PDA

View Full Version : California High-Speed Rail



bigc1
07-11-2008, 12:26 PM
Not sure if this has been discussed...

http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/

supposedly it can go from LA to SF (or Sacramento?) in 2.5 hours going 220mph

Hopeless Semantic
07-11-2008, 12:28 PM
Shit...thought this was about the other high-speed Californians adore.

amyzzz
07-11-2008, 12:30 PM
We need one from Phx to La, Phx to Vegas, and Phx to Tucson. Oh, and Phx to San Diego. :)

Mr. Dylanja
07-11-2008, 12:31 PM
^ I concur.

Blinken
07-11-2008, 12:32 PM
LA to Vegas FTW

Newro7ic
07-11-2008, 12:33 PM
That's one hell of a turn right there around Palmdale.... I don't know if I'd want to take that going 220MPH... ;)

Newro7ic
07-11-2008, 12:34 PM
LA to Vegas FTW

QFT!

Hopeless Semantic
07-11-2008, 12:37 PM
That's one hell of a turn right there around Palmdale.... I don't know if I'd want to take that going 220MPH... ;)

All I have to say is...Remember the 110 ;)

menikmati
07-11-2008, 12:56 PM
hahaha, does anyone actually think this will ever actually get built? hahahaha

full on idle
07-11-2008, 12:57 PM
hahahah I know it's like when a man "walked on the moon" hahahaha

marooko
07-11-2008, 01:04 PM
hahaha, does anyone actually think this will ever actually get built? hahahaha

well duh, they've only been talking about it for well over 10 years. haha. i hear ya.

Young blood
07-11-2008, 01:09 PM
That website freaked me out. Its like a scene in a movie that takes place in the future with interactive animation/flash movies on a billbord with a lady that narrates about how the government is working for you. Then there is a picture of an action hero from hollywood blockbusters that is now governor to add a sense of irony.

Like total recall.

It freaked me out is all im sayin'.

Boourns
07-11-2008, 01:11 PM
I want this so bad.

marooko
07-11-2008, 01:13 PM
That website freaked me out. Its like a scene in a movie that takes place in the future with interactive animation/flash movies on a billbord with a lady that narrates about how the government is working for you. Then there is a picture of an action hero from hollywood blockbusters that is now governor to add a sense of irony.

Like total recall.

It freaked me out is all im sayin'.

im now scared of this train.

menikmati
07-11-2008, 01:20 PM
hahahah I know it's like when a man "walked on the moon" hahahaha

I know, like we could actually set up video cameras, and land on the moon and broadcast all that back, in 1969???

Cdubby
07-11-2008, 01:24 PM
this really needs to get built, but we need the moneys

amyzzz
07-11-2008, 01:25 PM
Invest in your future!

SFChrissy
07-11-2008, 01:28 PM
hahaha, does anyone actually think this will ever actually get built? hahahahaI'd like to think so...that would be so cool...they are in the design phase now but I think the biggest obstacle right now is buying all the land for the tracks & station...

That's a shit load of "right of way"...

marooko
07-11-2008, 01:30 PM
eminent domain.

menikmati
07-11-2008, 01:35 PM
California can barely fix potholes in the freeway, no way is a high speed train getting built...sorry to be negative nancy, but let's be real.

SFChrissy
07-11-2008, 01:36 PM
yeahhh...my family is kinda going thru this in east highlands...

I hate that shit when it comes down to pretty much robbing families from property that have been in the family for generations...

SFChrissy
07-11-2008, 01:38 PM
California can barely fix potholes in the freeway, no way is a high speed train getting built...sorry to be negative nancy, but let's be real.for a second I thought you were calling me nancy and then it clicked...

chairmenmeow47
07-11-2008, 02:38 PM
That website freaked me out. Its like a scene in a movie that takes place in the future with interactive animation/flash movies on a billbord with a lady that narrates about how the government is working for you. Then there is a picture of an action hero from hollywood blockbusters that is now governor to add a sense of irony.

Like total recall.

It freaked me out is all im sayin'.

did they lady have 3 titties?

and i'm all for more rail. after going to switzerland and riding the rails there, i'm sold.

Hopeless Semantic
07-11-2008, 02:42 PM
My only concern is...How the damned thing will hold up when there's an earthquake a comin'. Other than that, I'm all for some rails being done here in California.

Heresy
07-11-2008, 02:44 PM
A bullet train from LA to Vegas would be rad. I can barely make the trip by car since I get restless and my ass starts hurting.

Blinken
07-11-2008, 02:48 PM
A bullet train to Vegas would ruin me. But I am still down for it.

slurpee
07-11-2008, 02:58 PM
The bullet train in Japan goes about that fast.

