Christie kills tunnel
Bolwerk
I'm guessing he made up his mind before halting construction.
Michael G. Koerner
> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/nyregion/08tunnel.html
>
> I'm guessing he made up his mind before halting construction.
The state's broke. If the money isn't there, then there isn't much that one
can do.
I'm thinking that whenever the State of New Jersey's finances are better off
and better cost controls can be put into place, the project will be resurrected.
Ditto a potential major cross-harbor freight railroad tunnel.
--
___________________________________________ ____ _______________
Regards, | |\ ____
| | | | |\
Michael G. Koerner May they | | | | | | rise again!
Appleton, Wisconsin USA | | | | | |
___________________________________________ | | | | | | _______________
John Levine
>>
>> I'm guessing he made up his mind before halting construction.
>
>The state's broke. If the money isn't there, then there isn't much that one
>can do.
The state has some of the lower gas taxes in the country.
If the goal were to provide the infrastructure that the residents of
NJ need rather than to mindlessly cut everywhere, it would be a no
brainer to fund the tunnel with a slightly increased gas tax, since it
will without question move traffic from roads to rail and lessen road
congestion.
>I'm thinking that whenever the State of New Jersey's finances are
>better off and better cost controls can be put into place, the
>project will be resurrected .
Don't count on it. Many billions of federal and PA matching funds
will go away if they don't do this project now.
I'm hoping this is a highly aggressive negotiating maneuver, but I
don't think Christie is that smart.
R's,
John
danny burstein
>Don't count on it. Many billions of federal and PA matching funds
>will go away if they don't do this project now.
Well, some people might say that reducing federal expenditures
(i.e. tax money or that Chinese credit card) is a Good Thing.
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dan...@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
Ed(NY)
"danny burstein" <dan...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:i8lp6p$9nh$1...@reader1.panix.com...
> In <i8logs$2oi4$1...@gal.iecc.com> John Levine <jo...@iecc.com> writes:
>
>>Don't count on it. Many billions of federal and PA matching funds
>>will go away if they don't do this project now.
>
> Well, some people might say that reducing federal expenditures
> (i.e. tax money or that Chinese credit card) is a Good Thing.
>
> today is a smart investment in this case because the long-term economic
> return will be substantially greater. But who has the guts to take the
> long view?
Adam H. Kerman
>>Don't count on it. Many billions of federal and PA matching funds
>>will go away if they don't do this project now.
>Well, some people might say that reducing federal expenditures
>(i.e. tax money or that Chinese credit card) is a Good Thing.
Could I ask what the Chinese might do with all their dollars if they aren't
buying US government debt?
J.R.Guthrie
news:n_idnS86MNvwkDPR...@earthlink.com...
> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/nyregion/08tunnel.html
>
> I'm guessing he made up his mind before halting construction.
Sure. Why would the oil lobby have poured so much $$$$ into his campaign if
there were no quid pro quo?
What Christie represents is getting rid of the penny-ante pay-for-play and
replace it with Billion dollar returns for his campaign contributors.
At least the NJ "Rail Advocates" will be happy -- no new tunnel not
connected to NYP and no (gasp!) deep station.
Cheers,
Jim Guthrie
Mark Mathu
>(i.e. tax money or that Chinese credit card) is a Good Thing.
Yeah... some people in Niger, Zimbawe, Congo.
Great civilizations are never created without governments that make
bold moves for the betterment of their society as a whole.
If we had followed the policy that reduced government was a good
thing, we'd all still be hunters and gatherers with a 30-year life
expectancy at birth. There would be no Egypt, no Athens, no China, no
Rome, no England, no United States to advance the betterment of
mankind.
The trick is to determine what the _good_ choices for public works
are.
Merritt Mullen
danny burstein <dan...@panix.com> wrote:
> In <i8logs$2oi4$1...@gal.iecc.com> John Levine <jo...@iecc.com> writes:
>
> >Don't count on it. Many billions of federal and PA matching funds
> >will go away if they don't do this project now.
>
> Well, some people might say that reducing federal expenditures
> (i.e. tax money or that Chinese credit card) is a Good Thing.
I doubt that it will reduce federal expenditures. The $3 billion of
federal funding will simply go to another project.
Merritt
Merritt Mullen
That, or buying other US-owned assets (land, buildings, corporations,
etc.).
The amount spent buying US manufactured goods is to our benefit of
course, but the imbalance is such that China still has a lot of dollars
left over.
The dollars do get spent in the US, but we are in effect transferring
ownership and control of US assets to China. It tends to undermine our
sovereignty.
Merritt
John Levine
>>will go away if they don't do this project now.
>
>Well, some people might say that reducing federal expenditures
>(i.e. tax money or that Chinese credit card) is a Good Thing.
Only people who are deeply ignorant of standard macroeconomics and
don't know the diffenence between expenditure and investment.
Was the IND subway a bad idea?
R's,
John
Adam H. Kerman
Now that's a straight line, the punch line for which is Members of Congress.
C'mon. Even when a public expenditure toward infrastructure is valid,
the subsidy is rarely, if ever, paid in proportionate share by those who
benefit from the infrastructure. It's been a real problem forever.
>Was the IND subway a bad idea?
Considering that New York City still hasn't paid off that debt...
John Levine
>>don't know the diffenence between expenditure and investment.
>
>Now that's a straight line, the punch line for which is Members of Congress.
I would agree that far too many members of congress are deeply
ignorant of economics. Looking at some of the proposals coming from
the Republican side, it appears that a surprising number are deeply
ignorant of arithmetic, too.
>>Was the IND subway a bad idea?
>
>Considering that New York City still hasn't paid off that debt...
Now, now, don't change the topic. Even if you believe that the debt
from the 1930s is still outstanding, which it's not since there's no
such thing as a 75 year muni bond, was the IND subway a bad idea?
Would we all be better off if it hadn't been built?
(I believe there's still unpaid debt for the 2nd ave line, but that
hardly counts since they were working on it rather more recently.)
R's,
John
Adam H. Kerman
John, PLEASE retain attribution lines so that others can tell who said what.
>>>Only people who are deeply ignorant of standard macroeconomics and
>>>don't know the diffenence between expenditure and investment.
>>Now that's a straight line, the punch line for which is Members of Congress.
>I would agree that far too many members of congress are deeply
>ignorant of economics. Looking at some of the proposals coming from
>the Republican side, it appears that a surprising number are deeply
>ignorant of arithmetic, too.
A friend of mine and I were lamenting that Congress has been mostly a
disgrace since the 1970's, a period in which men from both parties filled
both houses who were capable of putting the needs of the nation as a whole
over their own petty short-term interests.
>>>Was the IND subway a bad idea?
>>Considering that New York City still hasn't paid off that debt...
>Now, now, don't change the topic. Even if you believe that the debt
>from the 1930s is still outstanding, which it's not since there's no
>such thing as a 75 year muni bond, was the IND subway a bad idea?
>Would we all be better off if it hadn't been built?
>(I believe there's still unpaid debt for the 2nd ave line, but that
>hardly counts since they were working on it rather more recently.)
I haven't changed the topic. New York hasn't had solvent finances in
decades. Old debt is repaid with new debt. Building the IND was the
first huge public works project that put the city into financial ruin.
I won't separate out finance from infrastructure.
George Conklin
"Mark Mathu" <ma...@mathu.com> wrote in message
news:0s4ta696jtlp78bjv...@4ax.com...
> >Well, some people might say that reducing federal expenditures
> >(i.e. tax money or that Chinese credit card) is a Good Thing.
>
> Yeah... some people in Niger, Zimbawe, Congo.
>
> Great civilizations are never created without governments that make
> bold moves for the betterment of their society as a whole.
>
Railroad tunnels to serve the well-to-do in Manhattan are not bold
moves. It is more trickle down economics.
> If we had followed the policy that reduced government was a good
> thing, we'd all still be hunters and gatherers with a 30-year life
> expectancy at birth. There would be no Egypt, no Athens, no China, no
> Rome, no England, no United States to advance the betterment of
> mankind.
