Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 168 posts

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#31

Post by projectramo »

davidf18 wrote: post #11
projectramo wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know California is a net contributor to the federal government, right? By your argument, California could easily afford to pay for it if only Mississippi, Louisiana, Tennessee, Montana, and Kentucky were not "mooching" off of it.

> "By your argument, California could easily afford to pay for it if only Mississippi, Louisiana, Tennessee, Montana, and Kentucky were not "mooching" off of it." Not if the funds are paying for people living in these states legally. . Surely you see the distinction between funding people legally living in the US and those living here illegally. What I know is that if California elected responsible politicians that u…

I didn't downvote you.

I didn't make the argument that California should or should not fund anyone over anyone else. That is up to the (good) people of California.

You seemed to indicate the California could have chosen to spend its money in a different manner. You started off by pointing out "Money [is] fungible". I was just pointing out the logical conclusion of that argument.

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#32

Post by dragonwriter »

ZanyProgrammer wrote: post #4

They should've started high speed rail in the bookends, since any construction there would have immediate benefits for hundreds of thousands of riders, and instill public confidence in the project. That would've helped Caltrain electrification right there.

> They should've started high speed rail in the bookends, since any construction there would have immediate benefits for hundreds of thousands of riders, and instill public confidence in the project.

The bookends are the most expensive part to build in, and the parts with the best existing mass transit; their of the least marginal value until they are connected with each other.

San Jose into the Valley is quite a sensible initial operating segment, in terms of bang for the buck.

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#33

Post by Kluny »

davidf18 wrote: post #16
davidf18 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "By your argument, California could easily afford to pay for it if only Mississippi, Louisiana, Tennessee, Montana, and Kentucky were not "mooching" off of it." Not if the funds are paying for people living in these states legally. . Surely you see the distinction between funding people legally living in the US and those living here illegally. What I know is that if California elected responsible politicians that u…

Instead of down voting, please state why you want to fund people who are living in the US illegally instead of funding a train for people who are here legally.

I don't think anyone wants to fund them, and we aren't. We pretty generally agree that they contribute more to the economy than they take out of it. The California agricultural economy would collapse without them since employers can't afford to pay legal wages.

Now, the fact that their business model is so unsound that they can't pay legal minimum wage is a whole other problem. But as it stands, California is getting a damn fine deal out of their illegal Mexicans.

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#34

Post by ZanyProgrammer »

dragonwriter wrote: post #32
ZanyProgrammer wrote: post #4

They should've started high speed rail in the bookends, since any construction there would have immediate benefits for hundreds of thousands of riders, and instill public confidence in the project. That would've helped Caltrain electrification right there.

> They should've started high speed rail in the bookends, since any construction there would have immediate benefits for hundreds of thousands of riders, and instill public confidence in the project. The bookends are the most expensive part to build in, and the parts with the best existing mass transit; their of the least marginal value until they are connected with each other. San Jose into the Valley is quite a sen…

All those thousands of daily riders camping out in line to go to the Central Valley.

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#35

Post by ZanyProgrammer »

JamilD wrote: post #26
gumby wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well the Caltrain electrification is in one of the book ends. The logic for starting in the middle is that it created economic assistance (as a side effect) in an area with a jobs problem. Why not start that part sooner rather than later?

Exactly -- the HSR Authority is investing heavily in upgrades to Caltrain and Metrolink; they provide tangible benefits to commuters in the cities while building the infrastructure they need to run the high-speed trains in the cities. They can't get the high-speed trains running between SF and SJ until electrification and upgrades to the corridor are finished. And at the same time, they're doing construction in the C…

Which upgrades to Caltrain? CBOSS? San Bruno grade sep? You really want to defend those?

