There are grant programs and people who help with grant applications, but I'm not talking about a legitimate thinktank.  I'm talking about an LLC with a website slapping its name on reports you or I might write.  Kinda like Castro having the same soldiers walk back and forth behind him, suggesting to the camera a much larger army.

Well, it could have express and local trains, just like they did 100 years ago, and which still exist everywhere else in the world. 

 

True, but that wasn't the proposal.

Well, it could have express and local trains, just like they did 100 years ago, and which still exist everywhere else in the world. 

 

True, but that wasn't the proposal.

 

Do you still think it was a 39 mph train too?  The definition of a "starter" rail line is that it's not a full build, i.e. there wouldn't be stations in every little town because "hurr durr too expensive!"  I didn't hear much of the "it doesn't stop near me" argument because by definition the more rural areas it would run through have way less people than the cities it would have served.  Noisy minority versus a quiet majority perhaps, but it's still an ideological objection more than anything and the argument is an excuse rather than any legitimate criticism. 

Honestly any proposal is going to result in a lot of "me too!" shouting but a 3C train really should only stop in the 3 Cs. There's definitely nothing between Cincinnati and Columbus that would be worth the detour and added time and anything between Columbus and Cleveland that could justify a stop can just be reached by better regional rail that ties into the high speed network instead of forcing the high speed network to act like regional rail.

Honestly any proposal is going to result in a lot of "me too!" shouting but a 3C train really should only stop in the 3 Cs. There's definitely nothing between Cincinnati and Columbus that would be worth the detour and added time and anything between Columbus and Cleveland that could justify a stop can just be reached by better regional rail that ties into the high speed network instead of forcing the high speed network to act like regional rail.

 

Dayton might differ. 

 

At the time of the proposal, the Speaker of the House was from Medina County.  Unless the train terminated in Strongsville or near Hopkins, his district would host the line but not be served by it.

Dayton isn't between Columbus and Cincinnati. It's quite a ways away from a straight shot between those two. Regional rail can serve it if they want to be a part of it. But redirecting a train to Dayton and adding a stop there would greatly lengthen the trip between Cincy and Columbus or Cincy and Cleveland.

 

And plenty of districts would host the line and not be directly served by a station. That's inevitable with any well planned high speed rail.

Dayton isn't between Columbus and Cincinnati. It's quite a ways away from a straight shot between those two. Regional rail can serve it if they want to be a part of it. But redirecting a train to Dayton and adding a stop there would greatly lengthen the trip between Cincy and Columbus or Cincy and Cleveland.

 

And plenty of districts would host the line and not be directly served by a station. That's inevitable with any well planned high speed rail.

 

Except that the main railroad line between Columbus and Cincinnati that's good for 60-79 mph today goes through Dayton-Springfield (nearly 1 million people).

 

It's only 7 miles longer (118 vs 125) than a secondary, lesser-quality, 20-30 mph, more-direct rail line through Washington CH that serves little on-line population.

 

There is a posting I made about this in the 3C thread:

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,18328.msg422522.html#msg422522

I should have noted that when I'm talking about proper high speed rail I'm referring to an entirely new system that can actually operate independently and achieve speeds of 200+ mph, not the proposed system that used existing rail ROW that was shared with freight and could never achieve a true worldwide definition of "high speed rail" even with the upgrades that were to be made.

Got it. Yet even Ohio proposed high-speed systems, designed by European consultants, were to be routed through Dayton as well. The reason? It's a small route deviation with about 20 miles or 10 minutes added to an overall 90-minute trip in order to tap 1 million people. They deemed the extra time and cost of construction/maintenance to be worth it.

Interesting. I would have guessed it would have added more time with the necessary deceleration/acceleration, navigating tighter turns that are a result of being closer to a city center, and actually stopping to unload and load. But if it was truly only a 10 minute difference then yeah, that would make sense to do.

A blast from the past (1980)... Most curves were engineered for 186 mph (300km/h) except near major stations where trains wouldn't operate at high-speed anyway. Trains would enter/leave Dayton on 7 miles of near-continuous bridge. East of Fairborn, it would have been built in the median of I-70 except for a station in downtown Springfield. Then on the abandoned PRR right of way. Five stations were proposed Cincinnati-Columbus inclusive (Cincinnati Union Terminal, North Cincinnati, Dayton, Springfield, Columbus Union Station site) with alternating express/local-stop trains every hour....

