Could the US crack high-speed rail?

All this infrastructure talk

drives me nervous
bgb.jpg
 
ResearchMonkey said:
No, but you certainly make it clear about the alter you worship upon commie-boy.
Click to expand...

riiiiight... and you can draw that conclusion how, seeing as i have advocated no position here other than 'americans don't like the idea of public transportation?'

oh, right. it's how you feel.

don't you have a book burning to get to? maybe a loyalty oath to chant with your children would start the journey out right?
 
You say something from the middle, then you swing all cawk sucking up to the leftist principals that feed and appease your gurlyman sensitive side.
 
what the fuck are you even talking about?

look chooch, it's not my fault that you are dealing from a short deck. i know it seems kinda funny that i know a lot about uncle karl and other learnid things like um basic econ and that i don't follow the same chants you do.

it's really not very flattering (for you) when you try to paint others as wild-eyed commie beasts. it makes you look like a name-calling dipshit with nothing else to say.

if you have something substantial to say please do so. what are these leftist principles that you think i adhere to? put your money where your foot is. bitch.
 
Public transportation sucks.

It's needed, at the local level, assuming the locals want it.

As for federal control of any transporatation...IT'S NOT THEIR JOB
 
yes the interstate highway system was a mistake. and there should be no regulation or oversight of aviation.
 
Jeez, that's why "post roads" are in the Constitution. Roads are one of the big three.
 
yeah eight lane freeways were not named in the constitution. so you are interpreting, not receiving gospel.
 
The Constitution doesn't say one buggy width tracks of dirt either. The federal government builds interstates, then passes the upkeep to the states, assisting with gas taxes.

Roads, not rails
 
oh right so you don't believe in constitutional principles, just the letter of the law. which in no way names or anticipates (not that it could in this narrow frame anyway) a freeway system like the one we have. the roads they spoke of are not at all like the roads we have now. the federal government never should have gotten involved in the massive and costly interstate system. it is a serious violation of the SCALE of powers enumerated. unless you want to argue equivalences. say, that dirt roads : superhighways is analogous to tiny agrarian society : modern industrial economy. hmmm but that would be troublesome. original intent, dude.
 
It says roads. It does not say transporation. Ben Franklin could have talked Madison into providing Sunday carriage rides. He didn't. The did, however, provide for thoroughfares.

Interstates vs US highways...there could be an argument. US66 did not provide adequate travel, so we have I-10. The feds are not to provide state highways or city streets.

Original intent - provide a clear path of travel for the mail to get through.
 
mail huh? that's interesting. wonder what socioeconomic functions they intended it to serve. golly almost makes me think of how the gov invented the intarnets.
 
High speed rail won't work on our current rail lines, and adding new lines to accommodate it would be cost prohibitive in today's economic reality. Add into that the constant political meddling to get stops in just about every city near the proposed line, and you'll see where this is headed. Same thing happened with Acela. I believe THAT was what Cat was talking about when he mentioned corruption. ;)
 
Gonz said:
It says roads. It does not say transporation. Ben Franklin could have talked Madison into providing Sunday carriage rides. He didn't. The did, however, provide for thoroughfares.

Interstates vs US highways...there could be an argument. US66 did not provide adequate travel, so we have I-10. The feds are not to provide state highways or city streets.

Original intent - provide a clear path of travel for the mail to get through.
Click to expand...

Umm...the Interstate system was created to move troops and supplies anywhere in the US in times of war. We copied the idea from Germany just before WWII got our involvement.
 
Yep, that's why it's dubbed the Eisenhower Interstate System. Doesn't change
much of the argument though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top