A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck • Hacker News Board

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#51

Post by jhallenworld » Mon, Mar 13, 2017, 9:20 PM UTC

davidf18 wrote: post #3

Money if fungible. California spends an enormous amount of money on illegal aliens (illegal immigrants). For example, there was an NYT op-ed piece which explained that 200 illegal aliens are allowed to attend at in-state tuition UC Berkeley. Thus, the Federal Funds noted in this article were in fact being used to fund people who are residing in this country illegally. We don't even have enough money for the poor who…

I recently learned that what some think of as an illegal alien problem today began as a legal guest worker program between 1942 and 1964:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bracero_program

This set expectations for generations of businesses and workers and obviously continues to this day. The re-branding of welcome migrant workers to vile illegal aliens is just politics.

Do migrants depress the wages of American workers? Probably to some degree (I suppose it's like the H1B visa program). Do they interfere with the sovereignty of the United States? I think the argument is ridiculous, just pandering to nationalists.

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#52

Post by davidf18 » Mon, Mar 13, 2017, 9:21 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #25

iagooar wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Words can't express how sad I feel about people who write and believe in such a logic. Where is our humanity gone? How can you think that by helping people (legal or not) you are doing something wrong? USA is a country that has a massive problem with not accepting what it is, what it has, and what it could have. But then again, a country is made of diverse people. I feel happy that some people in California feel that…

> The poor living legally in your country ARE NOT competing for resources with "illegal aliens" you call them I am generally support immigration. But we need to remain realistic. Of course such competition exists. If an anti-poverty program for only me costs X, then that program for a million people will cost more [1]. It takes more resources, in aggregate, to maintain something for more people. That, in turn, means…

> "I am generally support immigration. But we need to remain realistic."

I support immigration. After all, my ancestors were immigrants. I do not support people living here illegally. There is the distinction.

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#53

Post by mikeyouse » Mon, Mar 13, 2017, 9:26 PM UTC

davidf18 wrote: post #24

iagooar wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Words can't express how sad I feel about people who write and believe in such a logic. Where is our humanity gone? How can you think that by helping people (legal or not) you are doing something wrong? USA is a country that has a massive problem with not accepting what it is, what it has, and what it could have. But then again, a country is made of diverse people. I feel happy that some people in California feel that…

> "Words can't express how sad I feel about people who write and believe in such a logic. Where is our humanity gone?" The correct term is illegal aliens. I didn't create the term, but I do use the language correctly. My humanity is for those poor people who live in the US who don't get enough funding as it is and who lose out on the funding because of illegal aliens. That is where my humanity is. My question to you…

The vast majority of children of immigrants in public schools are US citizens by virtue of being born in the US. This argument about spending money on educating illegal immigrants is pretty facile.

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#54

Post by davidf18 » Mon, Mar 13, 2017, 9:26 PM UTC

avar wrote: post #48

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The poor living legally in your country ARE NOT competing for resources with "illegal aliens" you call them I am generally support immigration. But we need to remain realistic. Of course such competition exists. If an anti-poverty program for only me costs X, then that program for a million people will cost more [1]. It takes more resources, in aggregate, to maintain something for more people. That, in turn, means…

Leaving the hairy question of immigration aside, you're assuming that economic systems on the scale of nation-states are zero-sum. It's not at all clear that providing a service to one person v.s. a million people is "cheaper" on that scale, because when you're talking about a nation you also tax those million people. You can take this logic to its extremes and assume that if you had only one very wealthy person livi…

> "Leaving the hairy question of immigration aside..."

I am all for legal immigration.

Your comment might be correctly phrased as "leaving the hairy question of illegal immigration aside..."

> "you're assuming that economic systems on the scale of nation-states are zero-sum."

I'm not assuming that at all. I'm simply making a statement that California taxpayer funds (and since money is fungible) and federal funds are used to fund people who live in this country illegally and that is only because the citizens of California elected politicians who are not fiscally responsible and seem to feel that it OK to use taxpayer funds to pay for people living here illegally.

As I originally stated, if Californians simply elected responsible politicians they would have the funds for paying for the electric train without the federal grant.

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#55

Post by dragonwriter » Mon, Mar 13, 2017, 9:26 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #27

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?

> it created economic assistance (as a side effect) Let's be honest, it was an important if not dominant reason for this project.