 

Cincinnati-Columbus HSR 1980s by Ken Prendergast, on Flickr

The acceleration/deceleration was incredibly impressive when I rode the TGV in France.  The train putters from DT Paris out to the airport, then after the airport, the train seemed to accelerate from 0 to its max 180mph in about two minutes, maybe faster than that.  These are incredibly, incredibly powerful machines. 

 

KJP, is that route from London into Columbus on the railroad that has now partially become a bike trail?

The acceleration/deceleration was incredibly impressive when I rode the TGV in France.  The train putters from DT Paris out to the airport, then after the airport, the train seemed to accelerate from 0 to its max 180mph in about two minutes, maybe faster than that.  These are incredibly, incredibly powerful machines. 

 

KJP, is that route from London into Columbus on the railroad that has now partially become a bike trail?

 

Yes, nearly half of the old New York Central RR's Cincinnati-Cleveland line east of London is a bike trail. The rest is the Camp Chase Industrial RR. East of London, Conrail kept and NS acquired the parallel Pennsylvania RR St. Louis-New York mainline. West of London to Springfield and Dayton, Conrail kept and NS acquired the NYC Cincy-Cleve line. The PRR mainline west of London is a bike trail into Xenia and most of the way into Dayton.

 

The acceleration (and braking) on high-speed trains around the world is very impressive. Every wheel on every car of the train is powered, greatly aiding acceleration. Train braking at 0:50 and accelerating at 3:40 with a quiet, smooth ride at 300 km/h (186 mph) in between (sound starts at 0:40)....

^Wow, that's an impressive train, no doubt.  My boss travels worldwide quite a bit, and he was also very impressed with the bullet train in Taiwan, very relaxing and fast.

 

I wonder what the economics are between subsidies you would need for air travel vs. train travel when talking about going between Chicago and Cincinnati?  I know All Aboard Ohio has this all down I am sure somewhere, but how is this route progressing currently, as I haven't heard a whole lot on it for awhile from Derek Baumann, unless I am missing something.

 

On another note, when I was in Bangkok for work a little less than a year ago, I was very impressed with their elevated train system, which is all fairly new.  In a city noted for it's massive traffic jams, the train system worked wonderfully.  They are also expanding it rapidly.  I also noticed that all throughout Tokyo Airport, and Bangkok airport and Bangkok in general, that everything was very clean, orderly and very new technology.  I can't seem to shake the feeling that, especially in a place like Cincinnati or Indianapolis where I am most familiar, that America is really out of date with infrastructure in general, and out of date with the times.  I can imagine the USA getting connected with high speed rail, especially starting with the Twin Cities, to Milwaukee, to Chicago.  From Chicago to Detroit, Chicago to St. Louis, Chicago to Indy, Indy to Louisville to Nashville to Atlanta, Indy to Cincinnati to Columbus, Cleveland, Indy to Columbus to connect up to Cleveland, then off to Pittsburgh and the rest of East Coast.  It would be a massvie project, but in the end you have to think that it would save the government a lot of the subsidies it pays already for air travel.  I am curious about a study on this. 

The privately-owned airlines no doubt have lobbied against high-quality intercity passenger rail for decades and will continue to do so.  The U.S. is pretty much the only country that doesn't have a single national airline owned by the federal government.  If it did, there wouldn't be entrenched interests opposed to a travel mode that could provide far superior intercity service. 

 

In Ohio, ideally an intercity passenger service would have non-stop service between the big cities, then a local service that doubles as commuter rail near the cities.  So a Cincinnati > Dayton > Columbus train would enable commuter rail as much as a new, high quality intercity service. 

IAGuy39, All Aboard Ohio is focused on trying to get several million dollars per year allocated to make daily the existing thrice-weekly train service from Chicago through Cincinnati to the East Coast. Yep, that sounds like small potatoes compared to worldwide investment in rail or the USA's investment in roads/aviation because it is. The USA invests in passenger rail $1.4 billion per year. China recently completed its latest high-speed rail line from Hefei–Fuzhou for $110 billion, including 170 bridges and 54 tunnels. One of the bridges, the Tongling Yangtze River Railroad Bridge, is 30 miles long. China may be one of the most aggressive nations when it comes to high-speed rail development but is by no means the only one. When Morocco, Uzbekistan, Iran and Turkey are developing high-speed rail and the USA isn't, then rail is clearly not too expensive. It's about priorities and politics. Investing in trillion-dollar weapons systems isn't the root of what makes the USA powerful. Infrastructure does. And we're falling way behind nations we looked down upon.

