote:


My day to day travel is about a tank of gas a month and 90% of it
could be in my golf cart if they would let me use it on the FPL R.O.W.
plus about 100 yards through a scrub park.

So, the world of public transportation should revolve around a retiree's
needs in Dumfoch, Florida?

The world of transportation has to take into account the needs of the
public in general. 2/3ds of Floridians said they did not want to spend
close to a trillion dollars on a train they would never ride.

One particular train between two particular places. A place where
retirees idea of going on a trip is to get in the golf cart and go to
the rec room for Bingo.

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 07:56:05 -0400, Hank©
wrote:

On 9/3/2013 12:33 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 02 Sep 2013 21:05:10 -0400, Wayne.B

You still run into that "last 20 (or 40) mile" problem in each city
you get close to.
They may not have a suitable interstate going into the city and that
real estate tends to be curb to curb traffic lane.

Elevating a high speed train? That is just funny.
Cost, additional danger in a derailment, more noise.

I do like your sense of humor tho.

All it would take is a train popping off a track and taking out a
whole row of bumper to bumper commuters in cars on that interstate
below to sink rail in this country for years.


I wonder why the monorail concept never took off?

It did, go to Disneyland and ride it any time you want.

It is a slow theme park ride, not good for much else.

Oh, hell.... Is that what you think the limit of a monorail is???

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 09:15:15 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 9/3/13 8:57 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:


The "infrastructure" is not crumbling... I drive all over the place with
a trailer. The roads are fine... the bridges are fine....

Your ignorance is no substitute for reality, little man.

Florida rates the best on the number of deficient bridges (2.2%).
Pennsylvania is the worst with a quarter of their bridges failing.

http://t4america.org/resources/bridges/

Maryland is #40 BTW

But Jawbone Scotty said it's not happening!!!