|
Our great capitalist society...
In article ,
says... On Mon, 2 Sep 2013 13:51:40 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 9/2/2013 11:36 AM, Hank© wrote: On 9/2/2013 11:16 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 9/2/13 10:27 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... ...can't compete with this: Japan Railway Comp. (JR Tokai) (TYO:9022) (aka. "The Central Japan Railway Comp.) is responsible for ferrying close to 400,000 passengers a day between some of the largest cities in central Japan. While its fastest bullet trains can cut the transit time from Tokyo to Osaka from about 6 hours by car to about 2 hours and 20 minutes by bullet train, JR Tokai is dreaming of a next generation maglev system that could go even faster, completing the 500+ kilometer (310+ mile) journey in under an hour. When you don't waste your money on the military, you can have nice things. -------------------------------- Funds have been approved to develop high speed rail corridors in the US however the Department of Transportation is still working on the safety standards that will apply. Right now, the "crash worthiness" spec for the trains is more than double (in terms of forces than can be withstood without frame deformation) than the standards used in Europe and Japan's high speed rail systems, i.e. almost 900,000 lbs versus 350,000 lbs. The cost of designing and manufacturing such trains is a major impediment, as is the cost of the rail system itself. Right now there are Amtrak trains between Boston and Wash DC capable of doing over 200 mph however there are very limited stretches of track that would allow speeds of even 150 mph. Plus, even if they could run at high speed, they would never be able to sustain the speed very long without having to stop at stations along the way. Not enough passenger usage for "non stop" tracks. Yeah, I've heard and read every excuse here for at least the last 20 years. The fact remains that in the operation of high speed trains, we're still in the caboose. And why is that? Geography, and our business model... Trains just don't work here. Even the fast one on the shoreline. It doesn't change traffic one bit down the CT coastline, it really serves a few folks who find it easier to commute between Boston, NYC, and DC from what i can see... but it's never crowded, I can't see how it could ever be profitable. The naysayers, the ones against progress, innovation and invention. If folks don't want to ride a train they're 'naysayers'? What horse**** you come up with. John (Gun Nut) H. Holy ****, could you PLEASE learn to read and comprehend before you ask anymore stupid questions? |
Our great capitalist society...
On 9/3/2013 12:33 PM, John H wrote:
On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 08:57:34 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 9/3/2013 7:51 AM, Hank© wrote: On 9/2/2013 11:24 PM, wrote: On Mon, 02 Sep 2013 14:42:08 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: I'll betcha if a national poll was taken the majority of people would prefer spending money on fixing roads and airports in lieu of building a rail system network and trains capable of travelling 200+ mph. The power grid isn't as big of a problem as you may think. Demand has basically flat lined in the past several years and has actually dropped in some. Smart grids and energy efficient devices have helped. Not to worry. Nothing much is happening in refurbishing roads, bridges, dams, infrastructure. That must be a North East problem. Florida maintains it's roads .. BTW who was talking about dams? The environmentalists want all of them blown up anyway Roads don't freeze in Florida. Northerners haven't figured out how to build roads to survive the harsh winters they experience. The "infrastructure" is not crumbling... I drive all over the place with a trailer. The roads are fine... the bridges are fine.... You've obviously not been on I-95 around Boston with a trailer. I drive around there all the time, half of our tracks are north of there but I do avoid the Boston Loop as much as possible... Still, 30-40 miles of interstate around one city doesn't prove the Libs point about the country infrastructure being crumbling... The asphalt dips three to five inches just before the concrete overpasses. When the wheels hit the concrete overpass, the trailer seems to bounce a foot. Our cabinet doors were opened, crap all over the floor, and shelves broken. What a mess. John (Gun Nut) H. |
Our great capitalist society...