^South Africa, too.

IAGuy39, All Aboard Ohio is focused on trying to get several million dollars per year allocated to make daily the existing thrice-weekly train service from Chicago through Cincinnati to the East Coast. Yep, that sounds like small potatoes compared to worldwide investment in rail or the USA's investment in roads/aviation because it is. The USA invests in passenger rail $1.4 billion per year. China recently completed its latest high-speed rail line from Hefei–Fuzhou for $110 billion, including 170 bridges and 54 tunnels. One of the bridges, the Tongling Yangtze River Railroad Bridge, is 30 miles long. China may be one of the most aggressive nations when it comes to high-speed rail development but is by no means the only one. When Morocco, Uzbekistan, Iran and Turkey are developing high-speed rail and the USA isn't, then rail is clearly not too expensive. It's about priorities and politics. Investing in trillion-dollar weapons systems isn't the root of what makes the USA powerful. Infrastructure does. And we're falling way behind nations we looked down upon.

 

... there you go.

At some point you have to hope that something changes, that leaders start to see the light.  I know all infrastructure ages, but a complete refurbish is needed for so many places in the United States in regards to infrastructure to even put us on par with Thailand or Japan. 

 

I like to think of this in college football terms.  The teams that put the most money into their facilities typically get the best recruits.  They have the top multi-million dollar facilities, the top coaches, the top recruits, the top teams and then the most money.  If we don't start paying attention to this, it's going to be tough to continue to attract top notch talent to the state of Ohio and Midwest in general.

At some point you have to hope that something changes, that leaders start to see the light.  I know all infrastructure ages, but a complete refurbish is needed for so many places in the United States in regards to infrastructure to even put us on par with Thailand or Japan. 

 

I like to think of this in college football terms.  The teams that put the most money into their facilities typically get the best recruits.  They have the top multi-million dollar facilities, the top coaches, the top recruits, the top teams and then the most money.  If we don't start paying attention to this, it's going to be tough to continue to attract top notch talent to the state of Ohio and Midwest in general.

 

It's already happening. If a small- to medium-sized town in Ohio doesn't have a university that can draw from outside of that town, then that town is dead. Its residents are limited to old people and poor people. It has a high number of storefronts that are either abandoned or converted to churches. Go to towns like Chillicothe or Ashtabula or Lima or Mansfield, and it looks like they've donated way too much blood. Larger towns are getting that way like Canton and Toledo. If Kent or Wooster or Alliance or Oxford didn't have colleges, they would look depleted too. Part of Alliance already does. As recently as the 1980s, I remember many of these cities having young middle-class families working at stores and factories in town. Ohio has stagnated, which is a nice way of saying it's dying from attrition, but starting with young people and small towns on up. As business writer Peter Drucker once wrote, if you're not growing, you're dying.

In other states though, it seems like the commercial aspects of smaller towns are in better shape, even in towns that are struggling as a whole.  And similarly, there's more storefront commercial activity in larger cities outside Ohio.  Our state and local policies are either encouraging this abandonment or failing to thwart it.  I would say Ohio's public transit policies and aversion to rail are among the core problems in that regard.

I wonder how much of the small town demise is more or less because of the change in the agriculture industry since the early 80's.  I don't want to get too far off topic, but in cities in the state where I am from in Iowa, you see a lot of the same thing.  I think there are only really 4 metro areas in Iowa that are seeing any type of growth, and everything else is shrinking.  This started with the farm crisis in the 80's and continues today, as smaller farms are continuously bought out, and larger and larger machinery is built so it takes less people to do all the work. 

 

You wouldn't think it in Iowa, but there are a lot of rough and tumble small towns throughout the state.  Small towns in Iowa are much smaller than small towns in Ohio, and I think overall Ohio was hit harder, but places like Waterloo, IA, Oskaloosa, Keokuk, Ottumwa, Fort Madison, Keokuk, Clinton, Fort Dodge, Sioux City, Mason City, etc. have all had really tough times, and these are all primarily farm towns. 