I assume it would be fairly similar.

Newro7ic
07-11-2008, 03:20 PM
My only concern is...How the damned thing will hold up when there's an earthquake a comin'. Other than that, I'm all for some rails being done here in California.

It works in Japan.

Hopeless Semantic
07-11-2008, 03:21 PM
It works in Japan.

Yeah, true, but Japan's first concern is Godzilla (Gojira). We don't have that issue here.

PlayaDelWes
07-12-2008, 10:47 AM
I'd hit it

BROKENDOLL
07-12-2008, 11:38 AM
Now, 220 MPH is the kind of speed I like.

tessalasset
07-13-2008, 11:56 AM
Please, people, vote for this in November. We need this.

menikmati
07-13-2008, 11:59 AM
Maybe I'm the only one, but I don't see this as being neccassary. How about upgrade Amtrack a little, fix some roads, get some bridges upgraded, keep tahoe blue, and save some owls.

Cdubby
07-13-2008, 12:03 PM
Please, people, vote for this in November. We need this.


agreed

suprefan
07-13-2008, 12:04 PM
Keep Tahoe blue, yes, high speed train, yes.




















Owls, well THEY CAN CLONE THE MOFOS NOW.........

Boourns
07-13-2008, 12:04 PM
Amtrak would need a hell of a lot of upgrades to actually make a trip half this fast. As in completely starting from scratch.

humanoid
07-13-2008, 12:29 PM
I'm all for this, it would be awesome. I'm surprised the LA to Vegas thing hasn't happened by now. Oil Companies probably bought up all the useful land in the Mojave to ensure that it can't happen

TomAz
07-13-2008, 05:04 PM
hahahah I know it's like when a man "walked on the moon" hahahaha

this made me laugh out loud

tessalasset
07-13-2008, 08:31 PM
Maybe I'm the only one, but I don't see this as being neccassary. How about upgrade Amtrack a little, fix some roads, get some bridges upgraded, keep tahoe blue, and save some owls.

You get to all the major cities in California in like half the time, for a great price, and it's environmentally friendly, for the most part. Hell, Sierra Club and Al Gore are both for it. You could live in Los Angeles and commute to San Francisco every day, and not have to do it via helicopter like some governor I know.

TomAz
07-13-2008, 08:55 PM
I like owls though.

shakermaker113
07-13-2008, 09:11 PM
san francisco to san jose in 30 mins? bring it on. I'd never ride caltrain again.


You could live in Los Angeles and commute to San Francisco every day, and not have to do it via helicopter like some governor I know.

that's still a near 3 hour commute. and I'm sure the governator would still want his helicopter.

when can we have this, again?

menikmati
07-13-2008, 09:15 PM
You get to all the major cities in California in like half the time, for a great price, and it's environmentally friendly, for the most part. Hell, Sierra Club and Al Gore are both for it. You could live in Los Angeles and commute to San Francisco every day, and not have to do it via helicopter like some governor I know.

I don't really know how to construct all my arguments here, but I guess I would have to say first off....traveling by rail just doesn't work here in the US, not on a major scale at least....it just never has, and never will...thats just how it is....we're always gonna be a car driven society, if that makes sense. So with that, I still think before anything else, upgrading and improving freeway/highways should be first priority....you know how many deadly 2-lane highways there are just here in the bay area? Too many....they need to be widened and have proper barriers put in place. Same goes for the Golden Gate bridge....the state is all over to jump on this high speed rail, but cant put a barrier in place on the GG bridge? Sorry, but that's bullshit. A barrier on the GG should of been put in place 15 years ago, and the fact there isn't one is an embarrasement.....they wanna put all their money they make into "research" on a suicide barrier??? And they wanna keep increasing tolls by a dollar every other year? Yet no barrier is in place? And now there is talk to wanna build a rail system? Sorry, but rail should be very low on the list and not done until other things are completed.

Plus look at Amtrak, if rail travel was so successful, don't you think Amtrak would be a lot bigger and more advanced than it is now? Instead of investing in a new rail system, why not just try upgrading amtrak first? Improve the track, fix spots to make it less bogged down, maybe add another train or two that are non-stops...that would improve trip time. I mean really, what kind of people are traveling from the bay area to LA mostly? I would say people visiting and/or going on vacation...so why can't they just take amtrak instead of driving? It would sure beat paying gas right? Yet they still don't do it....and the time argument (takes longer traveling by amtrak), well plan one more day ahead then...it doesn't take that much work/thinking to do that.

And just imagine the construction of this....especially parts which travel over freeways or under them or whatever....it's just gonna be a huge mess. This is not a good idea at all. I don't really see the average person just hopping on this here and there, and having it take cars off the road...if all that was true, then upgrades would of been made to Amtrak years ago, and that stuff would of been happening now. But it's not.