>
> The trick is to determine what the _good_ choices for public works
> are.
Railroad tunnels do not lengthen life expectancy.
Sancho Panza
"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote in message
news:i8lti5$tcs$2...@news.albasani.net...
Gamble it in Macau.
Sancho Panza
"John Levine" <jo...@iecc.com> wrote in message
news:i8mcn2$2hjm$1...@gal.iecc.com...
> there's no such thing as a 75 year muni bond
But there is such a thing as governments' rolling over and refinancing debt.
Sancho Panza
> I'm hoping this is a highly aggressive negotiating maneuver, but I don't
> think Christie is that smart.
The leading columnist in the state thinks otherwise:
"Sorting out the Macy's basement tunnel facts
By BOB INGLE . STATEHOUSE BUREAU . October 5, 2010
TRENTON - The pay-to-play crowd is worried the rail line from Monstrosity by
the Turnpike to Macy's basement will get canceled and the politically
connected will have to look for easy tax money elsewhere.
Something called New Jersey Future proclaims it has supported the line from
Xanadu to Macy's basement (officially called the ARC tunnel) but "a number
of misleading and inaccurate statements by critics ... have clouded the
issue." It tells us the tunnel has to go 150 feet under Macy's at 34th
Street instead of Penn Station, where Amtrak and subways and other NJ
Transit trains are, because there is no room left at Penn Station.
Jeff Tittel of the Sierra Club responds: "There is room at Penn Station
called Moynihan," the new facility being built by the federal government to
replace Penn Station.
According to New Jersey Future, the NJ Transit line can't be extended
directly to Grand Central Station on New York's East Side because
Manhattan's north-south water tunnel blocks an east-west connection.
Tittel: "The water tunnel that blocks access to Grand Central is only at the
new station (deep under Macy's) not Penn Station. New Jersey Transit is
giving up platform space at Penn Station for Metro North, which is
connecting Penn Station from Grand Central as part of Long Island Railroad
access to the East side."
New Jersey Future: Amtrak is not planning to build its own tunnel under the
Hudson River in the foreseeable future, in fact Amtrak is counting on the
(ARC) tunnel to provide it with additional capacity for decades to come.
Tittel: "Amtrak just announced its capital plan ... with new tunnels across
the Hudson. The Amtrak plan calls for building two two-track tunnels adding
four tracks" whereas New Jersey's white elephant is two one-track tunnels.
Also, Amtrak proposes to expand Penn Station to the south adding eight
platforms plus Moynihan is adding platform space to the west.
Who you going to believe? The Sierra Club, with no money to be made from the
project, or New Jersey Future, which has a problem with basics?
John S
Many were saying the same thing about Japan in the 1980s, until about
1991 that it is.
John S
They don't??? You mean we can't raise taxes and throw more money under
the dark waters of the Hudson and say it is for the children? Hmmm.
John S
>>> Only people who are deeply ignorant of standard macroeconomics and
>>> don't know the diffenence between expenditure and investment.
>>
>> Now that's a straight line, the punch line for which is Members of Congress.
>
> I would agree that far too many members of congress are deeply
> ignorant of economics. Looking at some of the proposals coming from
> the Republican side, it appears that a surprising number are deeply
> ignorant of arithmetic, too.
>
>>> Was the IND subway a bad idea?
>>
>> Considering that New York City still hasn't paid off that debt...
>
> Now, now, don't change the topic. Even if you believe that the debt
> from the 1930s is still outstanding, which it's not since there's no
> such thing as a 75 year muni bond,
The length of any particular bond and the length of a debt are two
independent subjects.
John S
You are seriously thinking that not dumping billions of non-existent
taxpayers' dollars under the hudson is due to a conspiracy with oil
companies? I'm sure they paid for that, right after they paid GM not to
build a cars and trucks that get 100 miles per gallon....;
George Conklin
"John S" <joh...@no.spam> wrote in message
news:i8n77s$9j8$4...@news.eternal-september.org...
Right up there with all those secret airport subsidies too.
Stephen Bauman
<snip>
>
> I haven't changed the topic. New York hasn't had solvent finances in
> decades. Old debt is repaid with new debt. Building the IND was the
> first huge public works project that put the city into financial ruin.
>
> I won't separate out finance from infrastructure.
Replacing old debt with new debt (i.e. refinancing old debt) works, if
the old debt significantly raises the tax base. This was the case with
the IND, although it might have been even stronger had Hylan not tried to
duplicate existing corridors.
The before/after IND pictures of the Queens Blvd corridor are striking.
This was the one line that did not duplicate an existing corridor. I grew
up in the Rego Park/Forest Hills area during the 40's and 50's. Open
fields, golf courses, tennis courts and amusement parks were turned into
housing and shopping. These replacements added to the tax base at the
expense of destroying my old toboggan slides.
Stephen Bauman
Stephen Bauman
> Railroad tunnels do not lengthen life expectancy.
The air one breathes in the old PRR rail tunnels is a lot healthier than
that in the Lincoln Tunnel. :=)
Stephen Bauman
rsh...@gmail.com
> On 2010.10.07 13:11:59, Bolwerk wrote:
>
> >http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/nyregion/08tunnel.html
>
> > I'm guessing he made up his mind before halting construction.
>
> The state's broke. If the money isn't there, then there isn't much that one
> can do.
>
> I'm thinking that whenever the State of New Jersey's finances are better off
> and better cost controls can be put into place, the project will be resurrected.
>
> Ditto a potential major cross-harbor freight railroad tunnel.
>
> --
> ___________________________________________ ____ _______________
let me explain something to you, and if you are smart will listen:
there will NEVER, ever be a cross harbor frt tunnel.
where do you put the entrance and exit portals that want hundreds of
trucks????
and where are the roads that can handle that quantity of trucks???
from what I understand the big distribution warehouses are in the
Bronx already, also 8A of the NJTPK for trans-shipment
S Kearney has the big cranes for offloading trailers and containers
from rail cars. Believe me the last thing they want is a freight
tunnel
Anotrher thing, the twin towers, as much as you would like to see them
"rise again", not happening. What is ongoing in lower Manhattan w/
Liberty Tower is what you will get
Peter T. Daniels
> On 2010.10.07 13:11:59, Bolwerk wrote:
>
> >http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/nyregion/08tunnel.html
>
> > I'm guessing he made up his mind before halting construction.
>
> The state's broke. If the money isn't there, then there isn't much that one
> can do.
The money was already budgeted and was not NJ's money only.
Christie is already worse than Kean and Whitman put together.
> I'm thinking that whenever the State of New Jersey's finances are better off
> and better cost controls can be put into place, the project will be resurrected.
It will cost twice as much.
rsh...@gmail.com
Not disagreeing with you in regards to Christie, but his major concern
was the potential for huge cost overruns that NJ would be stuck with
With that he does have a point. The feds would not inc their
portion, and who kniws about the PA's portion.
Plus there has been quite a lot of disc on this ng about killing the
deep 34th st station
Bolwerk
> On Oct 7, 4:43 pm, "Peter T. Daniels"<gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> On Oct 7, 2:25 pm, "Michael G. Koerner"<mgk...@dataex.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2010.10.07 13:11:59, Bolwerk wrote:
>>
>>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/nyregion/08tunnel.html
>>
>>>> I'm guessing he made up his mind before halting construction.
>>
>>> The state's broke. If the money isn't there, then there isn't much that one
>>> can do.
>>
>> The money was already budgeted and was not NJ's money only.
>>
>> Christie is already worse than Kean and Whitman put together.
>>
>>> I'm thinking that whenever the State of New Jersey's finances are better off
>>> and better cost controls can be put into place, the project will be resurrected.
>>
>> It will cost twice as much.
>>
>>
>
> Not disagreeing with you in regards to Christie, but his major concern
> was the potential for huge cost overruns that NJ would be stuck with
Then he should swing his big, fascist dick around to keep costs under
control, eh?
rsh...@gmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
whatever will work...
