Because using taxpayer dollars to forcefully confiscate private property and give it to a taxpayer-subsidized corporation, while subjecting the displaced landowners to taxation on the proceeds from the forced sale of their properties, is a bad idea.
Texas: Major win for possible $30 billion dollar bullet train
Discussion in 'Other News' started by Chinatown, Jun 28, 2022.
Page 2 of 3
-
BennysPennys, Another Canadian driver and JoeyJunk Thank this.
-
Trucking Jobs in 30 seconds
Every month 400 people find a job with the help of TruckersReport.
-
Many won’t want to take a 160 mph train ride imo
Another Canadian driver and JoeyJunk Thank this. -
Another Canadian driver Thanks this. -
If Alaska can have a bridge to nowhere, why can't Texas have a train no one rides?
Another Canadian driver and JoeyJunk Thank this. -
-
Another Canadian driver, RockinChair and JoeyJunk Thank this.
-
BennysPennys, Another Canadian driver and RockinChair Thank this.
-
BennysPennys and Another Canadian driver Thank this.
-
You act as if there is only one method that is possible for aquiring the land, and thats the current plan, no other way could ever happen. Thats simply not true.
Ive frequently thought doing an elevated rail along the median of a highway would make sense, but consider 3 scenarios that make that unwise.
A. Train derailment
B. Semi strikes elevating piers
C. Wartime, airstrike
In all those cases you have a single event that could shut down your only throughway on that corridor. This makes elevated rail along a throughway unattractive except for urban areas, there it not only makes sense, but there will be plenty of alternative routes.
Couple this with the fact that instead of doing it themselves, theyre looking at an outside company to build and manage it, its better to have them completely seperate geographically.
Lets say the time horizon is tomorrow, 3-5x fair market value as the starting place seems reasonable, people hate emminent domain because whatever they SAY about giving fair market value, it tends to be closer to half of real market rates.
But lets say that this is a well planned proposal. that is to say that construction shall start 30 years from now, is THAT an unreasonable time-frame for land aquisition now?
So i again ask, is aleviating traffic on a busy corridor a bad idea? Is your contention that less traffic will start flowing as time goes on without supplemental infrastructure? Thats a reasonable possibility, though highly unlikely as i see itAnother Canadian driver Thanks this. -
You cant tell me that walmart is failing because its customers complain, and ohh boy do they complain. No, if a complaint is enough of a cost, they charge enough to fix the problem.Another Canadian driver Thanks this.
Trucking Jobs in 30 seconds
Every month 400 people find a job with the help of TruckersReport.
Page 2 of 3