Funny We’re a Silly People

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
We are indeed not going to compete at the rate we're dealing with infrastructure. I can poke a couple of holes in Bill's whole speech here...one being safety and quality control building high rises and buildings in a few days often are accomplished by not using proper sand in concrete, etc....One earthquake has toppled a whole mountain of apartments over there on more than one occassion...bridges built too quickly may have issues as well. He's right about the work ethic...and the education systems ..people work all day and then go study at night to get ahead...and you can travel and work there without the need to ever own a car...here most folks won't take the bus to work let alone a high speed rail...hopefully these things will start to be addressed with a fresh administration. Traveling and living in Asia for half my adult life was humbling and very, very educational. I don't think many people realize how much of a setback the last 4 years have been to our position in the world. The mainland Chinese could always build things quickly, then the problem is usually that they don't maintain what they build..and China has ruined it's water supplies pretty much...they buy drinkable water ...not sure how long that's going to be sustainable. It's a reason they're trying to expand their borders with India.
 
Last edited:
Tyrant of Ants said:
Watched that. He's right for the most part. Americans are way too sensitive for their own good. Being practical is important, but some of the PC can go too far and practicality and pragmaticism get pushed aside.

A lot of Vietnamese and Thai people that I know from living abroad the last five years don't necessarily think Americans are silly/stupid, but rather good natured and gullible (and conceited) people.
Click to expand...
America looks completely different from overseas...doesn't seem so loud and overbearing...there's other shit in the world to pay attention to..they don't really follow the entertainment needs of the US very closely which seems to fill up the lives of many here stateside. My wife was thrilled when we moved here and had internet so she can follow Taiwanese news programing. Watch Korean series, etc...she think Korean films are the best thing around ..I'm worried about Taiwan a bit with Chinese naval aggression
 
It's ridiculous to me that we don't have a high speed rail that connects Bend to Florence on the coast...they want skiing to profit or ocean fishing or casinos...might make it easier for folks who balk at driving bumper to bumper on mountain roads for 4 hours to make a trip that would take 40 minutes on a rail system if that. People could get to sporting events, festivals, etc..concerts...maybe in my grandson's time
 
riverman said:
It's ridiculous to me that we don't have a high speed rail that connects Bend to Florence on the coast...they want skiing to profit or ocean fishing or casinos...might make it easier for folks who balk at driving bumper to bumper on mountain roads for 4 hours to make a trip that would take 40 minutes on a rail system if that. People could get to sporting events, festivals, etc..concerts...maybe in my grandson's time
Click to expand...

 
riverman said:
It's ridiculous to me that we don't have a high speed rail that connects Bend to Florence on the coast...they want skiing to profit or ocean fishing or casinos...might make it easier for folks who balk at driving bumper to bumper on mountain roads for 4 hours to make a trip that would take 40 minutes on a rail system if that. People could get to sporting events, festivals, etc..concerts...maybe in my grandson's time
Click to expand...

The Milwaukie to Portland Max line cost $205 million PER mile in 2013.

A high speed rail line from Las Angeles to Las Vegas is still being debated if it's economically feasible.

I just don't see anyway that high speed rail could financially support itself between Bend and Florence.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
The Milwaukie to Portland Max line cost $205 million PER mile in 2013.

A high speed rail line from Las Angeles to Las Vegas is still being debated if it's economically feasible.

I just don't see anyway that high speed rail could financially support itself between Bend and Florence.
Click to expand...
Now they have one two lane hwy 126 filled with sink holes that goes through the Fern Ridge Resevoir....there's the largest university in the State in Eugene...biggest ski resort in Bend and Casino in Florence....the idea is to generate spending locally and accessability definitely makes college students want to snow board ...Bend residents want to see a Ducks game go to a concert or wine tasting tour and retired folks want to gamble or fish on the coast...it primes that pump....as is, you're right...nobody is spending that time or money because it's not available to anyone. You should hub them from the airports to the universities...the whole state should be connected like that....I don't need on to go to LA because...I'd rather shop in Oregon.let LA build it's own rail...the French are building them all over asia in areas not as wealthy as the Pacific NW..problem here is mostly people and car love....the money repairing that hiway is huge....high speed rails can travel above ground.
Over 60,000 people per year go to the Oregon Country Fair and even more to Sporting events in Eugene. If we're spending 203 million a mile for a rail system...I think we're getting waxed by contractors. Cost has been the excuse for inaction on infrastructure for too long here.
 
