2024

[old salt]

Old Salt is livid at even the idea of altering the above percentages even one percentage point....which is absurd. And he's telling us that if we dare to move those numbers around, we're pie-eyed commie-hippies.
He doesn't REALLY believe this.

He certainly doesn't believe what you restated on his behalf.

Most funding for transportation infrastructure comes from user fees & fuel taxes from the transportation modes used,
except when trillion$ are spent to deprive consumers/voters of what they prefer to force massive unwanted, unproven, impractical PC changes on the consumer/voter before the technology is mature...further enriching their political allies & donors who cash in on the change (Fisker, Solyndra).

Keep improving existing transportation modes until market forces & tech advances drive incremental changes where practical.

Mandate non-hybrid EV's before battery tech is adequate. Delay adequate recharging infrastructure making long distance private EV travel impractical, forcing surface travelers to rail, driving demand for high speed passenger rail.

[MDlaxfan76]

Old Salt is livid at even the idea of altering the above percentages even one percentage point....which is absurd. And he's telling us that if we dare to move those numbers around, we're pie-eyed commie-hippies.
He doesn't REALLY believe this.

He certainly doesn't believe what you restated on his behalf.

Most funding for transportation infrastructure comes from user fees & fuel taxes from the transportation modes used,
except when trillion$ are spent to deprive consumers/voters of what they prefer to force massive unwanted, unproven, impractical PC changes on the consumer/voter before the technology is mature...further enriching their political allies & donors who cash in in the change (Fisker, Solyndra).

Keep improving existing transportation modes until market forces & tech advances drive incremental changes where practical.

44% on roads is not enough? Or is your problem just electric/hybrid infrastructure? Heaven forbid those oil and gas subsidies for a century don't continue instead. Gee, we should have stuck with horse and carriage and steam, not some new fangled technology that was "unproven".

Or is it mass transit that's the enemy? Is that unproven technology?

[old salt]

Old Salt is livid at even the idea of altering the above percentages even one percentage point....which is absurd. And he's telling us that if we dare to move those numbers around, we're pie-eyed commie-hippies.
He doesn't REALLY believe this.

He certainly doesn't believe what you restated on his behalf.

Most funding for transportation infrastructure comes from user fees & fuel taxes from the transportation modes used,
except when trillion$ are spent to deprive consumers/voters of what they prefer to force massive unwanted, unproven, impractical PC changes on the consumer/voter before the technology is mature...further enriching their political allies & donors who cash in in the change (Fisker, Solyndra).

Keep improving existing transportation modes until market forces & tech advances drive incremental changes where practical.

44% on roads is not enough? Or is your problem just electric/hybrid infrastructure? Heaven forbid those oil and gas subsidies for a century don't continue instead. Gee, we should have stuck with horse and carriage and steam, not some new fangled technology that was "unproven".

Or is it mass transit that's the enemy? Is that unproven technology?

"prove" the "unproven" technology before you bet the farm on it. The first automobiles were steam driven.

Henry Ford & the Boeing 707 killed passenger rail travel in the US. The consumer/traveler chose.

[a fan]

Old Salt is livid at even the idea of altering the above percentages even one percentage point....which is absurd. And he's telling us that if we dare to move those numbers around, we're pie-eyed commie-hippies.
He doesn't REALLY believe this.

He certainly doesn't believe what you restated on his behalf.

Most funding for transportation infrastructure comes from user fees & fuel taxes from the transportation modes used,
except when trillion$ are spent to deprive consumers/voters of what they prefer to force massive unwanted, unproven, impractical PC changes on the consumer/voter before the technology is mature...further enriching their political allies & donors who cash in in the change (Fisker, Solyndra).

Keep improving existing transportation modes until market forces & tech advances drive incremental changes where practical.

44% on roads is not enough? Or is your problem just electric/hybrid infrastructure? Heaven forbid those oil and gas subsidies for a century don't continue instead. Gee, we should have stuck with horse and carriage and steam, not some new fangled technology that was "unproven".

