Costs of California’s troubled bullet train rise again, by estimated $5B
1–10 of 67 posts
Re: Costs of California’s troubled bullet train rise again, by estimated $5B
#2One thing about the route I don’t get… why don’t they use the space between the roads on the 5? Isn’t that mostly accounted for by the government already? Especially if so much of the tracks is raised.
Re: Costs of California’s troubled bullet train rise again, by estimated $5B
#3What a joke.
There is no incentive for them to reduce costs. Any time some change or obstacle comes up - well, let's spend another $500M, that will take care of it.
And people still think we should place more of the economy under the control of the government?
Re: Costs of California’s troubled bullet train rise again, by estimated $5B
#4Alright that settles it I’m going to move to the Nevada side of Lake Tahoe for half a year to cash out my QSBS stocks.
California taxes are a tax on poor people, exclusively.
California voters will just authorize a new bond issuance anyway.
Re: Costs of California’s troubled bullet train rise again, by estimated $5B
#5What a joke. There is no incentive for them to reduce costs. Any time some change or obstacle comes up - well, let's spend another $500M, that will take care of it. And people still think we should place more of the economy under the control of the government?
Yes, the government is quite inefficient, but infrastructure is a natural Monopoly. Privatization doesn't work here either. Germany tried and failed that.
Natural monopolies only lead to rent seeking when in private hands. You'll pay even more than for inefficient government action. There's no incentive for them to lower their prices either.
Privatization only works when you consider negative externalities and have a competitive market.
For something like this you need a working democratic oversight. The people have to be the incentive to make it work.
Re: Costs of California’s troubled bullet train rise again, by estimated $5B
#6105B/39.51M=2657. Can I just take the money?
Re: Costs of California’s troubled bullet train rise again, by estimated $5B
#7So the total projected end to end cost is up to $105b from $100b 2 years ago. Isn't that just accounting for inflation? The LA times really has an axe to grind whenever they write about the bullet train.
Re: Costs of California’s troubled bullet train rise again, by estimated $5B
#8One thing about the route I don’t get… why don’t they use the space between the roads on the 5? Isn’t that mostly accounted for by the government already? Especially if so much of the tracks is raised.
Because the 5 is not where the population is in the central valley.
Re: Costs of California’s troubled bullet train rise again, by estimated $5B
#9One thing about the route I don’t get… why don’t they use the space between the roads on the 5? Isn’t that mostly accounted for by the government already? Especially if so much of the tracks is raised.
It's not about space. You don't spend $105,000,000,000 on land.
You can spend real money on construction that causes a minimum of inconvenience. Say you want to build on a road median, and then someone imposes a requirement that at most one lane be closed during the construction. The land isn't a problem, doing the construction while closing only one lane is expensive.
There are other variants. Basically, every time either the route or the construction is constrained, the cost goes up. You have to enter a city at one spot instead of 10m/100m further east? You have to build a bridge at one spot instead of 5km further west? I know examples where both of those caused well over 100% cost increases.
Re: Costs of California’s troubled bullet train rise again, by estimated $5B
#10This will grow until it cripples California's budget for decade, if it is not shut down.
See also "the big dig"