Last edited:
riverman said:
Now they have one two lane hwy 126 filled with sink holes that goes through the Fern Ridge Resevoir....there's the largest university in the State in Eugene...biggest ski resort in Bend and Casino in Florence....the idea is to generate spending locally and accessability definitely makes college students want to snow board ...Bend residents want to see a Ducks game go to a concert or wine tasting tour and retired folks want to gamble or fish on the coast...it primes that pump....as is, you're right...nobody is spending that time or money because it's not available to anyone. You should hub them from the airports to the universities...the whole state should be connected like that....I don't need on to go to LA because...I'd rather shop in Oregon.let LA build it's own rail...the French are building them all over asia in areas not as wealthy as the Pacific NW..problem here is mostly people and car love....the money repairing that hiway is huge....high speed rails can travel above ground.
Over 60,000 people per year go to the Oregon Country Fair and even more to Sporting events in Eugene. If we're spending 203 million a mile for a rail system...I think we're getting waxed by contractors. Cost has been the excuse for inaction on infrastructure for too long here.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying we go to LA, I'm saying that they've been debating for years if a high speed rail line will be economically feasible between LA and Las Vegas. If they can't make that pencil out there is no way a high speed rail line is feasible between Bend and Florence.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
I'm not saying we go to LA, I'm saying that they've been debating for years if a high speed rail line will be economically feasible between LA and Las Vegas. If they can't make that pencil out there is no way a high speed rail line is feasible between Bend and Florence.
Click to expand...
Them not making a profit or agreeing on a budget to do it doesn't change Bill Maher's pt....poor countries are doing it right now....San Diego has a rail system in place. The whole argument is that we'll spend 10years arguing on what to name the rail and they'll just build it....there is a lot of pressure against public transport grids by the auto industry and the petroleum industry...if it were a drone weapons system or submarine...or Mars rover...they'd find the money..I think the balking is the norm in this country when infrastructure comes up..why go to Vegas from LA?..they should go from Venice Beach to Big Bear...support the local economy...tourists are in LA...Vegas has it's own crop
 
Last edited:
There used to be a passenger train from the coast to Eugene.....that died off long before I moved here.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
I'm not saying we go to LA, I'm saying that they've been debating for years if a high speed rail line will be economically feasible between LA and Las Vegas. If they can't make that pencil out there is no way a high speed rail line is feasible between Bend and Florence.
Click to expand...
Socialism is getting the mass to take mass transit versus drive a vehicle. Mass this mass that! Whenever the gov wants people to conform to doing things one way, revolt. LOL
Thats comes from a college political science prof back in early 70's. Some truth to it however.
 
Hoopguru said:
Socialism is getting the mass to take mass transit versus drive a vehicle. Mass this mass that! Whenever the gov wants people to conform to doing things one way, revolt. LOL
Thats comes from a college political science prof back in early 70's. Some truth to it however.
Click to expand...
rapid transist systems work...I don't care what some college professor says about socialism and masses....if they worried about socialism massing people together we wouldn't have military bases or factories with giant parking lots. The difference in the quality of life in Taipei after high speed rail was built and before is amazing....you can breathe....Taiwan is the poster boy for capitalism as well....the two things have nothing to do with each other at all. You can move lumber by truck or train....one holds more boards and takes a lot less fuel and trips...Taipei has 8 million people ...without mass transit you would spend all day in traffic just trying to get to and from work and the air would turn to poison...America has almost devoted more land to cars than it has to people...parking lots are a shitty use of land in my view. Look at any city and see how many gas stations, parking lots, garages, car lots, mechanics shops.auto insurance co...etc are around you....it turns out we're obsessed in America with the automobile
 
Last edited:
SlyPokerDog said:
The Milwaukie to Portland Max line cost $205 million PER mile in 2013.