 

Example Ottumwa, IA:

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.0154495,-92.4093049,3a,75y,316.66h,88.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssAYeSaYUmESTh8kvhlDM7w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

 

Keokuk, IA:

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.3975495,-91.3851972,3a,75y,43.16h,91.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUKEFc0CHr0t1_09YWuYh_g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

 

Fort Madison, IA:

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.630906,-91.3114019,3a,75y,77.95h,88.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sALbdMiU6s3YpoOKC0v-jYw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

 

 

Also, this is a trend in Illinois in many places as well, in places like Rockford, Springfield, and other spots.  Every state has it's own story, but Ohio does have some heavy agriculture throughout the state so I am sure the demise of the family farm and huge combine development and GPS Technology, etc. has had some of an affect in the States small to medium sized cities.

 

 

I wonder how much of the small town demise is more or less because of the change in the agriculture industry since the early 80's.  I don't want to get too far off topic, but in cities in the state where I am from in Iowa, you see a lot of the same thing.  I think there are only really 4 metro areas in Iowa that are seeing any type of growth, and everything else is shrinking.  This started with the farm crisis in the 80's and continues today, as smaller farms are continuously bought out, and larger and larger machinery is built so it takes less people to do all the work. 

 

You wouldn't think it in Iowa, but there are a lot of rough and tumble small towns throughout the state.  Small towns in Iowa are much smaller than small towns in Ohio, and I think overall Ohio was hit harder, but places like Waterloo, IA, Oskaloosa, Keokuk, Ottumwa, Fort Madison, Keokuk, Clinton, Fort Dodge, Sioux City, Mason City, etc. have all had really tough times, and these are all primarily farm towns. 

 

Example Ottumwa, IA:

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.0154495,-92.4093049,3a,75y,316.66h,88.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssAYeSaYUmESTh8kvhlDM7w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

 

Keokuk, IA:

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.3975495,-91.3851972,3a,75y,43.16h,91.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUKEFc0CHr0t1_09YWuYh_g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

 

Fort Madison, IA:

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.630906,-91.3114019,3a,75y,77.95h,88.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sALbdMiU6s3YpoOKC0v-jYw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

 

 

Also, this is a trend in Illinois in many places as well, in places like Rockford, Springfield, and other spots.  Every state has it's own story, but Ohio does have some heavy agriculture throughout the state so I am sure the demise of the family farm and huge combine development and GPS Technology, etc. has had some of an affect in the States small to medium sized cities.

 

 

 

That's very much the case and has been for decades.  Indeed, sprawl is, in part, a partial reversal of that trend.  When rural men (including my paternal grandfather) flocked to the cities to work in the war industries, many sent for their families only after the war and only when they could move out of the city itself, though close enough to keep their jobs. 

 

Some of this looks like it might be the Walmart effect on the downtowns, though.

I wonder how much of the small town demise is more or less because of the change in the agriculture industry since the early 80's.  I don't want to get too far off topic, but in cities in the state where I am from in Iowa, you see a lot of the same thing.  I think there are only really 4 metro areas in Iowa that are seeing any type of growth, and everything else is shrinking.  This started with the farm crisis in the 80's and continues today, as smaller farms are continuously bought out, and larger and larger machinery is built so it takes less people to do all the work. 

 

You wouldn't think it in Iowa, but there are a lot of rough and tumble small towns throughout the state.  Small towns in Iowa are much smaller than small towns in Ohio, and I think overall Ohio was hit harder, but places like Waterloo, IA, Oskaloosa, Keokuk, Ottumwa, Fort Madison, Keokuk, Clinton, Fort Dodge, Sioux City, Mason City, etc. have all had really tough times, and these are all primarily farm towns. 

 

Also, this is a trend in Illinois in many places as well, in places like Rockford, Springfield, and other spots.  Every state has it's own story, but Ohio does have some heavy agriculture throughout the state so I am sure the demise of the family farm and huge combine development and GPS Technology, etc. has had some of an affect in the States small to medium sized cities.

 

 

 

You got it brother. To even bother with owning equipment you have to be farming a minimum of 1500 acres any more. The equipment is much more expensive, faster and wider.

I like to think of this in college football terms.  The teams that put the most money into their facilities typically get the best recruits.  They have the top multi-million dollar facilities, the top coaches, the top recruits, the top teams and then the most money.  If we don't start paying attention to this, it's going to be tough to continue to attract top notch talent to the state of Ohio and Midwest in general.

