Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Living Car Free
Reload this Page >

Texans Against High-Speed Rail

Notices
Living Car Free Do you live car free or car light? Do you prefer to use alternative transportation (bicycles, walking, other human-powered or public transportation) for everyday activities whenever possible? Discuss your lifestyle here.

Texans Against High-Speed Rail

Old 02-10-16, 06:40 PM
  #126  
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 27,767

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked 105 Times in 71 Posts
Originally Posted by Mobile 155 View Post
At least it wasn't pyramids with trees.
It was right up there with the tarping tall buildings like shade trees thing. Or vending machines for camping equipment out in nowheresville for the benefit of traveling vagabonds.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Old 02-10-16, 07:11 PM
  #127  
Darth Lefty 
Disco Infiltrator
 
Darth Lefty's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Folsom CA
Posts: 9,775

Bikes: Schwinn Paramount, Salsa Timberjack, Diamondback Expert TG, Burley Samba

Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1563 Post(s)
Liked 164 Times in 104 Posts
Originally Posted by Mobile 155 View Post
Still I thought it was quaint to think of people being born, living and dying in a few square miles because people didn't used to move around much...
A recent news magazine type podcast was doing a thought experiment - has there ever been a society with no money? And they did dig down into the age of trade. Neolithic Egyptian sites have pretty stones traded from Afghanistan. There was always someone walking out of town to make a buck.
__________________
Genesis 49:16-17
Darth Lefty is offline  
Old 02-10-16, 07:33 PM
  #128  
Bandera 
~>~
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: TX Hill Country
Posts: 5,936
Mentioned: 87 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1109 Post(s)
Liked 144 Times in 93 Posts
As a Texan I see little point in going to either Dallas or Houston, much less traveling between them by any means of transportation.
If you see the need have at it, just don't add your cost and complexity to my budget local/state/federal.

Hideous places both, unless compared to NYC or LA.

-Bandera
__________________
'74 Raleigh Internat'l. '77 Trek TX900 FG. '90 Vitus 979. '10 Merckx EMX3. '13 Soma Stanyan

Last edited by Bandera; 02-10-16 at 09:09 PM.
Bandera is offline  
Old 02-10-16, 08:32 PM
  #129  
Mobile 155
Senior Member
 
Mobile 155's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: So Cal
Posts: 5,009

Bikes: 72-76 Peugeot, 89 Klein Quantum Road Bike, 2013 Haro FL Comp 29er MTB.

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1439 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 34 Times in 26 Posts
Originally Posted by Darth Lefty View Post
A recent news magazine type podcast was doing a thought experiment - has there ever been a society with no money? And they did dig down into the age of trade. Neolithic Egyptian sites have pretty stones traded from Afghanistan. There was always someone walking out of town to make a buck.
Yes, people always moved about. And the real point is they have always been looking for the easiest way to do it. That is why I said for the HSR to work it had to be easy to use and inexpensive for the user. The HSR sounds like a good idea but I am not sure it will be worth it with the cost of air traffic being the bench mark.

For or most compact cars the trip would only take about a tank of gas. At today's prices that could be as little as 20 bucks maybe 30.00 door to door. I think you can get a flight for less than $200.00. It would seem as if the cost margin got the HSR might be a bit tight.
Mobile 155 is offline  
Old 02-10-16, 09:36 PM
  #130  
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 27,767

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked 105 Times in 71 Posts
Originally Posted by Mobile 155 View Post
For or most compact cars the trip would only take about a tank of gas.
With two or three and passengers, a couple of bicycles on a rack, and the family dog if so desired for little extra cost.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Old 02-10-16, 10:31 PM
  #131  
cooker
Prefers Cicero
 
cooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,793

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 75 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3536 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by Bandera View Post
As a Texan I see little point in going to either Dallas or Houston, much less traveling between them by any means of transportation.
If you see the need have at it, just don't add your cost and complexity to my budget local/state/federal.

Hideous places both, unless compared to NYC or LA.