A high speed rail line from Las Angeles to Las Vegas is still being debated if it's economically feasible.

I just don't see anyway that high speed rail could financially support itself between Bend and Florence.
Click to expand...
Does high speed rail really need to support itself? Wouldn't the economic and environmental benefits of a high speed rail system be worth the investment?

Imagine moving freight cross country in a few hours without having to use air. Or being able to commute to a high paying job in Seattle or LA. No more traffic jams if expanded at the local level.

Seems like the economic benefit we'd get just by building it would almost be worth the investment. At least, if we did it at a national level.
 
Phatguysrule said:
Does high speed rail really need to support itself? Wouldn't the economic and environmental benefits of a high speed rail system be worth the investment?

Imagine moving freight cross country in a few hours without having to use air. Or being able to commute to a high paying job in Seattle or LA. No more traffic jams if expanded at the local level.

Seems like the economic benefit we'd get just by building it would almost be worth the investment. At least, if we did it at a national level.
Click to expand...
Works for the military and the space program...don't know why it doesn't work for transit systems other than big oil and auto lobbyists
 
Phatguysrule said:
Does high speed rail really need to support itself? Wouldn't the economic and environmental benefits of a high speed rail system be worth the investment?

Imagine moving freight cross country in a few hours without having to use air. Or being able to commute to a high paying job in Seattle or LA. No more traffic jams if expanded at the local level.

Seems like the economic benefit we'd get just by building it would almost be worth the investment. At least, if we did it at a national level.
Click to expand...

I'm completely for the proposed high speed rail line between Vancouver BC and Portland, with an eventual expansion to a LA to San Fran high speed line. I think the economical benefits to the PNW would be substantial.

That makes sense to me.

A high speed rail line from Bend to Florence makes no such sense.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
I'm completely for the proposed high speed rail line between Vancouver BC and Portland, with an eventual expansion to a LA to San Fran high speed line. I think the economical benefits to the PNW would be substantial.

That makes sense to me.

A high speed rail line from Bend to Florence makes no such sense.
Click to expand...
a high speed rail from LA to Vegas makes no sense to me on any level......cheapest flights in the country route to Vegas.....shows where you and I do our traveling though....I think you underestimate the economics around Bend and the University of Oregon....the place that benefits on the coast would be Florence and maybe Yachats.....that's a depressed area but Bend has big money with some of the wealthiest Oregonians and so does Eugene....it's all good....you live in Portland Sly.....I'd go to Bend way more often than I'd go to Canada or Seattle...the Lane County valley as I've mentioned is a flood plain and roads are nearly impossible to keep in repair....and we're in logging country here where goods are moved from the mountains to the ports.. If going to the Moda didn't require a 7 hour round trip I'd be a season ticket holder for Blazer games....all these factors help Oregon. You can build a high speed rail or keep repairing sink holes year after endless year. Choices....we're already spending a fortune on road repair band aids
 
Last edited:
riverman said:
a high speed rail from LA to Vegas makes no sense to me on any level......cheapest flights in the country route to Vegas.....shows where you and I do our traveling though....I think you underestimate the economics around Bend and the University of Oregon....the place that benefits on the coast would be Florence and maybe Yachats.....that's a depressed area but Bend has big money with some of the wealthiest Oregonians and so does Eugene....it's all good....you live in Portland Sly.....I'd go to Bend way more often than I'd go to Canada or Seattle...the Lane County valley as I've mentioned is a flood plain and roads are nearly impossible to keep in repair....and we're in logging country here where goods are moved from the mountains to the ports.. If going to the Moda didn't require a 7 hour round trip I'd be a season ticket holder for Blazer games....all these factors help Oregon. You can build a high speed rail or keep repairing sink holes year after endless year. Choices
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think this should be a national priority. With each state getting a federally funded 3 or 4 branches from their hub. And the state can choose to add more to expand with some kind of a federal match if they like.

