How many would prefer to drive from Eugene to Vancouver if they had to pay tolls to cover the cost of maintaining the highways, and gas/oil taxes that really reflected the military and other costs of fueling our cars? I might visit London or Paris if I have a week and no Eurostar. I'll happily visit both if both if I can take a high speed train. I'd be much more likely to consider a London/Paris trip over a trip to Hawaii. But I'd probably go to Hawaii over just London or just Paris. It's ludicrous to suggest that Europe's high speed train system adds no tourist value for those thinking about a vacation. It's simply not true. I've backpacked around Europe. High speed rail, in some instances, is much like a lighthouse. Sure, it'd be nice to assign an exact dollar value and charge each user exactly for the benefit they derive. But it just doesn't happen because there are tons of benefits that are impossible to quantify/charge. A lighthouse can never really be repaid by a specific ship for not crashing into land. Public services don't always exist because liberals want to take all your tax money and have "free" stuff. Sometimes public services just work better.
BTW--that's not to say I'm in favor of the high speed corridor from Eugene to Vancouver. I just don't know. I'd need to see some dollar figures associated with it, and some economic estimates about its viability, net economic impact on the region, etc. Sometimes public services don't make sense, sometimes they do.
I'd be quite happy to have a full toll network. I believe in a user pay system. My point was you go to Europe to see London or Paris, not to take the Eurostar. That's you. I'm exactly the opposite. In fact, I'd fly to London just to spend a week at the British Museum. And it's equally ludicrious to suggest that it's the trains that bring people to Europe. That's great you've backpacked around Europe--you're the shizzle. However, ignoring the distance difference between cities and towns in the US compared to Europe is silly. What people who live in Europe and who are cool enough to backpack in the US either rent a car, fly or take Amtrak. No big deal. High speed rail, in some instances, is much like a lighthouse. Sure, it'd be nice to assign an exact dollar value and charge each user exactly for the benefit they derive. But it just doesn't happen because there are tons of benefits that are impossible to quantify/charge. A lighthouse can never really be repaid by a specific ship for not crashing into land. Public services don't always exist because liberals want to take all your tax money and have "free" stuff. Sometimes public services just work better.[/QUOTE]
Eugene to Vancouver: 425 miles. Europe is small, but not that small . A simliar train ride costs around 50 Euro in Germany fwiw.
Basically, there are four popular destinations on that line--Eugene, Portland, Seattle & Vancouver. You could take a 425 mile stretch almost anywhere in Western Europe and find more than four popular destinations.
I'm not a fan of bailouts to begin with, but it's quite a different thing than having the Government build and run something.
[video=youtube;PUIbpyBJBxg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUIbpyBJBxg[/video] Watch that video from 1 min - 2 min 20 secs if you want to see a train that should be built. Future By Design is a video you should all watch if you're interested in this type of stuff. Zeitgeist vol 1 and 2, and The Venus Project are also videos to watch if you enjoyed that clip. All can be found on Youtube. Defiantly makes you think.