-Bandera
Don't bury your head in all that Texas sand . You have a huge stake in this. Tens of thousands (maybe hundreds of thousands) of Texans and others travel into and out of and between those cities every day, and even though you don't, both your wallet and your lungs are already being heavily taxed to support it. So what would really benefit you, is if they did it in an energy-efficient and cost-effective way, and it's strongly in your interests to to pay attention to this and get involved to influence developments in the direction that will cost or harm you the least.

Last edited by cooker; 02-10-16 at 10:38 PM.
cooker is offline  
Old 02-10-16, 10:40 PM
  #132  
cooker
Prefers Cicero
 
cooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,793

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 75 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3536 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
With two or three and passengers, a couple of bicycles on a rack, and the family dog if so desired for little extra cost.
Yes cars are very efficient for group travel, but the overwhelming use they are actually put to is solo travel.
cooker is offline  
Old 02-11-16, 10:10 AM
  #133  
Mobile 155
Senior Member
 
Mobile 155's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: So Cal
Posts: 5,009

Bikes: 72-76 Peugeot, 89 Klein Quantum Road Bike, 2013 Haro FL Comp 29er MTB.

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1439 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 34 Times in 26 Posts
Originally Posted by cooker View Post
Yes cars are very efficient for group travel, but the overwhelming use they are actually put to is solo travel.
A very good what if point. Cars are great "if" used efficiently. And as we know they are getting more fuel efficient every day. Following that same train of thought what "if" the HSR turns into another Amtrak? What "if" it turns out to cost more than air travel? What if people don't use it?

Being built by by a private company if it doesn't work as expected will in be allowed to close up like any other private interest or will the people of Texas have to save it like the people of the US have to save Amtrak? Will the public get their land back?

I am not committed to believing HSR will not work only that from my experience in my state it is turning into a bit of an albatross.
Mobile 155 is offline  
Old 02-11-16, 06:23 PM
  #134  
tandempower
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,353
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8072 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
"amphetamines"? "employers to expect people to work 16+ hour days"?
It's the same as expecting people to drive 40 mile commutes for employment. MVs are the amphetamines of transportation.

Originally Posted by Mobile 155 View Post
At least it wasn't pyramids with trees. Still I thought it was quaint to think of people being born, living and dying in a few square miles because people didn't used to move around much. Well except for the new world discovery thing and maybe the move all the way from the east coast to the west coast. And I guess entire populations of First Nation people moving from a summer city to a winter city didn't count either?
Those are different forms of travel than commuting and running multiple errands daily over numerous linear miles of distance. You know people didn't cover that much distance daily before MVs. You call any geographical area "sprawl" but the concern with sprawl is that it distances people's homes from work and other destinations that makes alternatives to driving a difficult choice. This has been discussed a million times and you "deniers" persist in sticking your fingers in your ears and singing "la la la." You understand the problem of sprawl and driving-dependency but you just defend and defend it in any way you can for some reason. What's so hard about just admitting it is an objectively valid point that's incredibly difficult to address because of the scale and complexity of the problem?
tandempower is offline  
Old 02-11-16, 06:40 PM
  #135  
Bandera 
~>~
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: TX Hill Country
Posts: 5,936
Mentioned: 87 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1109 Post(s)
Liked 144 Times in 93 Posts
Originally Posted by cooker View Post
You have a huge stake in this.
The San Antonio-Austin "high speed rail" boondoggle collapsed today under scrutiny of it's plausibility, which was Zero despite hyperbole and lobbying.
Score 1.

PS: Both of my grandfathers were railroad men and the technology is quite familiar to me having been responsible for moving several Billions of $ of merchandise via rail on a couple of continents over the years. Texans know the smell of Bull_**** at a distance........

-Bandera
__________________
'74 Raleigh Internat'l. '77 Trek TX900 FG. '90 Vitus 979. '10 Merckx EMX3. '13 Soma Stanyan
Bandera is offline  
Old 02-11-16, 08:07 PM
  #136  
Mobile 155
Senior Member
 
Mobile 155's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: So Cal
Posts: 5,009

Bikes: 72-76 Peugeot, 89 Klein Quantum Road Bike, 2013 Haro FL Comp 29er MTB.

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1439 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 34 Times in 26 Posts
Originally Posted by tandempower View Post
It's the same as expecting people to drive 40 mile commutes for employment. MVs are the amphetamines of transportation.