The initial operating segment was always going to be near one of the Phase 1 endpoints (LA/SF) to somewhere in the middle (nothing else that doesn't require the whole north/south alignment to be built before running any trains makes sense.)

It's true that building the smaller initial construction segment in the Valley was driven by economic development concerns, but the Valley needed to be part of any sensible initial operating segment anyway, so why not start building their if the side benefits were greatest there?

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#56

Post by TACIXAT » Mon, Mar 13, 2017, 9:27 PM UTC

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…

Do you realize that many Californians associate more strongly with the undocumented immigrants than they do with people from the south? That is California. That is the state they want to have. It won't be run the way you want it to. I grew up there. I would much rather have my money flow to my neighbor, someone who works hard and is essential to the economy, than someone in Mississippi, no matter their citizenship status.

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#57

Post by eon1 » Mon, Mar 13, 2017, 9:28 PM UTC

davidf18 wrote: post #24

iagooar wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Words can't express how sad I feel about people who write and believe in such a logic. Where is our humanity gone? How can you think that by helping people (legal or not) you are doing something wrong? USA is a country that has a massive problem with not accepting what it is, what it has, and what it could have. But then again, a country is made of diverse people. I feel happy that some people in California feel that…

> "Words can't express how sad I feel about people who write and believe in such a logic. Where is our humanity gone?" The correct term is illegal aliens. I didn't create the term, but I do use the language correctly. My humanity is for those poor people who live in the US who don't get enough funding as it is and who lose out on the funding because of illegal aliens. That is where my humanity is. My question to you…

>Much of that money is used for funding..illegal aliens

Er, maybe, but far, far more is used on maintaining massive military superiority[0][1][2][3].. if it's tax dollars you're worried about, you ought to have far bigger concerns than "illegals".

[0] https://www.nationalpriorities.org/budget-basics/federal-bud...

[1] https://www.nationalpriorities.org/campaigns/us-military-spe...

[2] http://www.pgpf.org/chart-archive/0053_defense-comparison

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_...

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#58

Post by entee » Mon, Mar 13, 2017, 9:28 PM UTC

davidf18 wrote: post #46

entee wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 wer…

The amount of money spent for K-12 education people who live in California illegally as well as university education and healthcare far, far exceeds the > "I also think you're making a fairly inflammatory argument..." I don't believe I'm an inflammatory argument. Fiscally responsible politicians would not spend tax money on people who are not legally in the country except on law enforcement. The solution to the train…

Bandying about terms like "living here illegally" and the tone of how you're putting it is very much inflammatory. Fiscally responsible politicians should carefully consider the larger questions and tradeoffs including costs of enforcements, larger contributions to the economy, and how much those immigrants actually pay in taxes. How about sales taxes?

Or approaching the question from the other direction, how about the larger benefits of the electrification project? By withholding money this way (and I'm pretty sure nobody responsible for the withholding has been making the same arguments you are, but happy to be shown otherwise), are we cutting off our nose to spite our face?

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#59

Post by ptc » Mon, Mar 13, 2017, 9:31 PM UTC

coredog64 wrote: post #45

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…

Why is it that progressive income taxation is so awesome for everyone else and sucks when applied to you? (FWIW, I've looked at the report that purports to back the 'CA pays more than it receives' and it isn't super accurate)

But it isn't progressive, right? An individual in CA who makes 50k gets less in Federal funding to projects that would benefit them, than if that same individual moved to another state, and made the exact same amount.

Not saying I agree with the conceit that a state should have the level of economic autonomy argued for the the original post, but your argument doesn't hold water.

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#60

Post by dragonwriter » Mon, Mar 13, 2017, 9:32 PM UTC

jedberg wrote: post #23

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?

Because no one will ride that section. If you start on the ends people will actually pay money to ride the train, which then funds construction on the other part of the train and provides steady jobs instead of only temporary ones. If you want to provide welfare to people without jobs, then provide welfare. Don't provide secret welfare and call it a high speed train.

> If you start on the ends people will actually pay money to ride the train

The initial operating segment runs through the Valley to San Jose; that's pretty close to the S.F. end , and is the third biggest city in California (and the second biggest covered by the whole Phase 1 LA-to-SF alignment.)

Obviously, the initial operating segment isn't going to connect both ends, and short of doing that, where specifically would be better than the actual planned IOS?

Sure, the initial construction segment is a small section in the valley that would probably see little ridership without being connected to some place nearer to the endpoints, but the ICS is not the whole IOS.