Republicans short-sighted on high-speed rail on the Peoria.com Forums

From Peoria Chronicle's blog:

Republicans short-sighted on high-speed rail:
Peoria Chronicle: "Another state has spurned federal dollars to establish high-speed rail. …Florida Governor Rick Scott announced he will decline $2.4 billion in federal high-speed rail funding — putting a quick and unexpected end to the projected Tampa-Orlando line that was to be the Obama administration..."

Read more...

Short sided really- how about the country cannot afford this. Look at amtrak after it is built look at the expense:


U.S. taxpayers spent about $32 subsidizing the cost of the typical Amtrak passenger in 2008, about four times the rail operator's estimate, according to a private study.

Amtrak operates a nationwide rail network, serving more than 500 destinations in 46 states. Forty-one of Amtrak's 44 routes lost money in 2008, said the study by Subsidyscope, an arm of the Pew Charitable Trusts.

So all this is going to do cost taxpayers more money each and every year not matter what. the state can't afford it, the country can't afford this. Not to hard to see why governors are turning this money down- it is not free money- there is no free money.


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/report-amtrak-loss-co

Except high-speed rails aren't Amtrak. Yes, Amtrak is a mess, but a majority of the high costs associated with it are due to its aging infrastructure. There is a hesitance of people to use Amtrak due to well-known delays and overall unreliability of the service.
High-speed rail service, especially one in an area very high in tourist travel makes sense, but I don't expect teabaggers to understand that.
Scott is the next teabagger in line to act in the opposite interest of his constituents. We'll see how this works out in a few years.

The country can't afford NOT to increase our passenger rail service and efficiency. Its one of many needed integrated steps away from our dependence on foreign oil.

Consider. In 2010, Amtrak carried 29.1 million passengers for the entire year. That's about one-twenty-fifth of annual air travel (2010 estimate: 725 million passengers). It's also roughly a quarter of daily automobile commuters (124 million in 2008). Measured by passenger-miles traveled, Amtrak represents one-tenth of 1 percent of the national total.

Don't think that is going to cut the mustard on ending foriegn oil.

Exactly, the current rail system needs major overhauls in order to provide transportation service that people are want to use.

And who is going to pay for these major overhauls?

The same people that are going to benefit from them: Us.

How are you going to benefit from it. To tell you the truth, I don't know anyone that has ridden in a train in a long, long time. I am sure once there is high speed rail there will be a mass migration to the train depot- NOT< Train travel = 1/10 of 1% of miles traveled in this country. Do the Math- not worth it. If it is so great and everyone will use it, don't you think a private company would be doing it already?

I find it amusing that you are listing all the reasons why we need the government to fund high speed rail.

Do you think private companies are funding the highway system?

Everyone funds it when they drive thier cars- called gas tax- next stupid comment please.

Gas tax revenues do not cover the entire cost of the highway system-next stupid comment please.

But we all pay for it, almost everyone drives, 1/10 of one percent of miles traveled are by train- no way to pay for it unless it is almost all subsidized.

1/10 of the miles are traveled by train because that is all of the train their is...if there were more train routes people would use them!

Just as everyone could fund a train when they rode it. Are you seriously too dense to see the circular logic you are using here?

Do realize that trains are more fuel efficient than anything moving on the highway.