Save the money, time, and resources to improving roads, bridges, and other stuff.

miscorrections
07-13-2008, 09:21 PM
The problem with Amtrak is they have to share the rails with freight trains, which get priority. That's why they're always stopping and always late, etc.

RotationSlimWang
07-13-2008, 09:28 PM
I don't really know how to construct all my arguments here, but I guess I would have to say first off....traveling by rail just doesn't work here in the US, not on a major scale at least....it just never has, and never will...thats just how it is....we're always gonna be a car driven society, if that makes sense. So with that, I still think before anything else, upgrading and improving freeway/highways should be first priority....you know how many deadly 2-lane highways there are just here in the bay area? Too many....they need to be widened and have proper barriers put in place. Same goes for the Golden Gate bridge....the state is all over to jump on this high speed rail, but cant put a barrier in place on the GG bridge? Sorry, but that's bullshit. A barrier on the GG should of been put in place 15 years ago, and the fact there isn't one is an embarrasement.....they wanna put all their money they make into "research" on a suicide barrier??? And they wanna keep increasing tolls by a dollar every other year? Yet no barrier is in place? And now there is talk to wanna build a rail system? Sorry, but rail should be very low on the list and not done until other things are completed.

Plus look at Amtrak, if rail travel was so successful, don't you think Amtrak would be a lot bigger and more advanced than it is now? Instead of investing in a new rail system, why not just try upgrading amtrak first? Improve the track, fix spots to make it less bogged down, maybe add another train or two that are non-stops...that would improve trip time. I mean really, what kind of people are traveling from the bay area to LA mostly? I would say people visiting and/or going on vacation...so why can't they just take amtrak instead of driving? It would sure beat paying gas right? Yet they still don't do it....and the time argument (takes longer traveling by amtrak), well plan one more day ahead then...it doesn't take that much work/thinking to do that.

And just imagine the construction of this....especially parts which travel over freeways or under them or whatever....it's just gonna be a huge mess. This is not a good idea at all. I don't really see the average person just hopping on this here and there, and having it take cars off the road...if all that was true, then upgrades would of been made to Amtrak years ago, and that stuff would of been happening now. But it's not.

Save the money, time, and resources to improving roads, bridges, and other stuff.

This is an excellent stream of logic. First: rail travel doesn't work in America, never has. I wonder if all the people that work for railroads would disagree. I'm sure all the people who ride subways in the cities would be intrigued to hear it, not to mention the families who became the richest dynasties in our nation thanks to railroad monopolies.

But yes, instead of pumping money into a newer, more efficient mass transit system, let's keep pumping it into rejuvenating the roadways. That way we're even further trapped in the unbelievably expensive, environment-destroying car and gasoline industry. That way long distance travel HAS to go through the airlines which only rape our checkbooks worse.

Let me guess, Menik--you don't own a car, do you?

Boourns
07-13-2008, 09:32 PM
The "time argument" is a lot more complicated than simply taking another day off work. A light rail would make a day trip to SF possible. Impossible with Amtrak. Not everyone can, wants to, or should just skip a day or two of work to sit on a train. And Amtrak can be hella unreliable. My friend came from Seattle a couple years ago to see Radiohead in SD and LA. Since the train was running 19 hours behind, she had to catch a plane in Sacramento and fly to LA in order to make it here in time for the first show.

TomAz
07-13-2008, 09:34 PM
this is neither here nor there but I was just reminded of something

in the 80s and early 90s there was a plan put forth in Texas to build high speed rail. Houston-Dallas-Austin-San Antonio-Houston in a sort of triangle. The governor put together a commission to study the idea. Among appointees was Herb Kelleher, president and CEO of Southwest Airlines. Whaddya know? it never went beyond the study stage.

Boourns
07-13-2008, 09:46 PM
The airlines get away with such unbelievable evil that they might as well be comic book supervillains.

menikmati
07-13-2008, 09:53 PM
This is an excellent stream of logic. First: rail travel doesn't work in America, never has. I wonder if all the people that work for railroads would disagree. I'm sure all the people who ride subways in the cities would be intrigued to hear it, not to mention the families who became the richest dynasties in our nation thanks to railroad monopolies.

But yes, instead of pumping money into a newer, more efficient mass transit system, let's keep pumping it into rejuvenating the roadways. That way we're even further trapped in the unbelievably expensive, environment-destroying car and gasoline industry. That way long distance travel HAS to go through the airlines which only rape our checkbooks worse.

Let me guess, Menik--you don't own a car, do you?

Mass rail travel (from CITY to CITY) doesn't work in America, if you think otherwise, you're wrong. If it did work, don't you think little ol' Amtrak would be in a lot better shape???

