Only 31% of California voters want to keep paying for bullet train
1–10 of 119 posts
Re: Only 31% of California voters want to keep paying for bullet train
#2Key graphic: https://www.trbimg.com/img-5b0779e9/turbine/la-pol-g-ca-usc-...
31% for, 48% against, 19% undecided for all Californian voters.
Re: Only 31% of California voters want to keep paying for bullet train
#3Key graphic: https://www.trbimg.com/img-5b0779e9/turbine/la-pol-g-ca-usc-... 31% for, 48% against, 19% undecided for all Californian voters.
Also worth noting the huge disparity between Bay Area voters (overwhelmingly FOR continuing the project) vs. LA voters (this is an LA Times article).
Re: Only 31% of California voters want to keep paying for bullet train
#4Let's call it the monkey defense. If you don't like something the majority supports, scream and fling as much shit at it for as long as possible until no one is left that can bear the stench or the spectacle. Then claim you were right about it being a failure all along.
Re: Only 31% of California voters want to keep paying for bullet train
#5Let's call it the monkey defense. If you don't like something the majority supports, scream and fling as much shit at it for as long as possible until no one is left that can bear the stench or the spectacle. Then claim you were right about it being a failure all along.
The people who said this would be a massive boondoggle and voted against the bond in the first place were right all along.
Re: Only 31% of California voters want to keep paying for bullet train
#6Key graphic: https://www.trbimg.com/img-5b0779e9/turbine/la-pol-g-ca-usc-... 31% for, 48% against, 19% undecided for all Californian voters.
Also worth noting the huge disparity between Bay Area voters (overwhelmingly FOR continuing the project) vs. LA voters (this is an LA Times article).
Is LA Times against it because LA residents are, or are LA residents against it because LA Times is?
Re: Only 31% of California voters want to keep paying for bullet train
#7Let's call it the monkey defense. If you don't like something the majority supports, scream and fling as much shit at it for as long as possible until no one is left that can bear the stench or the spectacle. Then claim you were right about it being a failure all along.
[deleted]
Re: Only 31% of California voters want to keep paying for bullet train
#8Let's call it the monkey defense. If you don't like something the majority supports, scream and fling as much shit at it for as long as possible until no one is left that can bear the stench or the spectacle. Then claim you were right about it being a failure all along.
The people who said this would be a massive boondoggle and voted against the bond in the first place were right all along.
Every big public project is a massive boondoggle. Should we just stop doing things?
Re: Only 31% of California voters want to keep paying for bullet train
#9Let's call it the monkey defense. If you don't like something the majority supports, scream and fling as much shit at it for as long as possible until no one is left that can bear the stench or the spectacle. Then claim you were right about it being a failure all along.
The people who said this would be a massive boondoggle and voted against the bond in the first place were right all along.
The people who said it would be a massive boondoggle then went out of their way to make it a massive boondoggle. I guess the mistake California made was not realizing they weren't making a prediction, but a threat.
Re: Only 31% of California voters want to keep paying for bullet train
#10The cost argument is always interesting to me, when you consider it in context. We (in America) recently passed a tax cut that will cost around $150B/year for the next 10 years, and likely more if the temporary parts are made permanent. Even with cost overruns, that's almost enough to pay for 2 California bullet trains PER YEAR for the next decade.
And yes, I know California is just 1 state out of 50, but even still, it just seems like people have really bad context on what is / is not an outrageous cost for government.