On 9/3/13 12:43 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 11:44:42 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 9/3/13 11:30 AM, wrote: On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 09:57:25 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: No, it's mostly a stigma, people think elevated trains, they think noise, they think unsafe, etc. Add to that that for some reason beyond me, there are a LOT of people in the U.S. who just fear and loathe any new technology. Elevated trains ARE noisier and if they derail, over a major road, they are a lot more dangerous. We are not talking about the Lake Street El here. You want that train going 150 MPH or more. BTW you keep saying "innovation" and "new technology" but this is 200 year old technology and every plan I have heard involves buying existing technology from Europe or Japan. Were is the innovation? Bringing high speed trains over from Europe would be new technology for this country, because we have no capability anymore for passenger rail innovation. We'd have to reverse engineer what they are doing across the big pond. We are still not talking about any huge amount of innovation since the John Bull. It is just incremental improvement. The fact remains, we are not Europe. The US was developed around mobility and the automobile. Perhaps if we had rebuilt from scratch like Europe after WWII and concentrated on rail transport, we could adopt the European model, but the fact is, we didn't. We built good roads and comfortable cars for the masses. Japan? We would never live like that http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XfVl6_R7_k Right...we can't do it because we can't do it because we can't do it. Got it. |
Our great capitalist society...
On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 13:18:09 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 07:39:51 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Mon, 02 Sep 2013 21:41:57 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: When we take the train to Jax, it usually works out to be a 13 hour train trip. We leave in the evening and arrive the next morining, after a good night's sleep aboard the train. No long waits to clear security at the origin, no long wait for luggage at the termination. Compartment includes private toilet, two bunk beds and two pretty decent meals. Takes about the same time as driving, if I felt like driving without an overnight stop, which I don't like doing. Would take much less time if trackage and equipment were a lot better, but the trackage south of DC is mostly CSX, and it doesn't give a **** about high speed passenger rail. No worries about all the crap that accompanies airline travel. That "crap" is coming TSA is already eyeing trains as the next place to expand their empire. All it would take is one "terrorist gesture" to lock the train stations down as tight as an airport. About $700 round trip for two adults. Much more comfy than even first class on a plane. Takes longer, sure, but it's overnight and you have to sleep. Oh, and two first class airline tickets would be about $1000. But we can't improve passenger rail transportation because this is America and we can't things like that anymore. I get it. It is something most people do not want. It is simple, just put it to a vote. In Florida High Speed Rail went down about two to one in the 2004 vote. 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! Cite? :) John (Gun Nut) H. Wow, must you be shown everything? He http://bit.ly/18Auhqn You really should learn how to do a little research yourself. Nowhere says the 4,519,423 pollsters who said 'kill it' were old, retirees, or afraid of change. Perhaps you should read some of your 'cites'. John (Gun Nut) H. -- Hope you're having a great day! |
Our great capitalist society...
On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 13:21:23 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 9/3/2013 12:33 PM, John H wrote: On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 08:57:34 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 9/3/2013 7:51 AM, Hank© wrote: On 9/2/2013 11:24 PM, wrote: On Mon, 02 Sep 2013 14:42:08 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: I'll betcha if a national poll was taken the majority of people would prefer spending money on fixing roads and airports in lieu of building a rail system network and trains capable of travelling 200+ mph. The power grid isn't as big of a problem as you may think. Demand has basically flat lined in the past several years and has actually dropped in some. Smart grids and energy efficient devices have helped. Not to worry. Nothing much is happening in refurbishing roads, bridges, dams, infrastructure. That must be a North East problem. Florida maintains it's roads .. BTW who was talking about dams? The environmentalists want all of them blown up anyway Roads don't freeze in Florida. Northerners haven't figured out how to build roads to survive the harsh winters they experience. The "infrastructure" is not crumbling... I drive all over the place with a trailer. The roads are fine... the bridges are fine.... You've obviously not been on I-95 around Boston with a trailer. I drive around there all the time, half of our tracks are north of there but I do avoid the Boston Loop as much as possible... Still, 30-40 miles of interstate around one city doesn't prove the Libs point about the country infrastructure being crumbling... The asphalt dips three to five inches just before the concrete overpasses. When the wheels hit the concrete overpass, the trailer seems to bounce a foot. Our cabinet doors were opened, crap all over the floor, and shelves broken. What a mess. John (Gun Nut) H. Most certainly not. I was complaining about one stretch of road - which sucks. John (Gun Nut) H. -- Hope you're having a great day! |
Our great capitalist society...
"F.O.A.D." wrote in message m... On 9/3/13 12:43 PM, wrote: Japan? We would never live like that http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XfVl6_R7_k Right...we can't do it because we can't do it because we can't do it. Got it. ------------------------------ That video is funny as hell. In the USA, if people were getting stuffed into a train like that, they'd whip out their Clock and blow the pusher's head off. |
Our great capitalist society...