This would be huge for our country.
 
This country needs a lot of infrastructure work in any shape at this point. High speed rail is nice and will help some - but frankly - just updating the road infrastructure would be great - frankly, building the national grid and supporting EVs is the low-hanging fruit that probably makes the most sense as far as infrastructure work.
 
e_blazer said:
Click to expand...


This video is funny, but it reminds me a little of what my dad said when we saw the (admittedly impressive) pyramids in Egypt: "It's amazing what you can do with unlimited slave labor."

Likewise, it's amazing what you can do in an authoritarian regime. I wonder how China locked down the virus in a few months. How many US politicians could have imposed basically house arrest on their constituency and used drones to go after people without masks? The vast majority of the messiness of US politics is people disagreeing on the right approach and no one being able to say, "That's enough, I'm doing whatever I think is right."

There's been a popular (if half-joking) sentiment among political scientists that the most effective form of government would be "enlightened dictatorship." That is, someone who can act unilaterally but only has the best interests of his/her people at heart. That is, of course, a purely theoretical idea and it gets at the heart of the governance problem: dictatorship is the most effective way to get things done, but it's probably not the most effective way to get the right things done. I don't imagine Maher, for all his belief that China by-god-gets-things-done would want to actually live in China.
 
riverman said:
a high speed rail from LA to Vegas makes no sense to me on any level......cheapest flights in the country route to Vegas.....shows where you and I do our traveling though....I think you underestimate the economics around Bend and the University of Oregon....the place that benefits on the coast would be Florence and maybe Yachats.....that's a depressed area but Bend has big money with some of the wealthiest Oregonians and so does Eugene....it's all good....you live in Portland Sly.....I'd go to Bend way more often than I'd go to Canada or Seattle...the Lane County valley as I've mentioned is a flood plain and roads are nearly impossible to keep in repair....and we're in logging country here where goods are moved from the mountains to the ports.. If going to the Moda didn't require a 7 hour round trip I'd be a season ticket holder for Blazer games....all these factors help Oregon.
Click to expand...

I went to Oregon, love Florence, love Bend. My OPINION on high speed rail between those areas has nothing to do with that.

I pointed out the LA to Vegas because that would be a very popular and inexpensive route relatively speaking. We're talking tracks in a desert, not through mountain ranges.

The economics of scale on a project like this is insane, and there will most likely be other options that would be far cheaper to aid these communities.

By the time a project like high speed rail from Bend to Florence even gets through planning, environmental assessment, and funding it's going to be 10 years from now. Then add another 10 years to build a project like that. That's 20 years to complete.

If high speed rail from LA to Vegas is a $60 billion project what would your line be, $100 billion? $200 billion? What will it end up being at time of completion in 20years, $500 billion?

We are 5-7 years from self driving luxury electric motor coaches. You could provide free rides for life leaving every hour for a fraction of what it would take to put high speed rail in. That makes sense, that helps those communities.
 
HailBlazers said:
Click to expand...


There used to be extensive electric rail systems in nearly every large city in the U.S. in the late 1800’s/early 1900’s believe it or not. All these electric rail lines were scrapped and replaced with fuel burning buses at the behest of the Rockefeller fossil fuel monopoly. The National City Lines scandal is one of many interesting topics for anyone interested in the power and corruption behind the Rockefeller empire, and how it still effects our society today.

Cleaner burning and cheaper to produce alcohol was also well on its way to being the fuel of the future in the mid-late 1800’s. Henry Ford’s original combustion engine design was alcohol-burning. Farmers could literally make their own fuel to power implements with only a still and the nearly infinite sources of fermentable scrap material around the farm. Enter John D. Rockefeller. His enormous contributions to the prohibition of alcohol through public campaigns and backroom deals had nothing to do with morality and everything to do with eliminating a cheap and plentiful (and competitive) fuel source.