John S
>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/nyregion/08tunnel.html
>>>
>>> I'm guessing he made up his mind before halting construction.
>>
>> The state's broke. If the money isn't there, then there isn't much that one
>> can do.
>
And some of the highest tolls per capita in the country.
> If the goal were to provide the infrastructure that the residents of
> NJ need rather than to mindlessly cut everywhere, it would be a no
> brainer to fund the tunnel with a slightly increased gas tax, since it
> will without question move traffic from roads to rail and lessen road
> congestion.
Ahh more taxes, more taxes, more taxes---more spending, more spending,
more spending.
Last time I checked, there are already vehicle tolls for the crossings
parallel to this proposed tunnel, so the raise gas tax argument is just
more of the same money transfer, except how much "less road congestion"
would be there be outside of the rail corridors, eg. most of
western/central/southern NJ?
If the tunnel is a worthwhile venture that will help x many millions of
rail commuters, may I recommend a ticket tax on all rail ticket sales
that will pay for it.
John S
How is the air quality next to the power plant that feeds the PRR rail
turnnel? With the exception of Indian Point, most electricity in the
area comes from highly polluting coal plants, as well as those that burn
precious natural gas.
John S
> On Oct 7, 2:25 pm, "Michael G. Koerner"<mgk...@dataex.com> wrote:
>> On 2010.10.07 13:11:59, Bolwerk wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/nyregion/08tunnel.html
>>
>>> I'm guessing he made up his mind before halting construction.
>>
>> The state's broke. If the money isn't there, then there isn't much that one
>> can do.
>
> The money was already budgeted and was not NJ's money only.
>
> Christie is already worse than Kean and Whitman put together.
Ahh yes, says Peter the great soothsayer who claimed anyone who said the
proposed ground zero mosque is actually a mosque, which includes the
builders.....
But I'm sure if Christie rubber stamped pouring billions into the bottom
of the Hudson, Peter would love him, right? :)
John S
> On 10/8/2010 4:10 PM, rsh...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Oct 7, 4:43 pm, "Peter T. Daniels"<gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>> On Oct 7, 2:25 pm, "Michael G. Koerner"<mgk...@dataex.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2010.10.07 13:11:59, Bolwerk wrote:
>>>
>>>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/nyregion/08tunnel.html
>>>
>>>>> I'm guessing he made up his mind before halting construction.
>>>
>>>> The state's broke. If the money isn't there, then there isn't much
>>>> that one
>>>> can do.
>>>
>>> The money was already budgeted and was not NJ's money only.
>>>
>>> Christie is already worse than Kean and Whitman put together.
>>>
>>>> I'm thinking that whenever the State of New Jersey's finances are
>>>> better off
>>>> and better cost controls can be put into place, the project will be
>>>> resurrected.
>>>
>>> It will cost twice as much.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Not disagreeing with you in regards to Christie, but his major concern
>> was the potential for huge cost overruns that NJ would be stuck with
>
> Then he should swing his big, fascist dick around to keep costs under
> control, eh?
Is that how do you business? Or should I say "your business...."
JG
> "John S" <joh...@no.spam> wrote in message
>
> news:i8n77s$9j8$4...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>
>
> > On 10/7/2010 10:07 PM, J.R.Guthrie wrote:
> > >news:n_idnS86MNvwkDPR...@earthlink.com...
> > >>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/nyregion/08tunnel.html
>
> > >> I'm guessing he made up his mind before halting construction.
>
> > > Sure. Why would the oil lobby have poured so much $$$$ into his campaign
> if
> > > there were no quid pro quo?
>
> > > What Christie represents is getting rid of the penny-ante pay-for-play
> and
> > > replace it with Billion dollar returns for his campaign contributors.
>
> > > At least the NJ "Rail Advocates" will be happy -- no new tunnel not
> > > connected to NYP and no (gasp!) deep station.
>
> > You are seriously thinking that not dumping billions of non-existent
> > taxpayers' dollars under the hudson is due to a conspiracy with oil
> > companies? I'm sure they paid for that, right after they paid GM not to
> > build a cars and trucks that get 100 miles per gallon....;
>
> Right up there with all those secret airport subsidies too.
Not secret at all, my home's tax bill has a line billing for the local
GA Dupage County Airport.
chris.li...@gmail.com
Cite please? I thought most of our electricity was hydro.
Chris
Bolwerk
Doubtful. Locally, it's probably mostly coal with much of the rest
nuclear, but perhaps most of our "imported" electricity is hydro,
probably from Quebec. (IIRC, electricity is one reason why NYS is
Quebec's #1 trading partner.)
chris.li...@gmail.com
> On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 06:22:33 +0000, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
> > I haven't changed the topic. New York hasn't had solvent finances in
> > decades. Old debt is repaid with new debt. Building the IND was the
> > first huge public works project that put the city into financial ruin.
>
> > I won't separate out finance from infrastructure.
>
> Replacing old debt with new debt (i.e. refinancing old debt) works, if
> the old debt significantly raises the tax base. This was the case with
> the IND, although it might have been even stronger had Hylan not tried to
> duplicate existing corridors.
It also works if the interest rate on the new debt is significantly
lower than that on the old debt. Interest rates are about as low as
they can go right now, so it really makes sense to issue more bonds at
1% to finance debt at 6%. Also, although few people mention it, it is
a standard tactic of governments to allow inflation to wipe out old
debts. It's better than defaulting, but not by much.
Chris
Sancho Panza
<chris.li...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c6b12769-fba4-4d29...@x7g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...
CREATING CLEAN AND GREEN ENERGY SOURCES
Given the growing menace of global warming and the skyrocketing costs of
the burning of fossil fuels, New York must dramatically increase its use of
non-polluting and renewable energy sources. Over half of the electricity
used in New York was generated by fossil fuels:
* 36 percent comes from a combination of oil and gas.
* 18 percent from gas alone.
* 8 percent from oil alone.
* 8 percent from coal.
The remainder of power came from nuclear power reactors (13 percent),
hydroelectric (14 percent), and other "renewables" (3 percent) such as
biomass and wind. These numbers vary from year to year depending on a
number of factors, such as fuels prices and amount demanded. --nypirg.org
Sancho Panza
"John S" <joh...@no.spam> wrote in message
He does seem to have a "magic wand." Ray LaHood sure ran up to Jersey like a
lightning bolt today. And Bret Schundler was bounced off the front pages.
Michael Moroney
>> Cite please? I thought most of our electricity was hydro.
>CREATING CLEAN AND GREEN ENERGY SOURCES
> Given the growing menace of global warming and the skyrocketing costs of
>the burning of fossil fuels, New York must dramatically increase its use of
>non-polluting and renewable energy sources. Over half of the electricity
>used in New York was generated by fossil fuels:
> * 36 percent comes from a combination of oil and gas.
> * 18 percent from gas alone.
> * 8 percent from oil alone.
> * 8 percent from coal.
> The remainder of power came from nuclear power reactors (13 percent),
>hydroelectric (14 percent), and other "renewables" (3 percent) such as
>biomass and wind. These numbers vary from year to year depending on a
>number of factors, such as fuels prices and amount demanded. --nypirg.org
Also, most of the hydro is generated and put into the grid upstate (esp
Niagara Falls and Massena), and I think the imported hydropower from
Quebec gets put into the grid near Syracuse.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> How is the air quality next to the power plant that feeds the PRR rail
> turnnel?
It's hydro.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
<chris.linthomp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Cite please? I thought most of our electricity was hydro.
Yes, it is hydro that supplies the railroad.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
wrote:
> Also, most of the hydro is generated and put into the grid upstate (esp
> Niagara Falls and Massena), and I think the imported hydropower from
> Quebec gets put into the grid near Syracuse.
Hydro for the railroad came from Conowingo.
J.R.Guthrie
>
> Considering that New York City still hasn't paid off that debt...
The States of the Old Confederacy still haven't paid off their bonds either
. . .
Do you think it's about time they did so?
