A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck • Hacker News Board

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#131

Post by greglindahl » Tue, Mar 14, 2017, 2:25 AM UTC

CaliforniaKarl wrote: post #124

entee wrote: post #47

The bay area is a bit of a mess public transportation-wise, and at least for this particular project, the cost seems not all that large in the scheme of things ($1.9B overall, need $647M in federal money). I hesitate to propose this because I fear there might be a flame war, but is there any way we could tax some of the large tech companies very slightly to quickly get enough money to make Caltrain and other public t…

I am curious, how many people here use a Caltrain GO pass? If yes, how much is subsidized by your employer? Here's an interesting comparison: 48 business weeks of trips, on Clipper card: $3,456 (48•5•2•7.20) 12 monthly passes: $2,289.60 (12•190.80) 1 annual GO pass: $190 (assuming 83+ other people also use it; min. $15,960 spent per company.) I know (from personal experience) that Stanford is a heavy GO pass user. I'…

Isn't the GO pass priced such that you buy it for everyone and then Caltrain hopes that peak usage isn't too high as a result? Which means you don't have enough data to evaluate if it's priced correctly or not. I bet Caltrain makes individual deals with Stanford and other large users that reflect actual usage.

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#132

Post by davidf18 » Tue, Mar 14, 2017, 2:26 AM UTC

avar wrote: post #69

davidf18 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "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…

> Your comment might be correctly phrased as "leaving > the hairy question of illegal immigration aside..." No, it really couldn't. I'm replying to your economic fallacy of asserting that "[a] program for a million people will cost more [than a program for one person]". Of course that's literally true in terms of absolute dollar amounts, but it's not true in the sense that actually matters. I.e. if you had a million…

I'm not stating myself clearly enough. I'm simply stating that taxpayer money should not be paid to support people who are living in this country illegally. Instead they should be living in the country that they are legally residents of and receive education, health etc from that county.

The correct term for the people is illegal aliens. No quote marks.

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#133

Post by greglindahl » Tue, Mar 14, 2017, 2:27 AM UTC

hueving wrote: post #77

>Caltrain plans to use the money to switch to modern electric trains, from old diesel locomotives that are prone to failure. I ride the Caltrain about once a week and I haven't encountered a delay due to a locomotive failure. How often does this happen?

That's only part of the benefit of electrification. Electric trains accelerate more quickly, so you're delayed 100% of the time, today, compared to the schedule possible with an all-electric Caltrain.

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#134

Post by caf » Tue, Mar 14, 2017, 2:33 AM UTC

martinald wrote: post #117

tmaly wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should see the old metro north ones that run from CT to NYC, they are even older.

Nothing really wrong with old trains tbh assuming they are maintained and refurbished. The intercity 125 in the UK despite being over 40 years old is still fast (125mph), reliable (engines have all been replaced fairly recently) and very comfortable and quiet, even in standard class.

If you want to see a case study in exactly what you're talking about, you could check out the Australian version of the same train, the XPT, which is in dire need of refurbishment.

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#135

Post by davidf18 » Tue, Mar 14, 2017, 2:36 AM UTC

anoonmoose wrote: post #97

davidf18 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "A major flaw in your argument is the implication that undocumented individuals in CA" "undocumented individuals" is a euphemism that does not help the discussion and tends to minimize and obfuscate the language so as to seemingly minimize the fact that they are living in the country against the law. The correct term is illegal alien (look it up if you don't believe me). My argument is a simple one that I think mos…

I am not sure that most people would agree with you on that; at least, I personally do not agree that people who are in this country illegally do not deserve taxpayer funds. I think that's very similar to saying that someone who pays no taxes does not deserve taxpayer funds, which I also disagree with. Since most people who are living in this country illegally are paying one form of tax or another, the only differenc…

Receiving taxpayer funded benefits such as K-12 education or health benefits has nothing to do with whether someone pays taxes or not when (think retired or disabled people for example) but rather whether they are living in the country legally or not.

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#136

Post by dsfyu404ed » Tue, Mar 14, 2017, 2:42 AM UTC

Considering the great job CA has done playing ball with the new administration I'm not exactly surprised said administration is in no hurry to shovel money in their direction. /s

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#137

Post by scythe » Tue, Mar 14, 2017, 2:48 AM UTC

rebootthesystem wrote: post #129

> The Transportation Department is withholding $647 million in federal grants for a $1.9 billion project that would modernize and increase the capacity of Caltrain. About 65,000 people use the rail line every day to commute between San Francisco and San Jose OK. Just thinking out loud here. $1.9 billion. 65,000 people per day. That's about $30K per person. In other words, you can almost buy a Tesla Model 3 for each p…

The rider experience associated with boarding >20 buses per hour per station at rush houris likely to be nightmarish. It's not ideal to screw over transit riders; there's a reason Caltrain was built in the first place. If people switch to cars, there are major hidden costs. You're also ignoring the cost of 250 * ~$80k/year * [weekend-factor ~= 2] + insurance for the drivers and maintenance on the buses which will quickly eat up your margin.

Personally I think the Dumbarton rail bridge would improve the overall economy more by shifting some activity towards the cheaper South Bay but Caltrain electrification is a very good thing.

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#138

Post by caf » Tue, Mar 14, 2017, 2:54 AM UTC

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…

Given that government bond rates are virtually zero, it would seem to make more economic sense to issue bonds to pay for construction rather than using operating income from an earlier segment.

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#139

Post by acomjean » Tue, Mar 14, 2017, 3:33 AM UTC

rebootthesystem wrote: post #129

> The Transportation Department is withholding $647 million in federal grants for a $1.9 billion project that would modernize and increase the capacity of Caltrain. About 65,000 people use the rail line every day to commute between San Francisco and San Jose OK. Just thinking out loud here. $1.9 billion. 65,000 people per day. That's about $30K per person. In other words, you can almost buy a Tesla Model 3 for each p…

How I think of it: its 1.9 Billion to upgrade the line and increase capacity. Say double capacity. You have to average that out over the life expectancy of the upgrade (20 years maybe, how long have the tracks been there now). Of course there are maintenance and operation fees, but the railway is probably paying those now.

So in construction costs: 1900000000 dollar /130000 riders /20 year = 700 $/rider/year.

It helps the economy of the city/state as more people can live and work there increasing you tax base. Helps housing smooth out housing prices a little as people can commute the same time from further out.

Also you have to compare against the cost of increasing road capacity. Trains carry a lot of people and aren't subject to traffic like busses. Nobody likes taking the bus, it has a stigma for some reason.

Its expensive, but infrastructure always is. Oddly so in the US.

Re: A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck

#140

Post by sandworm101 » Tue, Mar 14, 2017, 4:19 AM UTC

davidf18 wrote: post #89

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…

Much of the wealth in California comes from high technology. The research of the high technology came from the Federal Government. The training of the PhDs that created the research (think semiconductors) came from the NSF and NIH and other federal funds. Thus, it is not unlike a VC making early stage investments in a company. BTW, I'm in NY State and it also has net tax outflows.

But what is california's trade balance with other states? I suspect it "exports" more than it imports. So paying more in tax (by some measure) is the price of remaining in the federation. US states are so integrated that generalizing them into givers and takers isnt very honest imho. It makes for gòod headlines and fans state pride, but always omits important detail. As example: How much of california's wealth comes from intelectual property laws, laws created and managed by the fed?