Those are different forms of travel than commuting and running multiple errands daily over numerous linear miles of distance. You know people didn't cover that much distance daily before MVs. You call any geographical area "sprawl" but the concern with sprawl is that it distances people's homes from work and other destinations that makes alternatives to driving a difficult choice. This has been discussed a million times and you "deniers" persist in sticking your fingers in your ears and singing "la la la." You understand the problem of sprawl and driving-dependency but you just defend and defend it in any way you can for some reason. What's so hard about just admitting it is an objectively valid point that's incredibly difficult to address because of the scale and complexity of the problem?
That would be a subjective not objective point. If you took the example of Southern California it would be just as easy move employment into outlying industrial parks where property is already less expensive. All that has happened is people have found a way to move at greater speed over greater distances. Read about the early travels of Franklin and see how many states he moved between and how often. Trains made it possible for people, that may have moved to San Francisco, the capability to travel back to New York or Chicago several times a year rather than once or twice in a lifetime. Cars simply give people the freedom to live where they want and commute if the so desire. There are people today that live on the west coast and work on the east coast. They commute by Air.

And desire they did if you bother to read about the success of the Red Cars in LA. Those Red Cars moved workers to what was called the suburbs because they could live better or in better places for less money.

Still the HSR goes to expand on the point. People could live on Houston and Work in Dallas if they wanted. It seems as if several already do with the amount of air traffic that suggests the HSR might have a customer base. I have my doubts that they will gather that many from air travel but you never know. But what it absolutely proves even by its suggestion that living and dying within walking distance of your birth place isn't the norm and hasn't been for a very long time.

Last edited by Mobile 155; 02-11-16 at 08:10 PM.
Mobile 155 is offline  
Old 02-11-16, 10:01 PM
  #137  
cooker
Prefers Cicero
 
cooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,793

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 75 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3536 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by mobile 155 View Post
being built by by a private company if it doesn't work as expected will in be allowed to close up like any other private interest or will the people of texas have to save it like the people of the us have to save Chrysler and GM?
fify
cooker is offline  
Old 02-11-16, 10:20 PM
  #138  
cooker
Prefers Cicero
 
cooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,793

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 75 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3536 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by Bandera View Post
The San Antonio-Austin "high speed rail" boondoggle collapsed today under scrutiny of it's plausibility, which was Zero despite hyperbole and lobbying.
Score 1.

PS: Both of my grandfathers were railroad men and the technology is quite familiar to me having been responsible for moving several Billions of $ of merchandise via rail on a couple of continents over the years. Texans know the smell of Bull_**** at a distance........

-Bandera
What are your thoughts on rail freight - should it be built up more in the US?
cooker is offline  
Old 02-11-16, 10:36 PM
  #139  
Mobile 155
Senior Member
 
Mobile 155's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: So Cal
Posts: 5,009

Bikes: 72-76 Peugeot, 89 Klein Quantum Road Bike, 2013 Haro FL Comp 29er MTB.

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1439 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 34 Times in 26 Posts
Originally Posted by cooker View Post
fify
Not a problem for me. I believe only Ford showed any ethics by not taking the bailout. And Chrysler stiffed the public when the went belly up and now that effort to save them is enjoyed by Fiat. I don't believe in too big to fail. GM should have been allowed to fold and replaced by any other company that had the will to produce what ever the public wanted.

So when passenger rail was proven unprofitable I think it should have died an honorable death. Amtrak is little more than a diseased corps of a transportation system that is hardly ever on time and only used by the grace of rented or leased tracks.

If the Texas HSR is to work I believe it has to be profitable or should be allowed to fail. If it fails it should cost the tax payers nothing. But that is simply my opinion. For my State I see no advantage to a HSR because it will be state and federally funded so it will cost the tax payer for something they never asked for.
Mobile 155 is offline  
Old 02-11-16, 11:07 PM
  #140  
cooker
Prefers Cicero
 
cooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,793

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 75 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3536 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by Mobile 155 View Post
Not a problem for me. I believe only Ford showed any ethics by not taking the bailout. And Chrysler stiffed the public when the went belly up and now that effort to save them is enjoyed by Fiat. I don't believe in too big to fail. GM should have been allowed to fold and replaced by any other company that had the will to produce what ever the public wanted.