Cheers,
Jim Guthrie
Michael G. Koerner
The major line into NYS from Hydro-Quebec feeds into a big-ass substation a
short distance north of Utica.
--
___________________________________________ ____ _______________
Regards, | |\ ____
| | | | |\
Michael G. Koerner May they | | | | | | rise again!
Appleton, Wisconsin USA | | | | | |
___________________________________________ | | | | | | _______________
Michael G. Koerner
> On Oct 7, 1:25 pm, "Michael G. Koerner"<mgk...@dataex.com> wrote:
>> On 2010.10.07 13:11:59, Bolwerk wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/nyregion/08tunnel.html
>>
>>> I'm guessing he made up his mind before halting construction.
>>
>> The state's broke. If the money isn't there, then there isn't much that one
>> can do.
>>
>> I'm thinking that whenever the State of New Jersey's finances are better off
>> and better cost controls can be put into place, the project will be resurrected.
>>
>> Ditto a potential major cross-harbor freight railroad tunnel.
>>
>> --
>> ___________________________________________ ____ _______________
>
>
> let me explain something to you, and if you are smart will listen:
>
> there will NEVER, ever be a cross harbor frt tunnel.
>
> where do you put the entrance and exit portals that want hundreds of
> trucks????
> and where are the roads that can handle that quantity of trucks???
>
> from what I understand the big distribution warehouses are in the
> Bronx already, also 8A of the NJTPK for trans-shipment
>
> S Kearney has the big cranes for offloading trailers and containers
> from rail cars. Believe me the last thing they want is a freight
> tunnel
Ahhhh, did you not see the 'RAIL' in front of the 'road' in that part of my post?
> Anotrher thing, the twin towers, as much as you would like to see them
> "rise again", not happening. What is ongoing in lower Manhattan w/
> Liberty Tower is what you will get
One BIG Bronx Cheer for you, too!
John S
Conowingo is in Pennsylvania, not New York. It is on the same grid, but
it unlikely that the electrons are moving that far to provide current.
If someone in NY has as contract to use Conowingo power, it is still
more than likely that the power they are consuming is coming from a
local source and Conowingo is powering something closer to it to make up
for it. Long distance transmission sounds nice but has serious
efficiency issues due to significant energy loss over distance.
John S
Which just means that the same hydroelectric power is not going to power
something else. The railroad did not build any hydroelectric plants,
they would still be producing the same amount of power, railroad or not.
John S
Really? So why does Amtrak bother to operate the electric converter
plants at Metuchen and Long Island City that receive power from the
public grid?
John S
Who holds these bonds?
rsh...@gmail.com
> On 2010.10.07 22:42:36, rshe...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 7, 1:25 pm, "Michael G. Koerner"<mgk...@dataex.com> wrote:
> >> On 2010.10.07 13:11:59, Bolwerk wrote:
>
> >>>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/nyregion/08tunnel.html
>
> >>> I'm guessing he made up his mind before halting construction.
>
> >> The state's broke. If the money isn't there, then there isn't much that one
> >> can do.
>
> >> I'm thinking that whenever the State of New Jersey's finances are better off
> >> and better cost controls can be put into place, the project will be resurrected.
>
> >> Ditto a potential major cross-harbor freight railroad tunnel.
>
> >> --
> >> ___________________________________________ ____ _______________
>
> > let me explain something to you, and if you are smart will listen:
>
> > there will NEVER, ever be a cross harbor frt tunnel.
>
> > where do you put the entrance and exit portals that want hundreds of
> > trucks????
> > and where are the roads that can handle that quantity of trucks???
>
> > from what I understand the big distribution warehouses are in the
> > Bronx already, also 8A of the NJTPK for trans-shipment
>
> > S Kearney has the big cranes for offloading trailers and containers
> > from rail cars. Believe me the last thing they want is a freight
> > tunnel
>
> Ahhhh, did you not see the 'RAIL' in front of the 'road' in that part of my post?
>
fine and dandy, however, eventually that freight is going to wind up
on a truck
it has been studied and studied an studied and on the eastern end,
believe me no one wants it and no one will allow it
what I am trying to tell you is the rr's do not want it, NYC does not
want it
It would require multiple billions from the Port Auth for something
no one wants.
> > Anotrher thing, the twin towers, as much as you would like to see them
> > "rise again", not happening. What is ongoing in lower Manhattan w/
> > Liberty Tower is what you will get
>
> One BIG Bronx Cheer for you, too!
whoa, nellie, WHOA, please
finally Lower Manhattan is getting SOMETHING to replace that horrid
hole in the ground
>
> --
> ___________________________________________ ____ _______________
> Regards, | |\ ____
> | | | | |\
> Michael G. Koerner May they | | | | | | rise again!
> Appleton, Wisconsin USA | | | | | |
> ___________________________________________ | | | | | | _______________- Hide quoted text -
rsh...@gmail.com
> On 10/7/2010 8:27 PM, John Levine wrote:
>
> >>>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/nyregion/08tunnel.html
>
> >>> I'm guessing he made up his mind before halting construction.
>
> >> The state's broke. If the money isn't there, then there isn't much that one
> >> can do.
>
> > The state has some of the lower gas taxes in the country.
>
> And some of the highest tolls per capita in the country.
>
well worth it, we are the richest area and can well afford it
those tolls provide our extensive transit network
where exactly do you live????
> > If the goal were to provide the infrastructure that the residents of
> > NJ need rather than to mindlessly cut everywhere, it would be a no
> > brainer to fund the tunnel with a slightly increased gas tax, since it
> > will without question move traffic from roads to rail and lessen road
> > congestion.
>
> Ahh more taxes, more taxes, more taxes---more spending, more spending,
> more spending.
>
> Last time I checked, there are already vehicle tolls for the crossings
> parallel to this proposed tunnel, so the raise gas tax argument is just
> more of the same money transfer, except how much "less road congestion"
> would be there be outside of the rail corridors, eg. most of
> western/central/southern NJ?
>
> If the tunnel is a worthwhile venture that will help x many millions of
> rail commuters, may I recommend a ticket tax on all rail ticket sales
> that will pay for it.
let me explain something to you, roads are very heavily subsidized
Nonetheless, anything that takes traffic off the roads and puts people
on transit is worthwhile and is worthy of a FUEL tax to accomplish
george conklin
"JG" <jgro...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:606b06a6-45cd-49bb...@t8g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
GA Dupage County Airport.----
----
The RDU airport is "subsidized" to the tune of $10,000 per owner, of
which there are only 4, two counties and two cities. This is the same rate
as in 1938.
Sancho Panza
"John S" <joh...@no.spam> wrote in message
> Conowingo is in Pennsylvania, not New York. It is on the same grid, but
> it unlikely that the electrons are moving that far to provide current.
Not quite. New York is not in the PJM Interconnection, as those of us who
remember several blackouts can point out.
Clark F Morris
<jgut...@pipeline.com> wrote:
>"Bolwerk" <bol...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:n_idnS86MNvwkDPR...@earthlink.com...
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/nyregion/08tunnel.html
>>
>> I'm guessing he made up his mind before halting construction.
>
>Sure. Why would the oil lobby have poured so much $$$$ into his campaign if
>there were no quid pro quo?
>
>What Christie represents is getting rid of the penny-ante pay-for-play and
>replace it with Billion dollar returns for his campaign contributors.
>
>At least the NJ "Rail Advocates" will be happy -- no new tunnel not
>connected to NYP and no (gasp!) deep station.
While there are deeper stations in the world on mainline rail, heavy
rail (subways and els), and light rail, do you know of any that are
terminal stations with a volume of 20 - 30 thousand people an hour at
that depth? Can such a station be safely evacuated if there is no
power for escalators and elevators? It seem like NJT is basing this
on 2 unprovens, a terminal deep station and a dual mode that is the
first of its type in the world (the Bombardier AGC is a
diesel-electric, electric MU which in tri-mode is 25KV AC 50 cycle,
1.5KV DC and diesel electric so the concept may not scale up).