"John H" wrote in message ... On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 13:18:09 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: You really should learn how to do a little research yourself. Nowhere says the 4,519,423 pollsters who said 'kill it' were old, retirees, or afraid of change. Perhaps you should read some of your 'cites'. John (Gun Nut) H. --------------------------- Sometimes I think iBoaterer just reads the title of an article and then "cites" it. |
Our great capitalist society...
"Mr. Luddite" wrote in message ... "F.O.A.D." wrote in message m... On 9/3/13 12:43 PM, wrote: Japan? We would never live like that http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XfVl6_R7_k Right...we can't do it because we can't do it because we can't do it. Got it. ------------------------------ That video is funny as hell. In the USA, if people were getting stuffed into a train like that, they'd whip out their Clock and blow the pusher's head off. ---------------------- Crap. Or maybe their "Glock". |
Our great capitalist society...
|
Our great capitalist society...
In article ,
says... On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 11:48:38 -0400, Wayne.B wrote: On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 10:58:12 -0400, wrote: What "subsidy". === The FAA and the air traffic control system. ATC could easily be privatized (like Canada), as could TSA (it used to be). Sure it could, and then the airlines would go broke without the subsidy. That is nothing more than governmental creep. If the airlines had to pay back every dime of the FAA cost of ATC it would be about $10 a flight per passenger. A private operator would do it cheaper, no doubt. cite? |
Our great capitalist society...
|
Our great capitalist society...
|
Our great capitalist society...
In article ,
says... "iBoaterer" wrote in message ... In article , says... On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 09:49:34 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: What you don't realize is that many bridges carrying interstate traffic were never engineered for that weight and frequency of traffic loads. That is but one problem. Why not? They were originally designed for trucks carrying tanks. Now where on earth do you get THAT idea from??? ------------------------- One of the many purposes and reasons for Eisenhower's Interstate Highway project which started in 1956, was to provide a means for efficient movements of military assets, the requirements of which contributed to the highway design. Another was for civil defense and mass evacuations of areas hit by natural disasters. It's the reason the design consists of lanes separated by a barrier. In the event of an emergency, traffic can travel in the same direction, using both sides of the highway. But LONG after his death, more and more interstate highways were built. When the built these in cities, many bridges got re-purposed as interstate bridges and weren't intended nor designed for that kind of traffic. |
Our great capitalist society...
|
Our great capitalist society...
|
Our great capitalist society...
In article ,
says... On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 12:10:54 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 07:39:10 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: Part of the cost of your travel to Jax is subsidized by taxpayers although Amtrak has done better this year, requiring only $1.3 billion in federal subsidizes compared to $1.4 billion in 2012. Air travel is subsidized as well. Cite You're kidding, right??? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_Air_Service http://tinyurl.com/882ckbl A boondoggle that should be stopped IMHO. That is not a general subsidy for anyone not going to 100 tiny airports. Rail needs the same kind of subsidy for virtually every passenger because ticket prices never cover costs. Oh ****, what on earth do you think the air subsidies are for??? |
Our great capitalist society...
In article ,
says... On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 13:18:09 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 07:39:51 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Mon, 02 Sep 2013 21:41:57 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: When we take the train to Jax, it usually works out to be a 13 hour train trip. We leave in the evening and arrive the next morining, after a good night's sleep aboard the train. No long waits to clear security at the origin, no long wait for luggage at the termination. Compartment includes private toilet, two bunk beds and two pretty decent meals. Takes about the same time as driving, if I felt like driving without an overnight stop, which I don't like doing. Would take much less time if trackage and equipment were a lot better, but the trackage south of DC is mostly CSX, and it doesn't give a **** about high speed passenger rail. No worries about all the crap that accompanies airline travel. That "crap" is coming TSA is already eyeing trains as the next place to expand their empire. All it would take is one "terrorist gesture" to lock the train stations down as tight as an airport. About $700 round trip for two adults. Much more comfy than even first class on a plane. Takes longer, sure, but it's overnight and you have to sleep. Oh, and two first class airline tickets would be about $1000. But we can't improve passenger rail transportation because this is America and we can't things like that anymore. I get it. It is something most people do not want. It is simple, just put it to a vote. In Florida High Speed Rail went down about two to one in the 2004 vote. 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! Cite? :) John (Gun Nut) H. Wow, must you be shown everything? He http://bit.ly/18Auhqn You really should learn how to do a little research yourself. Nowhere says the 4,519,423 pollsters who said 'kill it' were old, retirees, or afraid of change. Perhaps you should read some of your 'cites'. John (Gun Nut) H. You stupid fool, are you incapable of extrapolating data now? Hint: what percentage of Floridians are retirees......... think now, it may do some good. |
Our great capitalist society...
|
Our great capitalist society...
|
Our great capitalist society...
|
Our great capitalist society...
|
Our great capitalist society...