RotationSlimWang
07-13-2008, 09:55 PM
Perhaps you shouldn't base your opinions on what's worked so far in your little part of the country. Perhaps we should try to make it work. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but is Amtrak out of business? The rails still roll, do they not? What would you propose people who don't own cars and can't afford plane tickets do? Fucking walk?

TomAz
07-13-2008, 09:57 PM
Rail travel has not been succesful because the price of oil has been low enough that alternatives to cars and planes don't attract capital. Amtrak is an undercapitalized, overly bureaucratic quasi-governmental morass.

If the price of oil gets high enough, and maybe it is already, intelligent money will start to invest in rail.

menikmati
07-13-2008, 09:58 PM
The "time argument" is a lot more complicated than simply taking another day off work. A light rail would make a day trip to SF possible. Impossible with Amtrak. Not everyone can, wants to, or should just skip a day or two of work to sit on a train. And Amtrak can be hella unreliable. My friend came from Seattle a couple years ago to see Radiohead in SD and LA. Since the train was running 19 hours behind, she had to catch a plane in Sacramento and fly to LA in order to make it here in time for the first show.

The point is though, the only people who would be taking this train are those who just wanna travel to SF for a day or goto Disneyland on the fly (of course what happens when they get off the train? They rent a car, which disproves the theory that this would take cars off the road - anyway...)...I don't see the point investing all this money and taking all these years to build a system where only a few who wanna get away for a day will take the train. Why waste the money and time for their convenience...while everyone else has to continue to drive on the freeways that were meant for traffic 50 years ago? That makes no sense. Take a little money, improve Amtrak a little, and deal with making plans with an extra day for travel....if not, then hop on Southwest, it's cheap (I don't see how one could argue otherwise).

RotationSlimWang
07-13-2008, 09:58 PM
Amtrak from Jersey up through Boston does quite well. I can't speak to much else, not really being an expert on the matter. Except that trains have been in business for well over 100 years now. That might say a little something.

miscorrections
07-13-2008, 10:00 PM
The fact that it takes 8 hrs for me to get from San Diego to home on Amtrak is the shittiest fucking thing ever. There is no excuse for that ridiculous amount of time. Seriously, Amtrak needs to be scrapped entirely to let high speed take over.

RotationSlimWang
07-13-2008, 10:00 PM
Costs over 200 dollars to fly just about anywhere on Southwest, Menik. Not exactly cheap to those of us that, you know, have to afford cars, car maintenance, gas, insurance, and pay for our own food, housing, etc. Give it a shot first and then come tell me whether you really think cars and airlines are reasonable as the only two choices in the matter.

Hannahrain
07-13-2008, 10:01 PM
The fact that it takes 8 hrs for me to get from San Diego to home on Amtrak is the shittiest fucking thing ever. There is no excuse for that ridiculous amount of time. Seriously, Amtrak needs to be scrapped entirely to let high speed take over.

Don't touch my Amtrak, you filthy trollop. I'll cut you. I'll cut you hard. On the train. Because they don't check your baggage.

Boourns
07-13-2008, 10:01 PM
$159 round trip to fly to SF for Treasure Island on Southwest. Not so cheap considering the short distance.

miscorrections
07-13-2008, 10:02 PM
I do think it's funny that at the airport there's TSA crawling all up your ass but on the train you can bring whatever the fuck you want.

Boourns
07-13-2008, 10:03 PM
Amtrak is awesome for going to Coachella, though.

Hannahrain
07-13-2008, 10:04 PM
The train is leisurely. Easygoing people take the train. You can nap or walk around or put your feet up and observe. You can relax. It's got a lull. Cchhh chhhh chhh. I would take trains just for the hell of it if I were rich and/or unemployed.

miscorrections
07-13-2008, 10:04 PM
Taking 8 hours to go 300 miles is not leisurely, it is maddening.

miscorrections
07-13-2008, 10:05 PM
And there are always stupid people sitting next to you, and children running around and misbehaving.

miscorrections
07-13-2008, 10:05 PM
WHICH YOU COULD GET AWAY FROM MORE QUICKLY WITH HIGH SPEED RAIL

menikmati
07-13-2008, 10:07 PM
Amtrak from Jersey up through Boston does quite well. I can't speak to much else, not really being an expert on the matter. Except that trains have been in business for well over 100 years now. That might say a little something.