Also given that New York City and New York state are the primary
beneficiaries (the city gets the daytime spending and the state gets
the income tax revenues), they should have done more to make this
whole thing viable.
>
>Cheers,
>Jim Guthrie
>
>
Clark F Morris
<n...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>"John S" <joh...@no.spam> wrote in message
>news:i8n77s$9j8$4...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> On 10/7/2010 10:07 PM, J.R.Guthrie wrote:
>> > "Bolwerk"<bol...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> > news:n_idnS86MNvwkDPR...@earthlink.com...
>> >> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/nyregion/08tunnel.html
>> >>
>> >> I'm guessing he made up his mind before halting construction.
>> >
>> > Sure. Why would the oil lobby have poured so much $$$$ into his campaign
>if
>> > there were no quid pro quo?
>> >
>> > What Christie represents is getting rid of the penny-ante pay-for-play
>and
>> > replace it with Billion dollar returns for his campaign contributors.
>> >
>> > At least the NJ "Rail Advocates" will be happy -- no new tunnel not
>> > connected to NYP and no (gasp!) deep station.
>>
>> You are seriously thinking that not dumping billions of non-existent
>> taxpayers' dollars under the hudson is due to a conspiracy with oil
>> companies? I'm sure they paid for that, right after they paid GM not to
>> build a cars and trucks that get 100 miles per gallon....;
>
> Right up there with all those secret airport subsidies too.
>
Which like Air Traffic Control are in the FAA budget and the amounts
over the revenues from the airlines are also easily found.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> > Yes, it is hydro that supplies the railroad.
>
> Which just means that the same hydroelectric power is not going to power
> something else. The railroad did not build any hydroelectric plants,
> they would still be producing the same amount of power, railroad or not.
Conowingo was coordinated with the PRR electrification.
Bolwerk
> On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 22:07:56 -0400, "J.R.Guthrie"
> <jgut...@pipeline.com> wrote:
>
>> "Bolwerk"<bol...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:n_idnS86MNvwkDPR...@earthlink.com...
>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/nyregion/08tunnel.html
>>>
>>> I'm guessing he made up his mind before halting construction.
>>
>> Sure. Why would the oil lobby have poured so much $$$$ into his campaign if
>> there were no quid pro quo?
>>
>> What Christie represents is getting rid of the penny-ante pay-for-play and
>> replace it with Billion dollar returns for his campaign contributors.
>>
>> At least the NJ "Rail Advocates" will be happy -- no new tunnel not
>> connected to NYP and no (gasp!) deep station.
>
> While there are deeper stations in the world on mainline rail, heavy
> rail (subways and els), and light rail, do you know of any that are
> terminal stations with a volume of 20 - 30 thousand people an hour at
> that depth?
There quite possibly will be another across town with East Side Access.
> Can such a station be safely evacuated if there is no
> power for escalators and elevators?
That does sound questionable.
> It seem like NJT is basing this
> on 2 unprovens, a terminal deep station and a dual mode that is the
> first of its type in the world (the Bombardier AGC is a
> diesel-electric, electric MU which in tri-mode is 25KV AC 50 cycle,
> 1.5KV DC and diesel electric so the concept may not scale up).
>
> Also given that New York City and New York state are the primary
> beneficiaries (the city gets the daytime spending and the state gets
> the income tax revenues), they should have done more to make this
> whole thing viable.
I think it's rather sad that regional planners can't work together, but
this has a lot of potential to help NJ grow - NYS should have tried to
help them get to the east side or something, perhaps by coordinating
with East Side Access. Still, economic growth isn't going to be as fast
in Midtown Manhattan as it could be in inner suburbs of New Jersey. On
the merits, Jersey is going to reap most of the long-term benefits.
Phil Kane
>> Can such a station be safely evacuated if there is no
>> power for escalators and elevators?
>
>That does sound questionable.
That's what on-site backup generators are for.
--
"Stand Clear of the Closing Doors, Please"
Phil Kane - Beaverton, OR
PNW Beburg MP 28.0 - OE District
Michael Moroney
I believe Conowingo is dedicated to generating the 25 Hz power used by
the Northeast Corridor, making it completely off the grid other than
the connections where the Northeast Corridor gets some power from the grid
via 60 Hz-25 Hz converters.
Michael Moroney
As I mentioned, the Northeast Corridor has some dedicated hydro plants.
(At least one). I do not know if the PRR had them built or simply used
existing commercial 25 Hz hydro plants and eventually took them over
completely, esp. when the rest of the nation adopted 60 Hz.
John S
You are correct about PJM, however by grid I meant grid, not the
regional operators/organizations. There are only three grids in the
contiguous USA, East, West, and Texas. Power can be moved between
grids, but not with alternating current as the grids are not synchronized.
>
>
John S
Conowingo produces power for Exelon, which is added to the commercial
grid. There is one 25 Hz generator, however I believe this is used for
house power for the dam maintenance railroad/cranes.
I should have said Maryland not Pennsylvania, although much of/most of
the reservoir is in Pennsylvania.
John S
That may have been the case, but I believe PRR has been gone for a while
now. Conowingo was built by Philadelphia Electric Co. and is still
owned by Exelon, PECo's successor. It provides commercial power to the
grid.
John S
> On Oct 8, 5:44 pm, John S<joh...@no.spam> wrote:
>> On 10/7/2010 8:27 PM, John Levine wrote:
>>
>>>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/nyregion/08tunnel.html
>>
>>>>> I'm guessing he made up his mind before halting construction.
>>
>>>> The state's broke. If the money isn't there, then there isn't much that one
>>>> can do.
>>
>>> The state has some of the lower gas taxes in the country.
>>
>> And some of the highest tolls per capita in the country.
>>
>
> well worth it, we are the richest area and can well afford it
>
> those tolls provide our extensive transit network
Wow, what hubris! I'm glad you can magically determine what "we" can
afford. I'm sure the millions of people struggling right now in New
Jersey are very happy to hear it.
>
> where exactly do you live????
>
>
>
>
>>> If the goal were to provide the infrastructure that the residents of
>>> NJ need rather than to mindlessly cut everywhere, it would be a no
>>> brainer to fund the tunnel with a slightly increased gas tax, since it
>>> will without question move traffic from roads to rail and lessen road
>>> congestion.
>>
>> Ahh more taxes, more taxes, more taxes---more spending, more spending,
>> more spending.
>>
>> Last time I checked, there are already vehicle tolls for the crossings
>> parallel to this proposed tunnel, so the raise gas tax argument is just
>> more of the same money transfer, except how much "less road congestion"
>> would be there be outside of the rail corridors, eg. most of
>> western/central/southern NJ?
>>
>> If the tunnel is a worthwhile venture that will help x many millions of
>> rail commuters, may I recommend a ticket tax on all rail ticket sales
>> that will pay for it.
>
> let me explain something to you, roads are very heavily subsidized
>
> Nonetheless, anything that takes traffic off the roads and puts people
> on transit is worthwhile and is worthy of a FUEL tax to accomplish
If roads should subsidize transit, then it is only fair to expect
transit to subsidize roads. A significant fare surcharge would do the
trick, and as you mentioned before "we" can afford it. And don't forget
to make sure those buses and trains pay that FUEL tax you hope for.
John S
You mean the airlines that are teetering on bankruptcy can easily fund
what? Should bus companies fund the police and street light departments
too?
Actually AIR PASSENGERS and AIR SHIPPERS pay fare taxes and way bill
taxes which fund the national airport and airway system. Note the
contrast to RAIL passengers.
J.R.Guthrie
> While there are deeper stations in the world on mainline rail, heavy
> rail (subways and els), and light rail, do you know of any that are
> terminal stations with a volume of 20 - 30 thousand people an hour at
So, what kind of idiocy believes that if a station serves 30,000 people a
day, they are all there at once to be evacuated? That's ludicrous.
But just for argument sake, two trains arrive NYP at the nearly the same
time on, say, tracks 3 and 4 -- and each has a thousand passengers. How fast
do you think that could be evacuated? Do you think a new station with modern
safety concerns 100 feet down, or Penn Station built with no safety concerns
at all 40 feet down is safer?