On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 16:08:20 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:
"iBoaterer" wrote in message ... In article , says... On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:52:03 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 09:49:34 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: What you don't realize is that many bridges carrying interstate traffic were never engineered for that weight and frequency of traffic loads. That is but one problem. Why not? They were originally designed for trucks carrying tanks. Now where on earth do you get THAT idea from??? The original purpose of the interstate highway system and the original design guidelines In many cities, the interstate highways are being added and have been added. The original guidelines no longer stand, and the fact is that city bridges have been re-purposed to use for interstate traffic that they were never intended nor designed to hold. ----------------------------------- An example would be .......... ?? Shame on you. We know you're asking for a 'cite'. John (Gun Nut) H. -- Hope you're having a great day! |
Our great capitalist society...
On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 15:59:12 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 13:18:09 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 07:39:51 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Mon, 02 Sep 2013 21:41:57 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: When we take the train to Jax, it usually works out to be a 13 hour train trip. We leave in the evening and arrive the next morining, after a good night's sleep aboard the train. No long waits to clear security at the origin, no long wait for luggage at the termination. Compartment includes private toilet, two bunk beds and two pretty decent meals. Takes about the same time as driving, if I felt like driving without an overnight stop, which I don't like doing. Would take much less time if trackage and equipment were a lot better, but the trackage south of DC is mostly CSX, and it doesn't give a **** about high speed passenger rail. No worries about all the crap that accompanies airline travel. That "crap" is coming TSA is already eyeing trains as the next place to expand their empire. All it would take is one "terrorist gesture" to lock the train stations down as tight as an airport. About $700 round trip for two adults. Much more comfy than even first class on a plane. Takes longer, sure, but it's overnight and you have to sleep. Oh, and two first class airline tickets would be about $1000. But we can't improve passenger rail transportation because this is America and we can't things like that anymore. I get it. It is something most people do not want. It is simple, just put it to a vote. In Florida High Speed Rail went down about two to one in the 2004 vote. 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! Cite? :) John (Gun Nut) H. Wow, must you be shown everything? He http://bit.ly/18Auhqn You really should learn how to do a little research yourself. Nowhere says the 4,519,423 pollsters who said 'kill it' were old, retirees, or afraid of change. Perhaps you should read some of your 'cites'. John (Gun Nut) H. You stupid fool, are you incapable of extrapolating data now? Hint: what percentage of Floridians are retirees......... think now, it may do some good. Somewhere around 17%. Now, what percent of those are afraid of change and old? Cite, please. Does name-calling lend credibility to your argument? John (Gun Nut) H. -- Hope you're having a great day! |
Our great capitalist society...
"John H" wrote in message ... On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 16:08:20 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: "iBoaterer" wrote in message In many cities, the interstate highways are being added and have been added. The original guidelines no longer stand, and the fact is that city bridges have been re-purposed to use for interstate traffic that they were never intended nor designed to hold. ----------------------------------- An example would be .......... ?? Shame on you. We know you're asking for a 'cite'. John (Gun Nut) H. ----------------------- I was trying to be original. I don't know much about building bridges or "re-purposing" them, but it seems to me that any existing highway or bridge that is taken over by the state and made part of the federal interstate highway system would have to meet current construction requirements and criteria established by the Federal Highway Administration (under the Department of Transportation). I also suspect that the design criteria and requirements today are superior to those used in the 1950s. |
Our great capitalist society...
On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 12:33:28 -0400, John H
wrote: Our cabinet doors were opened, crap all over the floor, and shelves broken. What a mess. === Been there, done that, but we were in 8 to 10 foot waves at the time. All of our galley cabinets have heavy duty latches now. |
Our great capitalist society...
