View Single Post
Old 10-12-2010, 04:37 PM   #23 (permalink)
Wannabe greenie
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Yorba Linda, CA
Posts: 1,098

The Clunker (retired) - '90 Honda Accord EX sedan
Team Honda
90 day: 29.49 mpg (US)

Mountain Goat - '96 Ford Ranger XLT 4x4 SuperCab
90 day: 18 mpg (US)

Zippy - '10 Kymco Agility 125
90 day: 65.03 mpg (US)
Thanks: 5
Thanked 53 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by Wonderboy View Post
Here's some quick numbers from wikipedia:

United states
3.79 million sq miles
83 people/ sq mi

3.93 million sq miles
181 people/ sq mi

Our federal government would be responsible for spreading the tax money (in this hypothetical case for subsidizing high speed rail) over one country roughly the size of europe.
15 states have population densities higher than Europe, and many of those badly need good mass transportation (Southern California, for instance) and can't get it.

Besides, the federal government is spreading my tax dollars to build and maintain highways in flyover states like Wyoming, which has a population density of 5 persons/sq mi. What's the difference?

Originally Posted by nmgolfer View Post
How do you get to the train station? How do you get where you're going once the train reaches its nearest station? What a pain figuring all that out... Easier to just drive or Fly, walk over and rent bing bang done!
How to you get to the airport? How do you get where you're going once the plane reaches its nearest station? What a pain figuring that all out... at least trains can stop in the middle of a city and not 10 miles outside of town.

High speed rail is a pipe-dream of central planning focused socialists who believe they, not individuals should decide how and when people get from point A to point B.
Ah, another selfish teabagger.

  Reply With Quote