> first of its type in the world (the Bombardier AGC is a
> diesel-electric, electric MU which in tri-mode is 25KV AC 50 cycle,
> 1.5KV DC and diesel electric so the concept may not scale up).
It has a far better chance of being evacuated than NYP in a similar
situation. In fact, with wide platforms and multiple escalators, there might
even be some ruinning in the right direction to evacuate people.
>
> Also given that New York City and New York state are the primary
> beneficiaries (the city gets the daytime spending and the state gets
> the income tax revenues), they should have done more to make this
> whole thing viable.
But subtract the portion from the Port Authority and the Federal government
paid by New Yorkers first, because New Yorkers "aren't contributing," right?
And after we deduct, say, the Port of Authorityt's $1.5 Billion of the New
York half, let's bill New Jersey for the capital expense of the subway
system as used by New Jersey residents who haven't paid a dine in a hundred
years toward paying off those transit bonds. Maybe we could extend the MTA
payroll tax to New Jersey employers to pay their fair share of the subway
system expense when those NJ residents come to the city?
The notion that New Jersey residents working in NY spend all their money in
NY and in NY taxes is sheer ignorance. To be fair -- there's plenty in the
other direction too -- as are the accusations that the Port of Authority
killed tens of thousands of NYC jobs by moving the Port to Newark Bay.
Cheers,
Jim Guthrie
John S
> On Sat, 09 Oct 2010 17:35:50 -0400, Bolwerk<bol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Can such a station be safely evacuated if there is no
>>> power for escalators and elevators?
>>
>> That does sound questionable.
>
> That's what on-site backup generators are for.
hiccup. But what about a more sinister attack?
Steven M. O'Neill
>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/nyregion/08tunnel.html
>
>I'm guessing he made up his mind before halting construction.
A day after canceling a massive new rail tunnel between
New Jersey and Manhattan, Gov. Christie agreed Friday to
reconsider.
U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood met with Christie
at the statehouse in Trenton for nearly an hour Friday
afternoon and persuaded Christie to give a panel of experts
two weeks to evaluate ways to continue the project.
"Secretary LaHood presented several options to potentially
salvage a trans-Hudson tunnel project," Christie said in a
statement released after the meeting.
[more at URL above]
--
Steven O'Neill ste...@panix.com
Brooklyn, NY http://www.panix.com/~steveo
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> > The state has some of the lower gas taxes in the country.
>
> And some of the highest tolls per capita in the country.
Irrelevant.
But what is relevant when talking about NJ roads is that the secondary
road system is paid from property taxes--in many other states,
including Penna, such road networks are paid for by fuel taxes.
Interestingly, while NJ has extremely low gas taxes, it has high
proprety taxes. It would make sense to charge motorists for their
costs and relieve the property tax burden.
> > If the goal were to provide the infrastructure that the residents of
> > NJ need rather than to mindlessly cut everywhere, it would be a no
> > brainer to fund the tunnel with a slightly increased gas tax, since it
> > will without question move traffic from roads to rail and lessen road
> > congestion.
>
> Ahh more taxes, more taxes, more taxes---more spending, more spending,
> more spending.
I guess you were opposed to Eisenhower's Interstate highway network
and the airport building frenzy of the 1950s.
Funny, Eastern Airlines old president went around screaming about
government spending being bad--and at the same time complained towns
weren't spending enough on airports.
> Last time I checked, there are already vehicle tolls for the crossings
> parallel to this proposed tunnel, so the raise gas tax argument is just
> more of the same money transfer, except how much "less road congestion"
> would be there be outside of the rail corridors, eg. most of
> western/central/southern NJ?
Or we could raise road tolls to pay for it.
> If the tunnel is a worthwhile venture that will help x many millions of
> rail commuters, may I recommend a ticket tax on all rail ticket sales
> that will pay for it.
How about having motorists pay the true costs of their highways, such
as the loss in property taxes and public safety (fire, police, rescue)
costs?
The book Empire on the Hudson details this.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> > The air one breathes in the old PRR rail tunnels is a lot healthier than
> > that in the Lincoln Tunnel. :=)
>
> How is the air quality next to the power plant that feeds the PRR rail
> turnnel? With the exception of Indian Point, most electricity in the
> area comes from highly polluting coal plants, as well as those that burn
> precious natural gas.
As mentioned, the power plant that supplied the PRR electrification
was the Conowingo dam.
As others pointed out, NYC metro power comes partly from hydro
sources, too.
AFAIK, all automobiles and trucks must use oil based fuel--gasoline or
diesel.
I would strongly recommend against standing alongside the NJ Tpk or
GSP and breathing the air. It will make you sick.
rsh...@gmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
matched by your total ignorance
I don't believe for one minute you live anywhere near NJ or NYC.
because if you did, you would be familiar with 45+ minute backups at
the tunnels and hour long delays at the GWB.
the point of transit is to move PEOPLE. If you make transit more
accessible people will leave their cars behind, i.e., not use them at
all.
Again your ignorance, NJ is a very congested state.
I will tell you again, the NJ state gas tax should inc 10c a gal a
year for the next 5 years. Half for roads and half for transit
you will barely notice it.
and before you start whining my guess is it might cost me $200 a year
$4 a week
now start whining
one more thing, Tpk tolls inc every year
they inc annually to pay off the bonds that Repub Gov Kean had issued
by the Tpk Auth
to widen the Tpk north of 8A
rsh...@gmail.com
> On 10/9/2010 4:25 PM, Clark F Morris wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Fri, 8 Oct 2010 09:45:01 -0400, "George Conklin"
> > <n...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >> "John S"<joh...@no.spam> wrote in message
> >>news:i8n77s$9j8$4...@news.eternal-september.org...
> >>> On 10/7/2010 10:07 PM, J.R.Guthrie wrote:
> >>>>news:n_idnS86MNvwkDPR...@earthlink.com...
> >>>>>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/nyregion/08tunnel.html
>
> >>>>> I'm guessing he made up his mind before halting construction.
>
> >>>> Sure. Why would the oil lobby have poured so much $$$$ into his campaign
> >> if
> >>>> there were no quid pro quo?
>
> >>>> What Christie represents is getting rid of the penny-ante pay-for-play
> >> and
> >>>> replace it with Billion dollar returns for his campaign contributors.
>
> >>>> At least the NJ "Rail Advocates" will be happy -- no new tunnel not
> >>>> connected to NYP and no (gasp!) deep station.
>
> >>> You are seriously thinking that not dumping billions of non-existent
> >>> taxpayers' dollars under the hudson is due to a conspiracy with oil
> >>> companies? I'm sure they paid for that, right after they paid GM not to
> >>> build a cars and trucks that get 100 miles per gallon....;
>
> >> Right up there with all those secret airport subsidies too.
>
> > Which like Air Traffic Control are in the FAA budget and the amounts
> > over the revenues from the airlines are also easily found.
>
> You mean the airlines that are teetering on bankruptcy can easily fund
> what?
teetering on bankruptcy????? why is this???? I don't understand
explain please
the airlines charge plenty to go from say Helena, MT to Denver
how is it the are not rolling in the dough
Should bus companies fund the police and street light departments
> too?
>
> Actually AIR PASSENGERS and AIR SHIPPERS pay fare taxes and way bill
> taxes which fund the national airport and airway system. Note the
> contrast to RAIL passengers.- Hide quoted text -
John S
> On Oct 8, 6:48 pm, John S<joh...@no.spam> wrote:
>
>>> The air one breathes in the old PRR rail tunnels is a lot healthier than
>>> that in the Lincoln Tunnel. :=)
>>
>> How is the air quality next to the power plant that feeds the PRR rail
>> turnnel? With the exception of Indian Point, most electricity in the
>> area comes from highly polluting coal plants, as well as those that burn
>> precious natural gas.
>
> As mentioned, the power plant that supplied the PRR electrification
> was the Conowingo dam.