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#36

Post by rocqua »

erentz wrote: post #29

Question: the imbalance between what California contributes vs receivers from the federal government is pretty crazy to me. I'll grant some imbalances are necessary - you will always have richer and poorer areas of the country. But when he gap is as wide as it is, and then it is turned into a tool for punishing CA due to our politics, at what point should CA seek to seriously tackle this? Firstly of course is the ver…

I'd venture such a dividend scheme would immediately get hit with lawsuits by the federal government.

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#37

Post by entee »

davidf18 wrote: post #11
projectramo wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know California is a net contributor to the federal government, right? By your argument, California could easily afford to pay for it if only Mississippi, Louisiana, Tennessee, Montana, and Kentucky were not "mooching" off of it.

> "By your argument, California could easily afford to pay for it if only Mississippi, Louisiana, Tennessee, Montana, and Kentucky were not "mooching" off of it." Not if the funds are paying for people living in these states legally. . Surely you see the distinction between funding people legally living in the US and those living here illegally. What I know is that if California elected responsible politicians that u…

A major flaw in your argument is the implication that undocumented individuals in CA (or the US in general) do not pay for the services they use. While in certain cases that might be true, in others they are net contributors. See social security taxes [1].

I also think you're making a fairly inflammatory argument without providing much data or grappling with the practical implications of your argument. Even if we were to take all the money we spend as Californians on undocumented immigrants, would that actually come close to the funds we should be receiving for Caltrain electrification? I'm not sure. And what damage to our communities would be done by removing that money from the system? Immigrants, undocumented and fully documented, grow the larger economy and are meaningful parts of our community, and I'm pretty sure we'd be worse off without them.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/09/undocum...

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#38

Post by davidf18 »

gumby wrote: post #20
davidf18 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "By your argument, California could easily afford to pay for it if only Mississippi, Louisiana, Tennessee, Montana, and Kentucky were not "mooching" off of it." Not if the funds are paying for people living in these states legally. . Surely you see the distinction between funding people legally living in the US and those living here illegally. What I know is that if California elected responsible politicians that u…

Man, you really are upset with the idea of people living in California "illegally". Have you ever speeded and gotten away with it? Does that mean you also live in California "illegally" as that would make you also a scofflaw?

I am upset about the whining. Suck it up California. You elected politicians who use your tax funds on people who are in the country illegally and then you whine because you aren't getting federal funds. Since money is fungible it simply means that you want federal funds to pay for people who live in the country illegally. If you really want funding for the rail which I agree should exist, simply elect politicians that are fiscally responsible. It really is that simple. If you're unwilling to do that, stop whining and suck it up.

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#39

Post by JamilD »

ZanyProgrammer wrote: post #34
dragonwriter wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They should've started high speed rail in the bookends, since any construction there would have immediate benefits for hundreds of thousands of riders, and instill public confidence in the project. The bookends are the most expensive part to build in, and the parts with the best existing mass transit; their of the least marginal value until they are connected with each other. San Jose into the Valley is quite a sen…

All those thousands of daily riders camping out in line to go to the Central Valley.

Many workers in the Central Valley do commute to the Bay Area or LA.

http://kvpr.org/post/two-hour-daily-commute-thousands-valley...

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#40

Post by dragonwriter »

jedberg wrote: post #19
ZanyProgrammer wrote: post #4

They should've started high speed rail in the bookends, since any construction there would have immediate benefits for hundreds of thousands of riders, and instill public confidence in the project. That would've helped Caltrain electrification right there.

Yup. The train is a huge boondoggle, mostly because they are building it backwards. Building the middle part where no one lives is easier and will make a lot of jobs in a lot of poor areas, but then it is just a secret welfare program, not a useful piece of infrastructure. Let's just provide welfare if that's the goal, and then build some useful infrastructure like electrified tracks in the Bay Area and bullet train…

> Building the middle part where no one lives is easier and will make a lot of jobs in a lot of poor areas

The planned initial operating segment has one endpoint in the third largest city in the state, and passes through the fifth largest city in the state, so the idea that it's in a place where no one lives is, well, what recently has become known as an "alternative fact".

Post reply on HN