Or is it mass transit that's the enemy? Is that unproven technology?

"prove" the "unproven" technology before you bet the farm on it. The first automobiles were steam driven.

Henry Ford & the Boeing 707 killed passenger rail travel in the US. The consumer/traveler chose.

You mean like landing on the moon? Sailing to explore new lands? Winning WWII with new plane and weapon designs, and new fabrication procedures?

Yep: America's best bet is to Turtle up, and just slowly decline into irrelevance. Oh, and shovel more money to coastal libs.

Your Republican party is PRECISELY what you are asking for: do nothing. You win.

[a fan]

Henry Ford & the Boeing 707 killed passenger rail travel in the US. The consumer/traveler chose.

[a fan]

Look out, fellas.....OS is turning the gaslighting-troll game to "11".....

[MDlaxfan76]

Old Salt is livid at even the idea of altering the above percentages even one percentage point....which is absurd. And he's telling us that if we dare to move those numbers around, we're pie-eyed commie-hippies.
He doesn't REALLY believe this.

He certainly doesn't believe what you restated on his behalf.

Most funding for transportation infrastructure comes from user fees & fuel taxes from the transportation modes used,
except when trillion$ are spent to deprive consumers/voters of what they prefer to force massive unwanted, unproven, impractical PC changes on the consumer/voter before the technology is mature...further enriching their political allies & donors who cash in in the change (Fisker, Solyndra).

Keep improving existing transportation modes until market forces & tech advances drive incremental changes where practical.

44% on roads is not enough? Or is your problem just electric/hybrid infrastructure? Heaven forbid those oil and gas subsidies for a century don't continue instead. Gee, we should have stuck with horse and carriage and steam, not some new fangled technology that was "unproven".

Or is it mass transit that's the enemy? Is that unproven technology?

"prove" the "unproven" technology before you bet the farm on it. The first automobiles were steam driven.

Henry Ford & the Boeing 707 killed passenger rail travel in the US. The consumer/traveler chose.

yup, shoulda stuck with that steam...it was "proven".

Huge investment in roads and subsidies for oil and gas exploration dwarfed investments in rail and mass transit. That said, US size had a lot to do with the usefulness of road system...it's just that that's where all the emphasis went. Note 20 years after the Model T was introduced, less than 25% of Americans owned any car. We're early days of electric in a market where most of the subsidies have been for oil and gas...still...

Mass transit is highly proven, including high speed rail. Electric and hybrid/electric is very nearly more efficient than gas powered, certainly for short trips where most of America actually lives. With charging infrastructure and continued battery improvement and electric distribution improvements, electric will certainly displace a big portion of the individual transport...and we'll see bus and short haul trucks all go that way. Gonna take some more innovation before heavier load vehicles are displaced.

[a fan]

Huge investment in roads and subsidies for oil and gas exploration dwarfed investments in rail and mass transit.

Wrong, wrong, wrong, MDLax. American roads, bridges and tunnels were paid for by Elves, Fairies, Bigfoot, and (I'm told) Aliens.

Federal and State Governments giving out roads, bridges, and tunnels for free had NOTHING to do with it. Keep up.

[Typical Lax Dad]

https://seattletransitblog.com/2009/10/ ... it-debate/

[old salt]

Old Salt is livid at even the idea of altering the above percentages even one percentage point....which is absurd. And he's telling us that if we dare to move those numbers around, we're pie-eyed commie-hippies.
He doesn't REALLY believe this.

He certainly doesn't believe what you restated on his behalf.

Most funding for transportation infrastructure comes from user fees & fuel taxes from the transportation modes used,
except when trillion$ are spent to deprive consumers/voters of what they prefer to force massive unwanted, unproven, impractical PC changes on the consumer/voter before the technology is mature...further enriching their political allies & donors who cash in in the change (Fisker, Solyndra).

Keep improving existing transportation modes until market forces & tech advances drive incremental changes where practical.