Conowingo has always provided commercial power and has always been owned
by Philadelphia Electric/Exelon. It did supply power to the local PRR
lines back in the day, but does not ship power to New York City anymore
than any other part of the grid.
>
> As others pointed out, NYC metro power comes partly from hydro
> sources, too.
No more than any other power consumer in the same area.
>
> AFAIK, all automobiles and trucks must use oil based fuel--gasoline or
> diesel.
>
> I would strongly recommend against standing alongside the NJ Tpk or
> GSP and breathing the air. It will make you sick.
What about sitting on the NJ Tpk or GSP??? Is everyone sick there or is
there magic non-sick zone in the highway but not alongside?
J.R.Guthrie
> I believe Conowingo is dedicated to generating the 25 Hz power used by
> the Northeast Corridor, making it completely off the grid other than
> the connections where the Northeast Corridor gets some power from the grid
> via 60 Hz-25 Hz converters.
Not completely -- but a goodly portion of it runs the Corridor. Transmission
is along the former PRR Low Grade Line (which is causing great consternation
to the rails to trails people who thought those powerlines went away with
the tracks <g>. The main transmission lines continue along the Morrisville
Cut=off to Abrams, where they turn south along the ex PRR Schuylkill Valley
Branch into Philadelphia. I believe there are still feeders north and south
on the C&PD as well.
Amtrak owns those lines. The connection to the grid is another matter.
Some years ago, in its endless quest to make sure Amtrak "Runs line a
business" the Republicans in Congress passed what was called the Enron
Amendment, which prohibited Amtrak from using its extensive power grids as
part of the national grid system. Those restrictions were later eased, but
by that time, the extra capacity Amtrak had in the years immediately
following Conrail's discontinuance of electric-powered freight disappeared,
as the excess wire was scrapped (since they could not use it by
Congressional fiat).
So -- much -- but not all of the Washington-NY-New Rochelle Corridor power
is hydro generated. The New Haven-Boston segment comes off the commercial
grid, as does Metro North's (Cos Cob having been shut down some years ago).
Cheers,
Jim Guthrie
John S
> On Oct 8, 6:44 pm, John S<joh...@no.spam> wrote:
>>> The state has some of the lower gas taxes in the country.
>>
>> And some of the highest tolls per capita in the country.
>
> Irrelevant.
When we are talking about costs for driving, you bet tolls are relevant,
they are costs too.
>
> But what is relevant when talking about NJ roads is that the secondary
> road system is paid from property taxes--in many other states,
> including Penna, such road networks are paid for by fuel taxes.
I believe only county and local roads use property tax funding. The
same is true in Pennsylvania although there are few county roads there.
> Interestingly, while NJ has extremely low gas taxes, it has high
> proprety taxes. It would make sense to charge motorists for their
> costs and relieve the property tax burden.
Relieve the property tax burden from whom? And how would your proposal
ease the high toll burden on NJ motorists?
>
>
>
>>> If the goal were to provide the infrastructure that the residents of
>>> NJ need rather than to mindlessly cut everywhere, it would be a no
>>> brainer to fund the tunnel with a slightly increased gas tax, since it
>>> will without question move traffic from roads to rail and lessen road
>>> congestion.
>>
>> Ahh more taxes, more taxes, more taxes---more spending, more spending,
>> more spending.
>
> I guess you were opposed to Eisenhower's Interstate highway network
> and the airport building frenzy of the 1950s.
Please state where I stated any such thing.
>
> Funny, Eastern Airlines old president went around screaming about
> government spending being bad--and at the same time complained towns
> weren't spending enough on airports.
One person from one company.....so what?
>> Last time I checked, there are already vehicle tolls for the crossings
>> parallel to this proposed tunnel, so the raise gas tax argument is just
>> more of the same money transfer, except how much "less road congestion"
>> would be there be outside of the rail corridors, eg. most of
>> western/central/southern NJ?
>
> Or we could raise road tolls to pay for it.
Ahh, how creative. Let's build something for one group and bill it to
another. Nice.
>
>
>> If the tunnel is a worthwhile venture that will help x many millions of
>> rail commuters, may I recommend a ticket tax on all rail ticket sales
>> that will pay for it.
>
> How about having motorists pay the true costs of their highways, such
> as the loss in property taxes and public safety (fire, police, rescue)
> costs?
>
> The book Empire on the Hudson details this.
True costs of highways? Moments ago you were arguing that motorists
should be paying for costs of transit! If paying for true costs is so
important to you, let's start with transit users, they have the most to
do to even catch up.
John S
How many people a day fly from Helena to Denver? Now what would the
cost for Amtrak per capita for the same route daily?
>
>
>
>
>
> Should bus companies fund the police and street light departments
>> too?
>>
>> Actually AIR PASSENGERS and AIR SHIPPERS pay fare taxes and way bill
>> taxes which fund the national airport and airway system. Note the
>> contrast to RAIL passengers.- Hide quoted text -
Oops you forgot to answer. An oversight, I'm sure.
Sancho Panza
"John S" <joh...@no.spam> wrote in message
Sampling gauges are scattered along the turnpike and are used in formulating
air advisory warnings, which are far less frequent than those for New York
City.
rsh...@gmail.com
quit with the non sequiturs Amtrak has no route from Helena to Denver
and answer the question, why are the airlines not rolling in the
dough???
from what I understand the airlines make most of their miney from
routes like Helena to Denver
costs are low and fares are very high
>
>
> > Should bus companies fund the police and street light departments
> >> too?
>
if you are talking about Greyhound, etc, they pay property as well as
fuel
taxes
> >> Actually AIR PASSENGERS and AIR SHIPPERS pay fare taxes and way bill as well they should
how much in property taxes does O Hare, PGH, PHL, JFK, etc pay???
oh so they get police and fire protection that they are not paying for
not to mention billions in road improvements and new road const
PGH got new freeways right to their fromt door
SFO got I-380 right to their fromt door
how much did they pay for that????
> >> taxes which fund the national airport and airway system. Note the
> >> contrast to RAIL passengers.- Hide quoted text -
>
> Oops you forgot to answer. An oversight, I'm sure.- Hide quoted text -
Bolwerk
How do you think highways got built?
>>> If the tunnel is a worthwhile venture that will help x many millions of
>>> rail commuters, may I recommend a ticket tax on all rail ticket sales
>>> that will pay for it.
>>
>> How about having motorists pay the true costs of their highways, such
>> as the loss in property taxes and public safety (fire, police, rescue)
>> costs?
>>
>> The book Empire on the Hudson details this.
> True costs of highways? Moments ago you were arguing that motorists
> should be paying for costs of transit! If paying for true costs is so
> important to you, let's start with transit users, they have the most to
> do to even catch up.
That's really out of left field. Catch up to what, exactly? Nationally
speaking, tolls and gas taxes combined only pay for ~70% of the highway
transportation system (that's comparable to Amtrak's and NYCTA Subways'
respective farebox recovery ratios). Where do you suppose the rest
comes from? And how about the entire non-highway road network? If rail
performed so poorly, it would be slandered as socialism!
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> Actually AIR PASSENGERS and AIR SHIPPERS pay fare taxes and way bill
> taxes which fund the national airport and airway system. Note the
> contrast to RAIL passengers.
FALSE TO FACT:
Almost all US commercial airports were built and are operated with
public money provided directly or indirectly by the taxpayers. As
mentioned, the book "Empire on the Hudson" documents this in detail.
Unlike the railroads, which built and maintained their stations
through private capital, and then paid heavy property taxes; the
airlines could never afford to build and operate the airports using
private capital. Likewise with road networks.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> because if you did, you would be familiar with 45+ minute backups at
> the tunnels and hour long delays at the GWB.
45 minutes? Hah! Try 90 minute delays at the various Hudson
crossings.
I'm sure you know quite well how much pollution is generated by all
those cars waiting in line to cross, and wasted gasoline.