I know the rail system works somewhat (but not very good nor reliable)....freight trains travel all day every day moving and delivering products and resources, I'm not arguing against that. And if people so choose, they could hop on Amtrak to go travel across the country.....the point is, just because it's offered, doesn't mean it's preferred or the most reliable or fastest way to travel....our rail system isn't like Europe or Japan, and never will be. Our country was built on the interstate highway system, that's just how it is. You're never gonna stop people in this country from being "drive myself first" kind of people (planes (minus cross-country trips of course), greyhound, and amtrak will always be second options). Would having cross-country reliable trains be cool? Sure....but let's be realistic and realize that its never going to happen on a huge mainstream scale due to people not wanting to rely on other transport than their own (and I know people will say well with high gas prices, that's gonna change....we're at what? $4.50 or higher in a lot of places? If it's not happening now, then they're never gonna do it), plus just the physical size of the country and all the money and mainetnece it would take to build a new rail system (heck they have a hard enough time maintaining just amtrak), it's just not in the cards. So with that, let's fix what we have first.

RotationSlimWang
07-13-2008, 10:07 PM
Hannah, what of long-distance travel... IN THE FUTURE?

RotationSlimWang
07-13-2008, 10:08 PM
I know the rail system works somewhat (but not very good nor reliable)....freight trains travel all day every day moving and delivering products and resources, I'm not arguing against that. And if people so choose, they could hop on Amtrak to go travel across the country.....the point is, just because it's offered, doesn't mean it's preferred or the most reliable or fastest way to travel....our rail system isn't like Europe or Japan, and never will be. Our country was built on the interstate highway system, that's just how it is. You're never gonna stop people in this country from being "drive myself first" kind of people (planes (minus cross-country trips of course), greyhound, and amtrak will always be second options). Would having cross-country reliable trains be cool? Sure....but let's be realistic and realize that its never going to happen on a huge mainstream scale due to people not wanting to rely on other transport than their own (and I know people will say well with high gas prices, that's gonna change....we're at what? $4.50 or higher in a lot of places? If it's not happening now, then they're never gonna do it), plus just the physical size of the country and all the money and mainetnece it would take to build a new rail system (heck they have a hard enough time maintaining just amtrak), it's just not in the cards. So with that, let's fix what we have first.

Our country was built on the interstate highway system? Not railroads, huh?

Perhaps you should go back to school.

miscorrections
07-13-2008, 10:09 PM
I think light rail in California is eminently feasible. Light rail across the whole country? Maybe not, but that's not the current issue.

thinnerair
07-13-2008, 10:11 PM
I don't really know how to construct all my arguments here, but I guess I would have to say first off....traveling by rail just doesn't work here in the US, not on a major scale at least....it just never has, and never will...thats just how it is....


The Northeast uses Amtrak quite a bit. It is used way more than it is around Northern California, for sure.
People take trains btwn NYC, Boston, Philadelphia, DC, etc... but Amtrak is also way overpriced and there isn't too much competition for public travel except for a few lines of buses that run those routes.

The public transportation in Northern CA, particularly the BART and MUNI and all those lines are terribly underdeveloped and not all that efficient.

You dont really have too many options to go from major city to major city in CA except a flight really, so this would be great.

Dont get me wrong; being from New York, you get very spoiled when it comes to public transport. The NYC subway line is incredible. Dirty and stinky or not, it ll get you anywhere at virtually any time. None of this "last train at midnight" bullshit here in SF.

Boourns
07-13-2008, 10:11 PM
Fuck the rest of the cuntry. California should become its own sovereign nation.

Hannahrain
07-13-2008, 10:12 PM
And there are always stupid people sitting next to you, and children running around and misbehaving.

There are often stupid people sitting next to you. In general. On planes, on trains, at restaurants. At bus stops, at work, in public restrooms. In waiting rooms. In hotel lobbies. On park benches. If it were exclusive to the train, this might be valid. It's not, though, because they're everywhere. This is what headphones are for.

menikmati
07-13-2008, 10:12 PM
Our country was built on the interstate highway system? Not railroads, huh?

Perhaps you should go back to school.

I'm talking the 20th century (mostly starting in the late 20's), when automobiles become more popular to the mass public, and the thought of traveling to other states became possible for most people. You didn't see them all running to hop on the great transcontinental railroad to go travel did you? No, instead the highway system was built and is still used the most to this day.

miscorrections
07-13-2008, 10:13 PM
There are often stupid people sitting next to you. In general. On planes, on trains, at restaurants. At bus stops, at work, in public restrooms. In waiting rooms. In hotel lobbies. On park benches. If it were exclusive to the train, this might be valid. They're everywhere, Corinna. You can't escape them.

Yeah, but they don't sit next to me for 8 hours.

RotationSlimWang
07-13-2008, 10:14 PM
Automobiles didn't become a realistic mode of long-distance travel until way after the late 20s, dude. Yes, they did jump on the transcontinental railroad. Just because cars were invented in the 20s doesn't mean that it was remotely affordable or practical to move any distance on them for the average person. They were even less affordable then than they are now.

thinnerair
07-13-2008, 10:18 PM
In the 21st century, people ride on the Superhighway.

