4 ms·

That wasn't a hard line to push. I don't know many people in California that think it's a good idea. In a decade we'll have a train that is moderately faster

That wasn't a hard line to push. I don't know many people in California that think it's a good idea. In a decade we'll have a train that is moderately faster than driving from Merced to Bakersfield. Seeing as how most people don't want to end in either endpoint, what is the plan once they get there? Rent a car? Not exactly money well spent according to most locals. That said, the HSR rail funding is largely funded by a proposition. It would not be possible to redirect that money. >Prop 1A funds cannot be allocated to another project/program e.g. housing, schools, etc. due to the Bond requirements that voters approved. https://hsr.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Prop_1A_High-Level_Facts.pdf https://hsr.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Prop_1A_High-L...

lnxg33k1 3y ago
Once you get there you can get a bus, like people around the world do on daily basis? Or a bike? About the other stuff, I am Italian so not sure how it works there, I only have newspapers to somehow see what is going on
- frumper 3y ago
  Merced is at least 2 hours away from the SF Bay Area or Sacramento. Bakersfield is 2-3 hours away from LA. Not many people bike 100 miles, and a bus would be even slower travel times. These are not useful endpoints. There isn't anything better between them. California is 50% larger than Italy with 2/3 the population. It's just not a dense place.
  - ben_w 3y ago
    Also, central valley is really really hot, at least by European standards. I've been in both SF and Italy during the winter, and I can imagine cycling Italy[0], but not CA, and not even if I could be sure the drivers and roads were safe (and in CA neither seemed that good, though I have no experience of Italian drivers as that trip was on public transport, which was fine). And sometimes CA is also a bit on-fire. I was diverted by this, and even in a car that meant an extra night camping[1] though I can't remember at this point if that was because there weren't enough towns with motels, or we just couldn't find them due to no phone signal: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carr_Fire https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carr_Fire [0] the flat bits at least, I'm not fit enough/trained for the hills; but of course, that also describes most of CA that isn't central valley… [1] camping, in a forest that's on fire, and hoping that I was far enough away from the fire. I was, but I still have no sense of scale for the place.
panick21_ 3y ago
Having a long term strategy for public transport makes a lot of sense, and having a backbone line to build that on, makes a lot of sense as well. Evaluation any city-to-city part doesn't really make sense. California should have rail system that can compete with Germany or France and a high speed mainline is clearly part of that. Part of the problem with the US is that there is very little long term unified planning on any level.
- frumper 3y ago
  I'd agree that it would be a good thing. That's probably why it passed a statewide vote in 2008. What has actually come out as a result would have a very difficult time passing again today. The state's mismanagement of this has torched the trust.

lnxg33k1 3y ago

Once you get there you can get a bus, like people around the world do on daily basis? Or a bike? About the other stuff, I am Italian so not sure how it works there, I only have newspapers to somehow see what is going on

frumper 3y ago
Merced is at least 2 hours away from the SF Bay Area or Sacramento. Bakersfield is 2-3 hours away from LA. Not many people bike 100 miles, and a bus would be even slower travel times. These are not useful endpoints. There isn't anything better between them. California is 50% larger than Italy with 2/3 the population. It's just not a dense place.
- ben_w 3y ago
  Also, central valley is really really hot, at least by European standards. I've been in both SF and Italy during the winter, and I can imagine cycling Italy[0], but not CA, and not even if I could be sure the drivers and roads were safe (and in CA neither seemed that good, though I have no experience of Italian drivers as that trip was on public transport, which was fine). And sometimes CA is also a bit on-fire. I was diverted by this, and even in a car that meant an extra night camping[1] though I can't remember at this point if that was because there weren't enough towns with motels, or we just couldn't find them due to no phone signal: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carr_Fire https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carr_Fire [0] the flat bits at least, I'm not fit enough/trained for the hills; but of course, that also describes most of CA that isn't central valley… [1] camping, in a forest that's on fire, and hoping that I was far enough away from the fire. I was, but I still have no sense of scale for the place.

panick21_ 3y ago

Having a long term strategy for public transport makes a lot of sense, and having a backbone line to build that on, makes a lot of sense as well. Evaluation any city-to-city part doesn't really make sense. California should have rail system that can compete with Germany or France and a high speed mainline is clearly part of that. Part of the problem with the US is that there is very little long term unified planning on any level.

frumper 3y ago
I'd agree that it would be a good thing. That's probably why it passed a statewide vote in 2008. What has actually come out as a result would have a very difficult time passing again today. The state's mismanagement of this has torched the trust.