Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

More money goes into special interest pockets than asphalt.

---

Hello again, tom:

Kind of like the cash that's going into Chris Kristy's friends pocket from his privately run half way houses..

excon

I have no idea how that connects to Federal funding of roads . I get it that the Interstate has been funded through Federal taxes and administered through the Federal Highway Administration ;and it's too late to put the horse back in the barn. But the problem is that every authorization expands the bureaucracies power and mandate. Now highway funds is the answer for such boondoggles as high speed rail systems . Already 1/4 of the highway funds are spent on non highway programs. And if Obama has his way, the program will double in size.
And that only addresses the Interstate system . The Federal government has no business funding or authorizing State and local systems . Too often they have been lured by federal funds to do unwise infrastructure projects . When the gravy train stops ,they have no means to complete them or to maintain them. If Boston wants a tunnel ;or California wants high speed rail ,let them fund it .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

If Boston wants a tunnel ;or California wants high speed rail ,let them fund it .

---

What if Illinois wants a high-speed-rail system to the eastern states? All involved states--except for Indiana--agree such a system would be good and will pay their share of building one. Then what?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Dear excon:

Aren't interstates federally funded? or should each state be responsible for its section of an interstate? (Heaven help us all!)

Carol

---

I have never seen a federal truck working on our interstates but I see TXDOT trucks every day. Likewise in every other state I've traveled.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

What if Illinois wants a high-speed-rail system to the eastern states? All involved states--except for Indiana--agree such a system would be good and will pay their share of building one. Then what?

---

Oh well, C'est la vie.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

What if Illinois wants a high-speed-rail system to the eastern states? All involved states--except for Indiana--agree such a system would be good and will pay their share of building one. Then what?

---

Ok I'll address the hypothetical . I don't think Indiana should be forced to have that high speed rail if it doesn't want it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

What if Illinois wants a high-speed-rail system to the eastern states? All involved states--except for Indiana--agree such a system would be good and will pay their share of building one. Then what?

---

They get together with each of the states it goes through... and they all make plans and agreements and pay their share of the design... and everything that happens inside their borders. Federal involvement isn't needed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

They get together with each of the states it goes through...and they all make plans and agreements and pay their share of the design...and everything that happens inside their borders. Federal involvement isn't needed.

---

Indiana says no, no money for this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Indiana says no, no money for this.

---

Then it doesn't happen... because Florida shouldn't be forced to pay for it because Indiana doesn't want to find the money to build, maintain or operate it.

I left out one part in my answer that an Authority be set up with representatives from each state to run it. Not unlike how The Metro works as its in parts of DC MD and the District of Columbia.

Is there some market demand for high speed rail?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Is there some market demand for high speed rail?

---

Then think interstate. What if Indiana didn't want one to go through their state?

No ,rail is a loser in this country . Amtrak loses $32 per passenger on average .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

No ,rail is a loser in this country . Amtrak loses $32 per passenger on average .

---

Those are customer service and marketing problems.

Don't think so... their service is actually quite good, I've used it a few times... there just isn't enough people that need to travel on it to be profitable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Those are customer service and marketing problems.

---

I don't think so. Does that also explain why LA has the best subway system in the world that Nobody uses?

Quote:

---

What if Illinois wants a high-speed-rail system to the eastern states?

---

can't find a link to this proposal . Which states are involved ?

Even the NE corridor of AMTRAK barely pulls it's weight ;and that is the heaviest travelled corridor... and that is only because the price of the Acela express fare is in line with market pricing. .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

can't find a link to this proposal . Which states are involved ?

---

It's hypothetical -- suggested when everyone claimed it should be a state's-rights issue, not federal.

Oh I see . Because there are real proposals between Michigan ,Illinois ,and Indiana where the states are doing something similar to what Smoothy suggest correctly is the proper way to handle it . Here in NY there are frequent examples of intrastate systems (the Port Authority being the most famous) .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

No, I know what fairness is, "free from bias or injustice; evenhandedness."

There is nothing "fair" about taking from one person to give to someone else. All the things tom mentioned are a part of this country's left wing concept of "fairness" and it's anything but. Fairness to them is just one more deceptive cliche. And I know I'm right, thank you very much.

---

Sorry Steve, this is not right. It is my assessment of fairness that is
Spot on. On the other hand, it could be that we experience a difference type of fairness here.


Tut