Hannahrain
07-13-2008, 10:18 PM
Yeah, but they don't sit next to me for 8 hours.

No, but when you take the plane, they're there when you're at the airport for ages before your flight and everyone is upset. They're there when you get on the plane and everyone is upset. They're there through the takeoff, the turbulence, the idiot flight attendant who runs over your foot with the cart. And everyone is upset. Then, they're there for your layover in some shitty town in the midwest where you have to pay for the internet and a coffee costs six dollars. And everyone is upset.

PotVsKtl
07-13-2008, 10:20 PM
Luddite.

thinnerair
07-13-2008, 10:21 PM
No, but when you take the plane, they're there when you're at the airport for ages before your flight and everyone is upset. They're there when you get on the plane and everyone is upset. They're there through the takeoff, the turbulence, the idiot flight attendant who runs over your foot with the cart. And everyone is upset. Then, they're there for your layover in some shitty town in the midwest where you have to pay for the internet and a coffee costs six dollars. And everyone is upset.

this reminds me of a time I saw a couple arguing in front of their children at the airport. They were doing that "yelling under their breath" and looked really mad at each other. One of the kids looks up and asks "Daddy, why do you hate Mommy?" to which the dad snaps around angrily and says "Why dont Youuuu SHUT THE HELL UP?!"
This kid was fucking 7 yrs old or something. It was intense.

miscorrections
07-13-2008, 10:21 PM
In my experience (vast! and patronizing!), the people who take the train tend to be even less human than the ones who fly.

thinnerair
07-13-2008, 10:22 PM
In my experience (vast! and patronizing!), the people who take the train tend to be even less human than the ones who fly.

I get nice and drunk and sing whatever dancey R&B number is blasting out of my headphones.

miscorrections
07-13-2008, 10:23 PM
Yeah. See? Nando is subhuman.

PotVsKtl
07-13-2008, 10:24 PM
Rail traffic is for poors and vagrants.

Hannahrain
07-13-2008, 10:25 PM
I hope someone shoots down your gilded private jet.

thinnerair
07-13-2008, 10:25 PM
Yeah. See? Nando is subhuman.

If by subhuman you mean delicious, then yes. You're right.

RotationSlimWang
07-13-2008, 10:26 PM
I like rails because no one complains about my several colicky children.

miscorrections
07-13-2008, 10:26 PM
I prefer to travel by tiger-drawn chariots. Of fire.

RotationSlimWang
07-13-2008, 10:27 PM
Fire-drawn tigers for me.

PotVsKtl
07-13-2008, 10:28 PM
I hope someone shoots down your gilded private jet.

It's hard to aim a shoulder-launched SAM when you're burdened with the fact of having all your earthly belongings strung in a handkerchief at the end of a revolting pole.

RotationSlimWang
07-13-2008, 10:29 PM
Hannah's never tied her sack to my dick, Pot.

thinnerair
07-13-2008, 10:31 PM
I like rails.

Blow is a lot harder to do in a car than a train. Fact.

thinnerair
07-13-2008, 10:32 PM
Hannah's never tied her sack to my dick pot.

teehee

Hannahrain
07-13-2008, 10:33 PM
Hannah's never tied her sack to my dick, Pot.

I'm ready for you to stop using my name in your sentences now.

RotationSlimWang
07-13-2008, 10:33 PM
Next time you should just tell me the fucking future or else it's all going to play out like this.

Hannahrain
07-13-2008, 10:35 PM
I answered your questions, you simpering toad. We have no score to settle.

RotationSlimWang
07-13-2008, 10:37 PM
I'll settle your hash, woman.

Make me a sammich.

SoulDischarge
07-14-2008, 01:31 AM
If rail travel is good enough for Kraftwerk, it's good enough for the likes of all of you. Every experience I've had with Amtrak has been 85% positive. I've never had to sit next to anyone, could bring whatever the fuck I wanted onto the train to eat/get fucked up on. Don't get searched. Lot's of leg room. The timetables and high prices are really the only main drawbacks. And the latter is the only reason I don't use it more. I vastly prefer rail travel to automotive or plane. California just needs to fix up their unnatural disaster of a public transportation system because, as it is, this system of having to rely on cars is overloading the infrastructure. It's not sustainable and it's not healthy for anyone. Half the reason I'm temporarily dropped out of school is because there's no reasonable, affordable way to commute between LA and Ventura, and driving there and back was starting to make me feel like I was constantly on the verge of having a nervous breakdown. Every time I drive in and out of LA, I nearly avoid a major accident. California drivers, get fucked.