On 9/3/2013 2:03 PM, John H wrote:
On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 13:21:23 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 9/3/2013 12:33 PM, John H wrote: On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 08:57:34 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 9/3/2013 7:51 AM, Hank© wrote: On 9/2/2013 11:24 PM, wrote: On Mon, 02 Sep 2013 14:42:08 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: I'll betcha if a national poll was taken the majority of people would prefer spending money on fixing roads and airports in lieu of building a rail system network and trains capable of travelling 200+ mph. The power grid isn't as big of a problem as you may think. Demand has basically flat lined in the past several years and has actually dropped in some. Smart grids and energy efficient devices have helped. Not to worry. Nothing much is happening in refurbishing roads, bridges, dams, infrastructure. That must be a North East problem. Florida maintains it's roads .. BTW who was talking about dams? The environmentalists want all of them blown up anyway Roads don't freeze in Florida. Northerners haven't figured out how to build roads to survive the harsh winters they experience. The "infrastructure" is not crumbling... I drive all over the place with a trailer. The roads are fine... the bridges are fine.... You've obviously not been on I-95 around Boston with a trailer. I drive around there all the time, half of our tracks are north of there but I do avoid the Boston Loop as much as possible... Still, 30-40 miles of interstate around one city doesn't prove the Libs point about the country infrastructure being crumbling... The asphalt dips three to five inches just before the concrete overpasses. When the wheels hit the concrete overpass, the trailer seems to bounce a foot. Our cabinet doors were opened, crap all over the floor, and shelves broken. What a mess. John (Gun Nut) H. Most certainly not. I was complaining about one stretch of road - which sucks. John (Gun Nut) H. Yeah, I do admit to avoiding Boston all together... |
Our great capitalist society...
On 9/3/2013 10:20 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 09:26:21 -0400, Hank© wrote: You didn't go far enough up into NY to see the serious infrastructure rust and decay. === We got as far as Watertown, Syracuse, Binghamton and the Finger Lakes region. How much farther did we need to go? You went far enough. Did you notice the serious rusting under bridges and tressles? |
Our great capitalist society...
On Tuesday, 3 September 2013 22:55:43 UTC-3, JustWaitAFrekinMinute! wrote:
On 9/3/2013 2:03 PM, John H wrote: On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 13:21:23 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 9/3/2013 12:33 PM, John H wrote: On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 08:57:34 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 9/3/2013 7:51 AM, Hank� wrote: On 9/2/2013 11:24 PM, wrote: On Mon, 02 Sep 2013 14:42:08 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: I'll betcha if a national poll was taken the majority of people would prefer spending money on fixing roads and airports in lieu of building a rail system network and trains capable of travelling 200+ mph. The power grid isn't as big of a problem as you may think. Demand has basically flat lined in the past several years and has actually dropped in some. Smart grids and energy efficient devices have helped. Not to worry. Nothing much is happening in refurbishing roads, bridges, dams, infrastructure. That must be a North East problem. Florida maintains it's roads .. BTW who was talking about dams? The environmentalists want all of them blown up anyway Roads don't freeze in Florida. Northerners haven't figured out how to build roads to survive the harsh winters they experience. The "infrastructure" is not crumbling... I drive all over the place with a trailer. The roads are fine... the bridges are fine.... You've obviously not been on I-95 around Boston with a trailer. I drive around there all the time, half of our tracks are north of there but I do avoid the Boston Loop as much as possible... Still, 30-40 miles of interstate around one city doesn't prove the Libs point about the country infrastructure being crumbling... The asphalt dips three to five inches just before the concrete overpasses. When the wheels hit the concrete overpass, the trailer seems to bounce a foot. Our cabinet doors were opened, crap all over the floor, and shelves broken. What a mess. John (Gun Nut) H. Most certainly not. I was complaining about one stretch of road - which sucks. John (Gun Nut) H. Yeah, I do admit to avoiding Boston all together... Boston must be devastated. How can they survive without you buying happy meals and camping under the Freeway bridges? |
Our great capitalist society...
On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 22:48:47 -0400, Hank©
wrote: On 9/3/2013 10:20 AM, Wayne.B wrote: On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 09:26:21 -0400, Hank© wrote: You didn't go far enough up into NY to see the serious infrastructure rust and decay. === We got as far as Watertown, Syracuse, Binghamton and the Finger Lakes region. How much farther did we need to go? You went far enough. Did you notice the serious rusting under bridges and tressles? === Yes, I commented on that earlier. It looks bad in places and should certainly be sand blasted, inspected and re-painted at the very least. The Thruway Authority should have the money for that sort of thing with all the tolls they collect. |
Our great capitalist society...
|
Our great capitalist society...