 

We can continue this analogy by noting that just spending a ridiculous amount of money does not always guarantee the best recruits, a winning program, and fresh money to follow.  I live at ground zero for just that kind of overenthusiastic fantasy, by the University of Akron and its overpriced stadium.  Whether we're talking about transportation infrastructure or football infrastructure, overbuilding is definitely possible and "if you build it, they will come" is the kind of thing that has sunk a lot of speculative real estate ventures and has not sunk, but has certainly humbled, a major state university.

 

As for small towns and rail, note that Amtrak does have a few small-town Ohio stops.  The first time I boarded an Amtrak train in Ohio was in Alliance, en route to D.C.  The station in Alliance is spartan to put it charitably (just a platform, and I parked in an unpaved, unpainted parking lot), but that doesn't mean that development would spring up around it if you suddenly invested a few million of free money in that station.  Honestly, the emptying out of Ohio's small towns may be largely irreversible at anything resembling an acceptable cost, and that's partly because young people want to move to larger cities with more amenities and more opportunities, whether those are career opportunities, nightlife opportunities, or just a greater likelihood that they'll meet someone they'll be happy spending the rest of their life than they will in a place where there are only 100 people of the opposite sex of your age within a 20-mile radius, and you already know them all because you all graduated high school together.

I like to think of this in college football terms.  The teams that put the most money into their facilities typically get the best recruits.  They have the top multi-million dollar facilities, the top coaches, the top recruits, the top teams and then the most money.  If we don't start paying attention to this, it's going to be tough to continue to attract top notch talent to the state of Ohio and Midwest in general.

 

We can continue this analogy by noting that just spending a ridiculous amount of money does not always guarantee the best recruits, a winning program, and fresh money to follow.  I live at ground zero for just that kind of overenthusiastic fantasy, by the University of Akron and its overpriced stadium.  Whether we're talking about transportation infrastructure or football infrastructure, overbuilding is definitely possible and "if you build it, they will come" is the kind of thing that has sunk a lot of speculative real estate ventures and has not sunk, but has certainly humbled, a major state university.

 

As for small towns and rail, note that Amtrak does have a few small-town Ohio stops.  The first time I boarded an Amtrak train in Ohio was in Alliance, en route to D.C.  The station in Alliance is spartan to put it charitably (just a platform, and I parked in an unpaved, unpainted parking lot), but that doesn't mean that development would spring up around it if you suddenly invested a few million of free money in that station.  Honestly, the emptying out of Ohio's small towns may be largely irreversible at anything resembling an acceptable cost, and that's partly because young people want to move to larger cities with more amenities and more opportunities, whether those are career opportunities, nightlife opportunities, or just a greater likelihood that they'll meet someone they'll be happy spending the rest of their life than they will in a place where there are only 100 people of the opposite sex of your age within a 20-mile radius, and you already know them all because you all graduated high school together.

 

The UA stadium example you raise scores exactly the point for transit/rail passenger advocates: why are we so conditioned to roll the dice on sports stadia, esp at the pro level?  And yet when it comes to even small investments in rail transit or upgrading Amtrak (and we're talking light years below HSR), we always scrutinize transit to the penny and cry how expensive it is.  Here in Cleveland, when Modell yanked the Browns from Cleveland to Baltimore, we acted as if the situation was akin to Flint's current water crisis and immediately called on struggling taxpayers to pony up (to the tune of $350M) for a new limited-use, open air stadium right on the lake; a stadium that has hampered  development.  Also, when it comes to any new highway like, say, the Opportunity Corridor (which like the stadium was another $330-350M), the attitude of public officials:  Get 'er done!  ... with all deliberate speed.

 

KJP is absolutely right, the issue is NOT the money.  Moderate to poor economic nations are building HSR and yet the richest, most gluttonous nation on the face of the earth finds HSR and, in most cities, quality rail transit “too expensive.”  A “boondoggle. “  And, as the conservatives are throwing around in Indy (re BRT and LRT), the time-worn (yet effective) claim: "nobody will ride it."  ... That's the same crap naysayers were saying in Los Angeles as they fought the building of rail rapid transit a couple decades ago.  Fortunately the pro-transit forces were strong enough to fight this off and win, and today LA has one of the largest and most successful (and still growing) rail networks in the nation -- one that literally has, and still is, transforming the face of LA; turning it from a purely sprawl, auto-centric burgh into a denser, walkable city.