Donaldj
07-14-2008, 08:18 AM
I'm voting for it for sure. If I would have to guess I would say the consistent high price of oil in Europe sure didn't hurt the creation of a good mass public transportation system. If oil continues to jump in price, which is pretty much inevitable, I think we will see a lot of these types of systems being developed nation wide. Will we get non stop trips from Atlanta GA to Portland OR with all that empty space in between? Maybe not, but I can definitely see high speed rails connection from San Diego to Seattle or NYC to Miami.

thinnerair
07-14-2008, 09:00 AM
There really is no need for a rail from NYC to MIAMI
You can fly for like $99 and it takes like 2 hours.

shakermaker113
07-14-2008, 09:08 AM
wow. I didn't expect this to be so controversial.


Mass rail travel (from CITY to CITY) doesn't work in America, if you think otherwise, you're wrong. If it did work, don't you think little ol' Amtrak would be in a lot better shape???

I can't speak for amtrak, but I take caltrain train between cities to & from work every day. many commuters do. and on the weekend it's packed full of people. it beats driving in every respect but one. (one: worst case, leaving the house 30 seconds later can put me up to 40 minutes later into the office). if I had a faster train I'd be even happier.


Taking 8 hours to go 300 miles is not leisurely, it is maddening.

it won't take 8 hours, it will take 2.5.

if I could take the train to & from LA I'd take that over flying. in a heartbeat. fuck those high security sardine cans.

as gas price doubles & plane flights become unaffordable, people will need an alternative.

miscorrections
07-14-2008, 09:12 AM
it won't take 8 hours, it will take 2.5.

I KNOW. I'm saying CURRENTLY, it takes me 8 hours to go 300 miles. I would appreciate it if there were a faster option not involving me using my entire bank account on gas.

frozen pilgrim
07-14-2008, 09:16 AM
If rail travel is good enough for Kraftwerk, it's good enough for the likes of all of you. Every experience I've had with Amtrak has been 85% positive. I've never had to sit next to anyone, could bring whatever the fuck I wanted onto the train to eat/get fucked up on. Don't get searched. Lot's of leg room. The timetables and high prices are really the only main drawbacks. And the latter is the only reason I don't use it more. I vastly prefer rail travel to automotive or plane. California just needs to fix up their unnatural disaster of a public transportation system because, as it is, this system of having to rely on cars is overloading the infrastructure. It's not sustainable and it's not healthy for anyone. Half the reason I'm temporarily dropped out of school is because there's no reasonable, affordable way to commute between LA and Ventura, and driving there and back was starting to make me feel like I was constantly on the verge of having a nervous breakdown. Every time I drive in and out of LA, I nearly avoid a major accident. California drivers, get fucked.

move to toronto. we have an overfunded, flashy, useless, unreliable public transit system, but it's "one of the best in the world". and thanks to our roughly 65% immigrant population, traffic moves at about segway/get-a-round pace at all times.

I for one appreciate how drivers in california seem to understand that the purpose of driving is to get from point a to b as quickly as possible.


europe's got the entirety of NA shit-kickered though.
500km/h trains, and highway speed limits that go up to 70 MPH (or no limit at all in some countries) based on traffic conditions.

thinnerair
07-14-2008, 09:24 AM
Shut up. America is the fucking BEST!

miscorrections
07-14-2008, 09:24 AM
You tell 'im.

frozen pilgrim
07-14-2008, 10:11 AM
they took 'er jebs!

humanoid
07-14-2008, 10:17 AM
I know the rail system works somewhat (but not very good nor reliable)....freight trains travel all day every day moving and delivering products and resources, I'm not arguing against that. And if people so choose, they could hop on Amtrak to go travel across the country.....the point is, just because it's offered, doesn't mean it's preferred or the most reliable or fastest way to travel....our rail system isn't like Europe or Japan, and never will be. Our country was built on the interstate highway system, that's just how it is. You're never gonna stop people in this country from being "drive myself first" kind of people (planes (minus cross-country trips of course), greyhound, and amtrak will always be second options). Would having cross-country reliable trains be cool? Sure....but let's be realistic and realize that its never going to happen on a huge mainstream scale due to people not wanting to rely on other transport than their own (and I know people will say well with high gas prices, that's gonna change....we're at what? $4.50 or higher in a lot of places? If it's not happening now, then they're never gonna do it), plus just the physical size of the country and all the money and mainetnece it would take to build a new rail system (heck they have a hard enough time maintaining just amtrak), it's just not in the cards. So with that, let's fix what we have first.

I agree with much of what you said. Just wanted to add that in my lifetime, I have taken several cross country Amtrak trips, LA to NYC, and almost every seat in every car has been sold out for most of the way each time. I don't think its as ridiculous as it may seem.