In article ,
says... On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 15:47:37 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 11:48:38 -0400, Wayne.B wrote: On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 10:58:12 -0400, wrote: What "subsidy". === The FAA and the air traffic control system. ATC could easily be privatized (like Canada), as could TSA (it used to be). Sure it could, and then the airlines would go broke without the subsidy. That is nothing more than governmental creep. If the airlines had to pay back every dime of the FAA cost of ATC it would be about $10 a flight per passenger. A private operator would do it cheaper, no doubt. cite? Once you actually dig into the numbers, the whole idea of an airline "subsidy" falls apart. These are services 100% funded by ticket taxes http://tinyurl.com/l8m7yp4 Thank you, good job. Ticket taxes are subsidies. In fact the DOT is actually making over a billion dollars on these taxes, presumably being spent on other projects. Cite that. They collect about $18 billion in ticket taxes and fees, the total aviation budget for aviation is a tad over $16 billion. http://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.dev/fil...ial-report.pdf Expense Air Transportation 16,004,333 Here's more on the subsidies to airlines that apparently you don't know about: http://tinyurl.com/l2sgahq |
Our great capitalist society...
On 9/4/13 8:12 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 15:47:37 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 11:48:38 -0400, Wayne.B wrote: On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 10:58:12 -0400, wrote: What "subsidy". === The FAA and the air traffic control system. ATC could easily be privatized (like Canada), as could TSA (it used to be). Sure it could, and then the airlines would go broke without the subsidy. That is nothing more than governmental creep. If the airlines had to pay back every dime of the FAA cost of ATC it would be about $10 a flight per passenger. A private operator would do it cheaper, no doubt. cite? Once you actually dig into the numbers, the whole idea of an airline "subsidy" falls apart. These are services 100% funded by ticket taxes http://tinyurl.com/l8m7yp4 Thank you, good job. Ticket taxes are subsidies. In fact the DOT is actually making over a billion dollars on these taxes, presumably being spent on other projects. Cite that. They collect about $18 billion in ticket taxes and fees, the total aviation budget for aviation is a tad over $16 billion. http://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.dev/fil...ial-report.pdf Expense Air Transportation 16,004,333 Here's more on the subsidies to airlines that apparently you don't know about: http://tinyurl.com/l2sgahq Let's not forget the depreciation allowances airlines get for buying equipment. These are subsidies. |
Our great capitalist society...
On 9/3/2013 5:57 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 12:33:28 -0400, John H wrote: Our cabinet doors were opened, crap all over the floor, and shelves broken. What a mess. === Been there, done that, but we were in 8 to 10 foot waves at the time. All of our galley cabinets have heavy duty latches now. I wonder what the speed limit was in that area, and how fast John was going... I mean, if the roads were under construction, the speed limit could have been down around 40-45 in the city loop. Seems you might be moving a bit faster than that to do that kind of damage, and there is no way I am going to believe a "five inch" dropoff, all the way across the road... |
Our great capitalist society...
In article ,
says... "iBoaterer" wrote in message ... In article , says... On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:51:32 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 09:53:38 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: A fairly substantial bridge carrying I-95 over a river in Greenwich collapsed about three decades ago. === I was over that bridge about an hour before it went down, couldn't believe my ears when I heard the news in the morning. That bridge failed more from engineering/design issues than it did from deterioration. It was only about 30 years old at the time. Again, those "issues" are usually the result of old bridges being re- purposed and thus were never engineered to carry the traffic that they are getting. Why not? Because they weren't intended to be interstate bridges. ------------------------------ A bridge on *Interstate Route 95" is not an interstate bridge? Whoooosh...... I'll try again. In cities, where interstates were extended, added, spurs, etc. were placed long after the original interstate system was in place. A lot of these add ons were aligned to take advantage of in-place roadways including bridges, tunnels etc. These in-place infrastructures were not intended to carry the traffic that interstate travel imposes. |
Our great capitalist society...
In article , says...