 

Politics.  Race.  Ethnicity.  Socioeconomics.  These are the forces that most negatively impact rail development in this country, and at the end of the day, most of it is pure foolishness.

 

The transit example, like infrastructure and public schools and so many other crucial areas we are so tight-fisted moneywise about underscores one thing: in America we buy what we want and beg for what we need.

 

^ I am with you on the stadiums.  There is so much better things to spend money on than lousy stadia, especially in struggling rust belt cities.  Time and time again, studies have proven that stadia do not result in huge economic boons. 

 

I am actually really happy the Rams moved to Los Angeles.  Think how much good half a billion dollars of public goods could do for St. Louis.  But will the state and county of St. Louis decide to spend that money on city needs now that the stadium is gone?  Probably not.  It's like with the Cincinnati Streetcar, they came up with all these lame alternatives like painting a bus like a trolley, but do you think they would have actually spent a huge amount of investment money on the Hop On Trolley?  No, they would have just spent it on Unions and their other developer buddies.

 

In cities like Cincinnati, St. Louis, Cleveland, Detroit, etc., there is so much good that could come with $300 million dollars spent on city services rather than sports stadia.  Think of placing refurbished rail lines, construction of solid, safe, and aesthically pleasing affordable housing, money spent on strategically placed, free recreation and learning centers for after schools programs with full time help set up through the years.  All the latter would have lasting, positive affects on a city life and it's people.  Unfortunately, the only real benefit we see as a public for football stadiums is civic pride, the cost is the money spent, right down the drain.

The Reason Foundation has a new anti-California HSR hit piece:

 

These people know damn well that the California HSR line is going to change everything. 

Yes, they do. And if it doesn't, the Texas project will. But that's got very little public dollars because the engineering for it is a lot easier and less expensive. So that will be difficult to stop. They're trying very hard to stop the Florida Brightline project even though it's a privately led effort too. They couldn't stop the Miami-West Palm portion because FEC already owns the right of way and could start it relatively quickly. Even though the opposition is based along the Treasure Coast where tracks already exist, Brightline is vulnerable on the entire West Palm-Orlando portion because of the longer time it is taking to get the necessary permitting to build new track along Route 528 between Cocoa and Orlando. And those permits won't be issued until the lawsuits from the Treasure Coast are defeated.

 

In other words, it doesn't matter if a rail project is publicly subsidized or privately financed, the same opponents emerge to fight them, or to fund a local grassroots effort. Trace the money upstream and you will usually find the petroleum, road-building, rubber, automobile and related industries writing the checks.

Surprise -- Koch Bros. funding anti-rail effort in Nashville:

https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/2018/04/11/bulk-money-raised-opposition-nashville-transit-group-kept-secret/506717002/

 

 

The morning WSJ had a very pro-BRT article emphasizing its cost advantages over rail.

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-next-big-thing-in-urban-transit-fast-bus-systems-1523361600?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=1

 

The morning WSJ had a very pro-BRT article emphasizing its cost advantages over rail.

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-next-big-thing-in-urban-transit-fast-bus-systems-1523361600?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=1

 

 

The comments are amazing. 

The Nashville ruling class clues us in to all of this. It's not about making transportation in & out of a city center more efficient, it's about forcing rubes and clingers to change their culture. Easier said and done with socialist slaves in Seattle and perhaps so in purple, hip Denver, but outside of the (relatively small) city centers themselves, Nashville and other mid-sized western and southern cities are very different. Lots of deplorables who value their cars and their independence. Hopefully TN taxpayers outside of Nashville won't be funding this prog-leftist unionista boondoggle.

 

 

 

They must have a difficult time with all the rail projects in Arizona, Texas, New Mexico, Utah, Oklahoma, North Carolina....

Unbelievable.  Anti-transit group in Nashville warns of more mass shootings in Waffle Houses if transit tax passes:

https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/2018/04/23/anti-transit-group-slammed-warning-more-crime-after-waffle-house-shooting-nashville-tn/541774002/

 

 

In a Facebook post hours after the shooting, the volunteer advocacy group Better Transit for Nashville wrote, "4 killed in shooting in Antioch at a restaurant at about 3 am this morning. we are sorry to post this, but 'transit' will bring more crime like this. #voteagainst."