44% on roads is not enough? Or is your problem just electric/hybrid infrastructure? Heaven forbid those oil and gas subsidies for a century don't continue instead. Gee, we should have stuck with horse and carriage and steam, not some new fangled technology that was "unproven".

Or is it mass transit that's the enemy? Is that unproven technology?

"prove" the "unproven" technology before you bet the farm on it. The first automobiles were steam driven.

Henry Ford & the Boeing 707 killed passenger rail travel in the US. The consumer/traveler chose.

yup, shoulda stuck with that steam...it was "proven".

Huge investment in roads and subsidies for oil and gas exploration dwarfed investments in rail and mass transit. That said, US size had a lot to do with the usefulness of road system...it's just that that's where all the emphasis went. Note 20 years after the Model T was introduced, less than 25% of Americans owned any car. We're early days of electric in a market where most of the subsidies have been for oil and gas...still...

Mass transit is highly proven, including high speed rail. Electric and hybrid/electric is very nearly more efficient than gas powered, certainly for short trips where most of America actually lives. With charging infrastructure and continued battery improvement and electric distribution improvements, electric will certainly displace a big portion of the individual transport...and we'll see bus and short haul trucks all go that way. Gonna take some more innovation before heavier load vehicles are displaced.

Steam automobiles were as practical as current range limited EV's which can't be "refilled" in 5 min at every corner stop & don't work in cold temps. ...just minor glitches to be worked out.

US size had a lot to do with it... No sh!t Sherlock. We haven't gotten smaller.

Oil & gas subsidies ? How 'bout the consumption taxes we pay on them ? Nice try with that BS sleight of hand.

How are we going to generate the necessary electricity ? We can't meet current demand without brownouts & outages. Nonspecific blather like "strengthen the grid" is a dodge. Renewable gen elec is not storable to meet peak demand periods.. We have a war on fossil fuel generation & we're afraid of nucs, You can't just blithely wave away the tech challenges for which we have no foreseeable practical solutions.
You just want to limit our freedom of choice options

Mass transit is not dispersed enough or practical to meet the needs of our current disbursed population.
The Orwellian plan is clear. Make POV travel impractical & unaffordable. Force us out of the rural areas & into the cities.
That's why the public is rejecting EV's. even with subsidies, & forcing Biden to back off on his unrealistic mandate.

https://energycommerce.house.gov/posts/ ... -its-cover

[OCanada]

What is the tab going to cost? Investment in infrastructure doesn't come cheap. Whose gonna finance the multi trillion dollar investment? The ChiComs? The American taxpayer? I would like to believe there would be a coordinated and logical plan. This is something that becomes important to all of the lower 48. This isn't the type of project you whip up overnight. As is always the case " the devil is in the details"

Cradle, my man.....I JUST told you we blow 6x----SIX TIMES-----what we spend on ALL of our Transportation needs on freaking interest on our MASSIVE debt.

THAT is where I'd pull from...balance the motherf'ing budget, like you and I have discussed for YEARS.

We've lost our way. If we had adults in Congress? Every single one of them would be advocating raising our taxes JUST pay for the free stuff and bailouts from Covid. Remember those?

We have to pay for what we get. That's it.

And Infrastructure, by definition, has a ROI.

That doesn't answer the question of what the total price could be. That is if your talking about an update that includes all 48 states. The sticker shock may make it impossible to sell. How many trillions do you think it would take?

Total cost should be expenses less benefit. If only expenses are included then cost becomes grossly contorted.

There is no good economic reason why the whole process can’t be more efficient.

Capital projects at the federal level take yesrs go develop and finance. The GPO can provide materials to inform

[NattyBohChamps04]

Someone's finally off their rocker

[a fan]

Someone's finally off their rocker

You know what's impossible? Building more electrical plants to improve our grid, and increase capacity.

Maybe we can reach out the Haitians for blueprints?

....or does anyone have Thomas Edison's number? He's still around, right?

[a fan]

Old Salt is livid at even the idea of altering the above percentages even one percentage point....which is absurd. And he's telling us that if we dare to move those numbers around, we're pie-eyed commie-hippies.
He doesn't REALLY believe this.