I also wouldn't think that now is the point that it will happen, or it never will. You say $4.50 gas prices should have made it happen. But what if gas is $6.50 a gallon next year? I don't think the majority of the population can withstand that degree of escalation and not at least heavily consider a drastic lifestyle change.

shakermaker113
07-14-2008, 08:06 PM
I KNOW. I'm saying CURRENTLY, it takes me 8 hours to go 300 miles. I would appreciate it if there were a faster option not involving me using my entire bank account on gas.

oh. got it. thanks for the clarification. agreed!


thanks to our roughly 65% immigrant population, traffic moves at about segway/get-a-round pace at all times.

did you really just say *segway* pace?


I also wouldn't think that now is the point that it will happen, or it never will. You say $4.50 gas prices should have made it happen. But what if gas is $6.50 a gallon next year? I don't think the majority of the population can withstand that degree of escalation and not at least heavily consider a drastic lifestyle change.

$4.50 gas prices will make it happen. just watch the election in november. if it doesn't, then fuck it -- california is too dumb for its own good.

*if* gas is $6.50 a gallon? try *when*. or how about when it is $9 a gallon? just wait. it will happen. within the next two years. and if at that point we don't have a high speed rail on the way, we will be regretting it.

thinnerair
07-14-2008, 10:10 PM
put it this way. if they build this train, a lot of ppl will benefit from it and expand their possi ilities, from job options, commute options, real estate and other shit. california lacks really solid public transportation. if you disagree, you are stupid.

Pixiessp
07-14-2008, 10:18 PM
I wanna wid da twain

tessalasset
07-15-2008, 12:05 AM
you want to rid the train? rid it of what?

full on idle
07-15-2008, 12:25 AM
put it this way. if they build this train, a lot of ppl will benefit from it and expand their possi ilities, from job options, commute options, real estate and other shit. california lacks really solid public transportation. if you disagree, you are stupid.

It's not California's fault that you refuse to learn Muni routes.

thefunkylama
07-15-2008, 02:13 AM
I agree that California public transportation needs a major overhaul. There's not a reliable bus around here for miles and miles and so most people don't even really know what public transportation is really about. Most people I know look at it as a last resort instead of an essential part of getting around. S'part of why I love San Fran so much; as flawed as the system can be, at least there IS a system.

thinnerair
07-15-2008, 09:10 AM
It's not California's fault that you refuse to learn Muni routes.

MUNI is garbage. At least those buses that ride on tracks underground and only go about 16 blocks. Those MUNI things are garbage.

The buses are alright and I like that I can ride them for free if I feel like being dishonest and showing a bogus transfer ticket.

I will say that my first experience with CALTRAIN last night was a fairly enjoyable one. Speedy, clean, affordable trains. Good shit.

Hannahrain
07-15-2008, 09:14 AM
You greedy bastards. When it takes you an entire afternoon to go and buy groceries, you'll know about shitty public transport.

Except Alma. Alma's complaint is legit.

thinnerair
07-15-2008, 09:24 AM
You greedy bastards. When it takes you an entire afternoon to go and buy groceries, you'll know about shitty public transport.

Except Alma. Alma's complaint is legit.

15 miles in the snow? When you were my age?

Hannahrain
07-15-2008, 09:26 AM
Uphill both ways, and I had to carry a watermelon. And a few babies.

Hannahrain
07-15-2008, 09:27 AM
The babies are an unrelated complaint.

thinnerair
07-15-2008, 09:31 AM
Hi my name Hannah and I'm 15 years old and I don't care what my momma says but I'm gonna have a baby.
I will do whatever it takes to take care of my baby.
If it has to come out of prostituting my body so be it.
I'm gonna dress my baby in all brand names and if I can't afford it then I guess I'm gonna steal it.
If my baby gets cold and it needs a blanket it's alright cause I have it.
If my baby needs clothes, it's cool cause I got tons of em.
If my baby loses a pacifier it's OK cause I got three more.
I'm not just having sex with one, not two, but three different guys.
That's right, I'm a player, it's cool. cause I got it like that.
My dream is to drop out of school to be on girls gone wild and to have my baby and there's nothing my stupid mother could say to change my mind.

Hannahrain
07-15-2008, 09:32 AM
You don't know me. Y'all don't know me.

thinnerair
07-15-2008, 09:33 AM
Whateva. Whateva.

menikmati
07-15-2008, 09:55 AM
I use to ride the MUNI train back from SFSU for free my whole first semester. It was risky, and I almost got caught once, but someone like two seats in front of me was doing the same thing, got caught and the police were busy with him, so I lucked out.