 

The post was later deleted.

 

 

Literal anti-rail hitmen.

Like Nashville, there's a Koch-funded group emerging in Cleveland to block any attempt at boosting local funding for RTA which continues to lose funding to sprawl, state funding cuts....

 

Jason Sonenshein may be behind this. He's the guy who was an organizer for the campaign that killed Cleveland's red light cameras and is a local libertarian. The location of their phone bank was the local field office for Americans for Prosperity, the group funded by the Koch brothers. Here's there Facebook page:

https://m.facebook.com/events/230614064349640

Gee. Just what Cleveland needs. Two extremely rich libertarians who will likely never need a train, but who religiously believe that no one else should ever want to need one either.  ::)

 

They don't even live in Northeast Ohio. What is it to them, anyway?

They don't even live in Northeast Ohio. What is it to them, anyway?

 

If large populations nationwide come to enjoy local trains, it could lead to a nationally relevant faction of intercity rail supporters, which could in turn mean the Kochs' taxes go up to pay for new infrastructure projects that they'll seldom use.

 

Or maybe they actually believe the nonsense they promulgate about trains being inherently anti-freedom because of the horrors of inflexible routes.

Is there any evidence COAST received money from the Koch brothers during the Cincinnati streetcar fight?

How the Koch brothers are killing public transit projects around the country

HIROKO TABUCHI

 

NASHVILLE, Tenn. — A team of political activists huddled at a Hardee’s one rainy Saturday, wolfing down a breakfast of biscuits and gravy. Then they descended on Antioch, a quiet Nashville suburb, armed with iPads full of voter data and a fiery script.

 

The group, the local chapter for Americans for Prosperity, which is financed by the oil billionaires Charles G. and David H. Koch to advance conservative causes, fanned out and began strategically knocking on doors. Their targets: voters most likely to oppose a local plan to build light-rail trains, a traffic-easing tunnel and new bus routes.

 

“Do you agree that raising the sales tax to the highest rate in the nation must be stopped?” Samuel Nienow, one of the organizers, asked a startled man who answered the door at his ranch-style home in March. “Can we count on you to vote ‘no’ on the transit plan?”

 

 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/how-the-koch-brothers-are-killing-public-transit-projects-around-the-country/ar-AAyRgIL?ocid=ientp

Seattle's mayor is still trying to block the downtown streetcar expansion, citing imaginary problems with compatibility:

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/transportation/seattle-has-ordered-streetcars-much-bigger-and-heavier-than-the-old-ones-but-is-that-a-problem/

This is from a few years ago...this character worked to defeat Nashville's AMP BRT plan from 2013~.  As you can see, he manipulates the crowd into laughing at the BRT supporters:

 

Every city seems to have one of these jackasses.  The media always goes to them to "balance" their stories. 

More from Nashville's paper:

 

Just last month, Blackburn’s comment was highlighted by Americans For Prosperity, which has launched negative ads on TV against her opponent, while suggesting the congressman “has opposed proposals to raise the federal gas tax.”

 

Tori Venable, AFP's state director, said "raising the gas tax at any level is bad policy and not the right step for Tennessee."

 

“If Congress is serious about making the transportation fund solvent they need to cut pork spending first," Venable said. "Before asking taxpayers for more money, and worse, setting the tax increases on autopilot, elected officials should ensure our gas tax dollars are spent on roads and bridges, instead of being diverted for mass transit, bike trails, and greenways.”

 

 

 

Same old tired "argument"!

 

Easy answer: vehicles don't pay taxes. People do. The people value having choices and consider these as transportation taxes.

The Koch Bros. rumored to be behind planned 2020 ballot issue to halt California HSR project:

 

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-new-gas-tax-initiative-20180925-story.html#

Add Anonymous to the anti-rail list. 

 

In their latest video, the group claims that PG&E intentionally set California's wildfires to clear land for high speed rail.  You can't make this up:

 

LOL!

The number of people who think DEW (Direct Energy Weapons) caused the fire is concerning. People really think the US Govt attached lasers to planes and shot them at the forests and residential neighborhoods to cause massive wildfires.

The conspiracy theory is growing:

 

CA HSR cancelled.