So when passenger rail was proven unprofitable I think it should have died an honorable death. Amtrak is little more than a diseased corps of a transportation system that is hardly ever on time and only used by the grace of rented or leased tracks.

If the Texas HSR is to work I believe it has to be profitable or should be allowed to fail. If it fails it should cost the tax payers nothing. But that is simply my opinion. For my State I see no advantage to a HSR because it will be state and federally funded so it will cost the tax payer for something they never asked for.
I'd be in total agreement if the same market discipline and transparency were applied to the automotive and airline industries, and I actually think rail would do very well on a level playing field.
cooker is offline  
Old 02-12-16, 12:12 AM
  #141  
Mobile 155
Senior Member
 
Mobile 155's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: So Cal
Posts: 5,009

Bikes: 72-76 Peugeot, 89 Klein Quantum Road Bike, 2013 Haro FL Comp 29er MTB.

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1439 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 34 Times in 26 Posts
Originally Posted by cooker View Post
I'd be in total agreement if the same market discipline and transparency were applied to the automotive and airline industries, and I actually think rail would do very well on a level playing field.
Maybe, but you don't have to lay track in the air. You don't have to put your rail lines where only the people that cannot afford to fight you live.
Rail gad their shot. They got government land grants for ROWs and government bonds to build it from congress. They had passenger rails and slowly but surely they lost money because of Cars, trucks and airlines. Freight lines still benefit from that head start. How much more level do you need it?
Mobile 155 is offline  
Old 02-12-16, 01:23 AM
  #142  
Rollfast
What happened?
 
Rollfast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Around here somewhere
Posts: 7,668

Bikes: 3 Rollfasts, 3 Schwinns, a Shelby and a Higgins Flightliner in a pear tree!

Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1624 Post(s)
Liked 108 Times in 96 Posts
It just makes the oops I can't use that bar name sorry tonks next to the track noisier and more dangerous, I gather.
__________________

Marcia Brady rode a ROLLFAST!
Rollfast is offline  
Old 02-12-16, 05:29 AM
  #143  
SHBR
C*pt*i* Obvious
 
SHBR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 1,127
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 494 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
HSR is inevitable, car ownership will start to decrease as it will become less affordable for the masses. Texas and California both have a deeply entrenched car culture. Consider these states as a testing ground for further nationwide implementation. In China, car ownership is increasing, however this is mostly because of the tax revenue it creates. Nothing happens on a massive scale by accident.
SHBR is offline  
Old 02-12-16, 06:24 AM
  #144  
Ekdog
Senior Member
 
Ekdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seville, Spain
Posts: 4,402

Bikes: Brompton M6R, mountain bikes, Circe Omnis+ tandem

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 145 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by SHBR View Post
HSR is inevitable, car ownership will start to decrease as it will become less affordable for the masses. Texas and California both have a deeply entrenched car culture. Consider these states as a testing ground for further nationwide implementation. In China, car ownership is increasing, however this is mostly because of the tax revenue it creates. Nothing happens on a massive scale by accident.
Is China moving away from their experimentation with replacing bicycles with cars in their cities?

Last edited by Ekdog; 02-12-16 at 06:43 AM.
Ekdog is offline  
Old 02-12-16, 06:30 AM
  #145  
Ekdog
Senior Member
 
Ekdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seville, Spain
Posts: 4,402

Bikes: Brompton M6R, mountain bikes, Circe Omnis+ tandem

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 145 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by SHBR View Post
HSR is inevitable, car ownership will start to decrease as it will become less affordable for the masses.
Less affordable as regards money or also in terms of the environment, public health and safety and so on?

Even if we don't give a damn about anything but money:

[h=1]Pollution crisis is choking the Chinese economy[/h][h=2]The Asian colossus is losing 6.5 percent of GDP to pollution-rated costs.[/h]

Last edited by Ekdog; 02-12-16 at 06:42 AM.
Ekdog is offline  
Old 02-12-16, 06:50 AM
  #146  
Ekdog
Senior Member
 
Ekdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seville, Spain
Posts: 4,402

Bikes: Brompton M6R, mountain bikes, Circe Omnis+ tandem

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 145 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
1.6 million deaths due to air pollution in China. Can they afford not to move away from the car-centric model defended by so many in this forum?