It’s simply mind boggling, actually insulting, that we are just recently being pitched the idea of corn ethanol as some new innovative fuel source when distilled ethyl alcohol as a fuel was being used well over 100 years ago, and ironically being suppressed by the same ones pitching it today as something progressive.
 
Last edited:
Minstrel said:
This video is funny, but it reminds me a little of what my dad said when we saw the (admittedly impressive) pyramids in Egypt: "It's amazing what you can do with unlimited slave labor."

Likewise, it's amazing what you can do in an authoritarian regime. I wonder how China locked down the virus in a few months. How many US politicians could have imposed basically house arrest on their constituency and used drones to go after people without masks? The vast majority of the messiness of US politics is people disagreeing on the right approach and no one being able to say, "That's enough, I'm doing whatever I think is right."

There's been a popular (if half-joking) sentiment among political scientists that the most effective form of government would be "enlightened dictatorship." That is, someone who can act unilaterally but only has the best interests of his/her people at heart. That is, of course, a purely theoretical idea and it gets at the heart of the governance problem: dictatorship is the most effective way to get things done, but it's probably not the most effective way to get the right things done. I don't imagine Maher, for all his belief that China by-god-gets-things-done would want to actually live in China.
Click to expand...

Funny, the slave labor and dictatorial government ideas were my exact thoughts when I watched the video. Like any political satire, you don’t want to take Mahr’s shtick too seriously. I do think that our culture does spend too much time on a lot of stuff that doesn’t really matter much and that we’ve kind of lost any sense of focus about big picture changes that could actually make life better. We need some new leaders with bigger ideas.
 
e_blazer said:
and that we’ve kind of lost any sense of focus about big picture changes that could actually make life better. We need some new leaders with bigger ideas.
Click to expand...

I wonder if that's true, or if our political system with its low incentives on parties working together, has made "big picture changes" close to impossible. For example, whether or not you'd want it to pass, universal health care is a "big picture change" but politically impossible right now. A removal of income tax (and entitlement programs) would likewise be a "big picture change" but also politically impossible. There are plenty of leaders who have these "big ideas" and would love to implement them. But our system is a "big ship"--it's resistant to large changes in the short-term--only long-term changes in course can eventually cause it to deviate from its current path.
 
Minstrel said:
I wonder if that's true, or if our political system with its low incentives on parties working together, has made "big picture changes" close to impossible. For example, whether or not you'd want it to pass, universal health care is a "big picture change" but politically impossible right now. A removal of income tax (and entitlement programs) would likewise be a "big picture change" but also politically impossible. There are plenty of leaders who have these "big ideas" and would love to implement them. But our system is a "big ship"--it's resistant to large changes in the short-term--only long-term changes in course can eventually cause it to deviate from its current path.
Click to expand...

Those ideas are divide the pie issues. You’re correct that the current political power distribution isn’t likely to allow either to go anywhere. I’m thinking about things like infrastructure improvements that have a little something for a lot of people in the way of jobs, construction contracts, and practical usage. Seems like some deals could be struck in that arena.
 
riverman said:
rapid transist systems work...I don't care what some college professor says about socialism and masses....if they worried about socialism massing people together we wouldn't have military bases or factories with giant parking lots. The difference in the quality of life in Taipei after high speed rail was built and before is amazing....you can breathe....Taiwan is the poster boy for capitalism as well....the two things have nothing to do with each other at all. You can move lumber by truck or train....one holds more boards and takes a lot less fuel and trips...Taipei has 8 million people ...without mass transit you would spend all day in traffic just trying to get to and from work and the air would turn to poison...America has almost devoted more land to cars than it has to people...parking lots are a shitty use of land in my view. Look at any city and see how many gas stations, parking lots, garages, car lots, mechanics shops.auto insurance co...etc are around you....it turns out we're obsessed in America with the automobile
Click to expand...
I realize there are definite efficiencies in mass transit and it provides a reasonable cost of service. If it improves peoples life style and travel abilities, Im all for it.
We jump on Max or use the bus on occasion. When I go to the Casey Eye Clinic I'll take the tram up the hill.
But I also enjoy getting in y truck and hauling or travel trailer to places that mass transit cant get us too.
I was out on the water Saturday and was mazed at how many boats were traveling up and down the river, many fisherman but not all.
Boat sales are crazy now as people are playing closer to home.
Im for anything as long as Im free to do things differently from time to time.
 
