4 ms·

My problem with this project is: 1 - if you want to spend $80B on public transport infrastructure, there are productive places in CA to do that. This project

by x0x0 10y ago

My problem with this project is: 1 - if you want to spend $80B on public transport infrastructure, there are productive places in CA to do that. This project is not in the top 20. You could, alternatively, build out bart/muni/caltrain/vta/LA metro. I'm sure San Diego also has transit projects available. 2 - the ridership numbers for this project are created in what can only be described as a crack-aided manner. It's already $80/pp, up from $50/pp. By the time it's actually built, I'd guess tickets will be well over $100/pp. If you have even two people, you may as well drive. How many people need to commute between LA and SF? The HSR estimates are between 18m and 31m passengers annually [1] which seems unlikely. Also note the $86 far comes to about 20c/mi, while amtrak on the east coast charges 50c/mi and most european long haul trains charge 45+c/mi [1]. Which should make you suspicious that tickets will cost far more than $86, or the ridership numbers are farcical. 3 - when these projects are sold with transparently fake numbers, it poisons public support for all transport infrastructure projects. Currently the part of the project under construction is pure bait and switch rail construction for amtrak, which will use the track until at some unnamed date HSR starts using it. 4 - the local transit projects in sfbay, san jose, LA, or probably san diego have much less risk: we can reasonably project usage. [1] http://www.latimes.com/local/politics/la-me-adv-bullet-fares-20150510-story.html http://www.latimes.com/local/politics/la-me-adv-bullet-fares...

npunt 10y ago
Spot on. Local travel is where majority of need is, and in most places in CA it's sorely lacking and could benefit a great deal from state funds. Time waste there FAR exceeds that between HSR stops. HSR is a bet on people commuting more between city centers, which - if true - would only increase the local transport problem that city centers have today (as people arrive sans cars), and if false, would remain underutilized. Isn't a win either way.
dragonwriter 10y ago
On #1, part of the HSR program of making improvements to local and regional mass transit networks connecting to HSR. They aren't competing alternatives.
- x0x0 10y ago
  Of course they are. Every dollar wasted on building high speed rail on, eg, merced to bakersfield could be used to build public transport lots of people will regularly use, in population centers of California.

by x0x0 10y ago

npunt 10y ago

Spot on. Local travel is where majority of need is, and in most places in CA it's sorely lacking and could benefit a great deal from state funds. Time waste there FAR exceeds that between HSR stops. HSR is a bet on people commuting more between city centers, which - if true - would only increase the local transport problem that city centers have today (as people arrive sans cars), and if false, would remain underutilized. Isn't a win either way.

dragonwriter 10y ago

On #1, part of the HSR program of making improvements to local and regional mass transit networks connecting to HSR. They aren't competing alternatives.

x0x0 10y ago
Of course they are. Every dollar wasted on building high speed rail on, eg, merced to bakersfield could be used to build public transport lots of people will regularly use, in population centers of California.