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/02/11/pollution-crisis-is-choking-the-chinese-economy.html
Ekdog is offline  
Old 02-12-16, 07:31 AM
  #147  
Bandera 
~>~
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: TX Hill Country
Posts: 5,936
Mentioned: 87 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1109 Post(s)
Liked 144 Times in 93 Posts
Originally Posted by cooker View Post
What are your thoughts on rail freight - should it be built up more in the US?
The entire infrastructure from ports through the railway system is badly outdated and in need of an overhaul/upgrade, essential elements of the economy that are well worth investment/re-think. Yes, a more efficient freight rail system would serve real world needs quite well.

-Bandera
__________________
'74 Raleigh Internat'l. '77 Trek TX900 FG. '90 Vitus 979. '10 Merckx EMX3. '13 Soma Stanyan
Bandera is offline  
Old 02-12-16, 09:40 AM
  #148  
tandempower
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,353
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8072 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by cooker View Post
I actually think rail would do very well on a level playing field.
Do you mean by putting the public right-of-way of all roads up for bid to corporate investors who would transform them into either toll roads, rail lines, or both?

If you did that, you'd have to regulate the sale to prevent automotive interests from pooling their money for the sake of creating roads with low enough tolls (or free of charge) that promote driving over trains, etc.

MV sales, service, and insurance makes a lot more money than train ticket sales so if you allow business competition to control road right-of-way, the car companies will use their market position to exclude rail and promote driving by lowering the tolls, as they have done with the interstate highway system.

They will even pay smart marketing minds to spin it as a benefit to consumers and commerce to have big business pay for the highways and allow private individuals to use them for free.

Last edited by tandempower; 02-12-16 at 09:48 AM.
tandempower is offline  
Old 02-12-16, 08:16 PM
  #149  
cooker
Prefers Cicero
 
cooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,793

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 75 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3536 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by Mobile 155 View Post
Maybe, but you don't have to lay track in the air. You don't have to put your rail lines where only the people that cannot afford to fight you live.
Rail gad their shot. They got government land grants for ROWs and government bonds to build it from congress. They had passenger rails and slowly but surely they lost money because of Cars, trucks and airlines. Freight lines still benefit from that head start. How much more level do you need it?
Airports take up massive space in their own right and have an impact on property values for miles around due to height restrictions, noise pollution, fumes, fear of crashes, and so on, so one major airport probably impinges as much on property owners' rights and economic benefits as thousands of miles of rail. Certainly in many area there is a lot of public resistance, both rural and urban, to airport expansions and highway re-routing, widening, extra interchanges and so on, so all forms of transportation have both good and bad implications for property owners in various locations, and can only operate if government gets involved with permits, expropriations, and in most cases, subsidies of various sorts.

It's true that rail ceded most of it's long-distance passenger business to cars and planes over the course of the 20th century, but they had a lot of help from government - for example, as mentioned the interstates are one of the costliest government projects anywhere, ever, and certainly LAX or O'Hare or whatever only exist at their current massive size because governments sided with proponents over opponents, and kicked in a lot of funds too.

Now, all around the world, passenger rail is making a comeback, as both the general public and governments start to buy into it again, and inevitably it will claw its way back into a competitive position in the USA again as well, although obviously not as readily as it is doing so in Europe, China, Japan etc.

Last edited by cooker; 02-12-16 at 08:19 PM.
cooker is offline  
Old 02-12-16, 08:24 PM
  #150  
cooker
Prefers Cicero
 
cooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,793

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 75 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3536 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by Bandera View Post
The entire infrastructure from ports through the railway system is badly outdated and in need of an overhaul/upgrade, essential elements of the economy that are well worth investment/re-think. Yes, a more efficient freight rail system would serve real world needs quite well.

-Bandera
Why don't the rail and freight companies just start doing it?
cooker is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.