He certainly doesn't believe what you restated on his behalf.

Most funding for transportation infrastructure comes from user fees & fuel taxes from the transportation modes used,
except when trillion$ are spent to deprive consumers/voters of what they prefer to force massive unwanted, unproven, impractical PC changes on the consumer/voter before the technology is mature...further enriching their political allies & donors who cash in on the change (Fisker, Solyndra).

Keep improving existing transportation modes until market forces & tech advances drive incremental changes where practical.

Mandate non-hybrid EV's before battery tech is adequate. Delay adequate recharging infrastructure making long distance private EV travel impractical, forcing surface travelers to rail, driving demand for high speed passenger rail.

No.

Anything else?

[a fan]

Put me in charge. VERY low bar car costs.

Forgive me. Couldn't resist.

[a fan]

I'd love a fast train option...someone pulled together some data points:
https://www.quora.com/How-long-would-th ... ain-system

Wrong cities.

This is one big reason why Republican voters don't want it, btw. Those are all "lib cities" listed.

As usual, Dems and Libs are HORRIBLE at sales pitches.

[a fan]

What is the tab going to cost? Investment in infrastructure doesn't come cheap. Whose gonna finance the multi trillion dollar investment? The ChiComs? The American taxpayer? I would like to believe there would be a coordinated and logical plan. This is something that becomes important to all of the lower 48. This isn't the type of project you whip up overnight. As is always the case " the devil is in the details"

Cradle, my man.....I JUST told you we blow 6x----SIX TIMES-----what we spend on ALL of our Transportation needs on freaking interest on our MASSIVE debt.

THAT is where I'd pull from...balance the motherf'ing budget, like you and I have discussed for YEARS.

We've lost our way. If we had adults in Congress? Every single one of them would be advocating raising our taxes JUST pay for the free stuff and bailouts from Covid. Remember those?

We have to pay for what we get. That's it.

And Infrastructure, by definition, has a ROI.

That doesn't answer the question of what the total price could be. That is if your talking about an update that includes all 48 states. The sticker shock may make it impossible to sell. How many trillions do you think it would take?

Total cost should be expenses less benefit. If only expenses are included then cost becomes grossly contorted.

There is no good economic reason why the whole process can’t be more efficient.

Capital projects at the federal level take yesrs go develop and finance. The GPO can provide materials to inform

A coal power plant runs around $7 billion, Cradle.

Pocket nuclear reactors from WestingHouse cost around $1 Billion. They haven't built one yet.

Again....$600 Billion EVERY YEAR on interest payments on our Debt, Cradle.

[old salt]

I'd love a fast train option...someone pulled together some data points:
https://www.quora.com/How-long-would-th ... ain-system

Wrong cities.

This is one big reason why Republican voters don't want it, btw. Those are all "lib cities" listed.

As usual, Dems and Libs are HORRIBLE at sales pitches.

...beam me cross-country Scotty = Dems & Libs transportation plan.
Are we there yet daddy, how much longer ?
What big cities are not "lib cities" ?

[a fan]

I'd love a fast train option...someone pulled together some data points:
https://www.quora.com/How-long-would-th ... ain-system

Wrong cities.

This is one big reason why Republican voters don't want it, btw. Those are all "lib cities" listed.

As usual, Dems and Libs are HORRIBLE at sales pitches.

...beam me cross-country Scotty = Dems & Libs transportation plan.
Are we there yet daddy, how much longer ?
What big cities are not "lib cities" ?

None of them.

You're right: F any cities other than where libs work. Let them eat cake.

[NattyBohChamps04]

Someone's finally off their rocker

You know what's impossible? Building more electrical plants to improve our grid, and increase capacity.

Maybe we can reach out the Haitians for blueprints?

....or does anyone have Thomas Edison's number? He's still around, right?

I think it's 1 or 2.

First electric car was built in 1888.

Electric public transit dominated our cities for decades until monopolistic conspiracies...