On 9/3/13 11:30 AM, wrote: On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 09:57:25 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: No, it's mostly a stigma, people think elevated trains, they think noise, they think unsafe, etc. Add to that that for some reason beyond me, there are a LOT of people in the U.S. who just fear and loathe any new technology. Elevated trains ARE noisier and if they derail, over a major road, they are a lot more dangerous. We are not talking about the Lake Street El here. You want that train going 150 MPH or more. BTW you keep saying "innovation" and "new technology" but this is 200 year old technology and every plan I have heard involves buying existing technology from Europe or Japan. Were is the innovation? Bringing high speed trains over from Europe would be new technology for this country, because we have no capability anymore for passenger rail innovation. We'd have to reverse engineer what they are doing across the big pond. If they change the octane of gasoline and it makes cars go faster is that new technology or an improvement on an existing technology. Fixed track trains are 200 years old and they only thing that has changed is how the locomotive is powered. |
Our great capitalist society...
In article ,
says... "iBoaterer" wrote in message ... In article , says... On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:52:03 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 09:49:34 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: What you don't realize is that many bridges carrying interstate traffic were never engineered for that weight and frequency of traffic loads. That is but one problem. Why not? They were originally designed for trucks carrying tanks. Now where on earth do you get THAT idea from??? The original purpose of the interstate highway system and the original design guidelines In many cities, the interstate highways are being added and have been added. The original guidelines no longer stand, and the fact is that city bridges have been re-purposed to use for interstate traffic that they were never intended nor designed to hold. ----------------------------------- An example would be .......... ?? No problem! http://tinyurl.com/kn9udaf Which in part, after a good explanation of old bridges being fracture critical, states: Washington state has much incentive to finish the repairs quickly. I-5 is the primary highway corridor along the Pacific Coast, carrying an average of 71,000 vehicles including 10,000 trucks a day, which will have to endure lengthy and costly detours until the bridge is repaired. U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood announced Friday that $1 million in emergency federal funds would be available to help repair the bridge. But the bridge will reopen with the same narrow lanes and low clearances it always had ? it predates the interstate system and was not constructed to federal standards for interstates. Many of such bridges on the interstate system, including this one and others on I-5, were ?grandfathered in,? said Sean McNally, a spokesman for the American Trucking Associations, an industry group. ?This is designed to a different era,? he said. |
Our great capitalist society...
In article ,
says... On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 16:08:20 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: "iBoaterer" wrote in message ... In article , says... On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:52:03 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 09:49:34 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: What you don't realize is that many bridges carrying interstate traffic were never engineered for that weight and frequency of traffic loads. That is but one problem. Why not? They were originally designed for trucks carrying tanks. Now where on earth do you get THAT idea from??? The original purpose of the interstate highway system and the original design guidelines In many cities, the interstate highways are being added and have been added. The original guidelines no longer stand, and the fact is that city bridges have been re-purposed to use for interstate traffic that they were never intended nor designed to hold. ----------------------------------- An example would be .......... ?? Shame on you. We know you're asking for a 'cite'. John (Gun Nut) H. Here, moron: Washington state has much incentive to finish the repairs quickly. I-5 is the primary highway corridor along the Pacific Coast, carrying an average of 71,000 vehicles including 10,000 trucks a day, which will have to endure lengthy and costly detours until the bridge is repaired. U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood announced Friday that $1 million in emergency federal funds would be available to help repair the bridge. But the bridge will reopen with the same narrow lanes and low clearances it always had ? it predates the interstate system and was not constructed to federal standards for interstates. Many of such bridges on the interstate system, including this one and others on I-5, were ?grandfathered in,? said Sean McNally, a spokesman for the American Trucking Associations, an industry group. ?This is designed to a different era,? he said. Read more he http://www.kansas.com/2013/05/24/281...hatever-cause- washington-state.html#storylink=cpy |
Our great capitalist society...
|
Our great capitalist society...
In article ,
says... On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 13:11:24 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... Rail lines need a direct subsidy, just to keep the train moving. As do planes. Bull**** Have you looked at the taxes on a plane ticket. Most of the "subsidies" you talk about are actually paid for by the air traveler, not the general fund like the railroads. You pay Federal taxes 7.5% for infrastructure $3.50 per takeoff for ATC $2.50 per boarding for TSA and the airport tacks on $3 -$18 for their expenses. That was in 2007. The way taxes work it may be a lot more than that now. I suppose I could dig out the charges on my tickets to Oregon a couple months ago and look. http://tinyurl.com/l2sgahq |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:53 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com