e_blazer said:
Those ideas are divide the pie issues. You’re correct that the current political power distribution isn’t likely to allow either to go anywhere. I’m thinking about things like infrastructure improvements that have a little something for a lot of people in the way of jobs, construction contracts, and practical usage. Seems like some deals could be struck in that arena.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't have thought infrastructure would count as a "big idea," I thought you meant something that shifted the paradigm, though I of course agree that a big infrastructure bill would be a boon. But then, again, we have the perverse incentives of our system--while infrastructure probably is something people in both parties would like, voters and politicians alike, the "game" aspect of politics incentivizes Republicans to stonewall any infrastructure plan for two reasons: 1. to deny Biden any big, popular bills he (and the Democrats more broadly) can take credit for, and 2. to force Democrats to use reconciliation on that, rather than something else.

When the incentives push you towards blocking bills that you agree with and are in your own interests, you know that the system needs work. But I'm not sure what that work would be. The broad concept of our government seems okay, but the toxicity inherent in the "sport" of partisan politics is the problem and hard to solve.
 
Minstrel said:
I wouldn't have thought infrastructure would count as a "big idea," I thought you meant something that shifted the paradigm, though I of course agree that a big infrastructure bill would be a boon. But then, again, we have the perverse incentives of our system--while infrastructure probably is something people in both parties would like, voters and politicians alike, the "game" aspect of politics incentivizes Republicans to stonewall any infrastructure plan for two reasons: 1. to deny Biden any big, popular bills he (and the Democrats more broadly) can take credit for, and 2. to force Democrats to use reconciliation on that, rather than something else.

When the incentives push you towards blocking bills that you agree with and are in your own interests, you know that the system needs work. But I'm not sure what that work would be. The broad concept of our government seems okay, but the toxicity inherent in the "sport" of partisan politics is the problem and hard to solve.
Click to expand...

It depends on the infrastructure as to whether it would qualify as a "big idea". Massive investment in alternative energy sources to drastically reduce greenhouse emissions would be a big idea. A high speed rail system would be pretty impressive. Investment in manufacturing to return more basic jobs to this country could be a big deal. As far as the kinds of economic/social ideas you mentioned, I think that there has to be a vision to expand the pie, not just change how it's divided up, if you want a real shot at passing something in the way of basic income or universal health care. The rich and the powerful are only going to go along with major increases in social benefits if they can see a way to make more money for themselves in the process.

I think that there's zero chance much, if any, of this can happen in the current political environment. That's why I said it's going to take new leaders with new visions to put together plans and sell the public on them. That's sure not going to happen during the Biden presidency. At some point, at least I hope, there will be some new blood that can start working together again. Right? Right? If not, we're doomed to becoming a declining society in my estimation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ABM
OT Silly FB Videos
Replies
2
Views
218
SheedSoNasty
SheedSoNasty
RoseCityRebel
Politics House Sub-Committee Zoom Call Ends After 20 Minutes of Not Hearing Each Other
Replies
8
Views
341
Lanny
Lanny
Lanny
Politics I wonder if Trump knows
Replies
9
Views
245
EL PRESIDENTE
EL PRESIDENTE
BigGameDamian
OT KEANU REEVES SAYS BILL & TED 3 IS CLOSER THAN EVER
Replies
1
Views
386
crowTrobot
crowTrobot
MickZagger
OT Heat wave, bitches
Replies
27
Views
1K
UncleCliffy'sDaddy
UncleCliffy'sDaddy

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top