J.R.Guthrie
money. The fact is that the airline industry -- despite all the subsidies
from municipal airports an associated facilities paid for with general tax
dollars (and usually hidden so booboisie taxpayers don't ask questions --as
evidenced here in this thread) -- has never turned a profit. Investors and
taxpayers have always footed the bill.
But business (both users and travel-related) needs air travel and makes sure
that it exists where they want it -- at the expense of the suckers who
invest or provide "economic improvement" subsidies. And others, say, living
in the path of air technology are no compensated either for noisy airplanes
or even those chunks of green ice that fall into their yards from time to
time, melting into sewage.
"The worst sort of business is one that grows rapidly, requires significant
capital to engender the growth, and then earns little or no money. Think
airlines. Here a durable competitive advantage has proven elusive ever since
the days of the Wright Brothers. Indeed, if a farsighted capitalist had been
present at Kitty Hawk, he would have done his successors a huge favor by
shooting Orville down. -- Warren Buffett "
See, for example:
http://www.thestreet.com/story/10656047/professor-buffetts-airline-lesson.html
Say what you will, and aply ignorant ideological arguments or equally
ignorant anecdotes about high fares, the facts are out there for all to see.
Cheers,
Jim Guthrie
rsh...@gmail.com
First off I do not believe for one minute "John S" lives within 1000
miles of NYC
he is a whiner, and beyond that terrified that his beloved airlines
will lose their subsidized position in the transportation hierarchy.
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_16289952?source=most_emailed&nclick_check=1
Opinion: Paul Krugman: America's road to greatness is blocked by penny-
pinchers
No matter what Christie says, NJ is NOT broke. It has billions coming
into the state treasury
Plus the NJ Tpk raises billions every year
The PA is the same
as I said earlier, there does have to be some sort "stop loss" or it
could conceivably make the "big dig" look like small change.
The NJ gas tax SHOULD be inc 10c a gal for the next 5 years. No one
would notice it
but of course the idiots would scream blue murder
Clark F Morris
<jgut...@pipeline.com> wrote:
>"Clark F Morris" <cfmp...@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
>
>> While there are deeper stations in the world on mainline rail, heavy
>> rail (subways and els), and light rail, do you know of any that are
>> terminal stations with a volume of 20 - 30 thousand people an hour at
>
>So, what kind of idiocy believes that if a station serves 30,000 people a
>day, they are all there at once to be evacuated? That's ludicrous.
Try 30 thousand an hour or 1200 - 1300 every 2.5 minutes. If they
insist on the pair of 2 platform 3 track stations, one on top of the
other, you could have 4,000 - 5000 people in trains waiting to depart
and on the platform in the evening peak. Now have them all walking up
15 - 17 floor equivalents.
>
>But just for argument sake, two trains arrive NYP at the nearly the same
>time on, say, tracks 3 and 4 -- and each has a thousand passengers. How fast
>do you think that could be evacuated? Do you think a new station with modern
>safety concerns 100 feet down, or Penn Station built with no safety concerns
>at all 40 feet down is safer?
It is a slow slog but we are talking only a 2 - 3 floor climb to
street level.
>
>> first of its type in the world (the Bombardier AGC is a
>> diesel-electric, electric MU which in tri-mode is 25KV AC 50 cycle,
>> 1.5KV DC and diesel electric so the concept may not scale up).
>
>It has a far better chance of being evacuated than NYP in a similar
>situation. In fact, with wide platforms and multiple escalators, there might
>even be some ruinning in the right direction to evacuate people.
>>
>> Also given that New York City and New York state are the primary
>> beneficiaries (the city gets the daytime spending and the state gets
>> the income tax revenues), they should have done more to make this
>> whole thing viable.
>
>But subtract the portion from the Port Authority and the Federal government
>paid by New Yorkers first, because New Yorkers "aren't contributing," right?
>And after we deduct, say, the Port of Authorityt's $1.5 Billion of the New
>York half, let's bill New Jersey for the capital expense of the subway
>system as used by New Jersey residents who haven't paid a dine in a hundred
>years toward paying off those transit bonds. Maybe we could extend the MTA
>payroll tax to New Jersey employers to pay their fair share of the subway
>system expense when those NJ residents come to the city?
New Jersey passengers are basically using spare capacity that would be
there anyway with the possible exceptions of the routes 106 crosstown,
the 49th-50th street crosstown and the Times Square Shuttles.
Otherwise I would not have been able to get a seat on the 1 line when
using the E, F and 1 lines to and from the Equitable building to the
Port Authority terminal or the numbers 1 or 7 lines when commuting
from the Pan Am Building.
>
>The notion that New Jersey residents working in NY spend all their money in
>NY and in NY taxes is sheer ignorance. To be fair -- there's plenty in the
>other direction too -- as are the accusations that the Port of Authority
>killed tens of thousands of NYC jobs by moving the Port to Newark Bay.
If you work in New York, try buying lunch in New Jersey unless you
bring it from home. Also the benefits analysis done for the ARC came
to similar conclusions.
Clark Morris
>
>Cheers,
>Jim Guthrie
>
>
george conklin
"J.R.Guthrie" <jgut...@pipeline.com> wrote in message
news:8LOdnXUnxsYRqi_R...@earthlink.com...
>I suppose some folk here would say Warren Buffett knows nothing about
>making money. The fact is that the airline industry -- despite all the
>subsidies from municipal airports
Yes, our local airports get a subsidy of $10,000 a year. Budget? About 60
Million +, a subsidy of ....well, .017%. Guess what? If they paid taxes
on the land, you could cover that with a $1 surcharge in the parking lot,
and no one would notice. They already have their own police, fire training
and telephone. What about charging Amtrak passengers $5 terminal usage fee
(PFC to be technical), and $5 to get off too. Airline passengers pay that.
Amtrak should too.
george conklin
<hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote in message
news:efab5ded-208c-4301...@t11g2000vbc.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 9, 10:00 pm, John S <joh...@no.spam> wrote:
> Actually AIR PASSENGERS and AIR SHIPPERS pay fare taxes and way bill
> taxes which fund the national airport and airway system. Note the
> contrast to RAIL passengers.
FALSE TO FACT:
Almost all US commercial airports were built and are operated with
public money provided directly or indirectly by the taxpayers.
---
Our compulsive liar is at it again. RDU got a small airfield on worthless
land from the army and got going before World War II. After that, it
purchased its own land from revenues. And why are airports cash cows now,
as in Port Authority of NY?
george conklin
>
Conrail's discontinuance of electric-powered freight disappeared,
> as the excess wire was scrapped (since they could not use it by
> Congressional fiat).
Conrail declared publically that the freight routes which were
electrified did not conform to modern transportation routes, and were only
those which the Pennsylvania had to use because it did not have access to
more efficient routes. Sorry you have to come up with another one of your
conspiracy theories. Conrail, being a combination of numerous routes, could
then figure out the most cost-effective way to operate. And they did. Why
do you worship the 1920s?
Michael Finfer
> No matter what Christie says, NJ is NOT broke. It has billions coming
> into the state treasury
>
The problem is not that there is no money coming it. The problem is
that much of it is dedicated to things like pensions and debt service,
leaving too little for other stuff.
Michael Finfer
Bridgewater, NJ
John S
> On Oct 10, 2:41 pm, hanco...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> On Oct 10, 1:50 am, "rshe...@gmail.com"<rshe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> because if you did, you would be familiar with 45+ minute backups at
>>> the tunnels and hour long delays at the GWB.
>>
>> 45 minutes? Hah! Try 90 minute delays at the various Hudson
>> crossings.
>>
>> I'm sure you know quite well how much pollution is generated by all
>> those cars waiting in line to cross, and wasted gasoline.
>
> First off I do not believe for one minute "John S" lives within 1000
> miles of NYC
So at least here you admit your beliefs have no basis in fact.
>
> he is a whiner,
Whining like about NJ should have higher taxes? Oh wait....
So anyone with an opinion different than your own narrow minded
opinions is a "whiner...." Nice.
and beyond that terrified that his beloved airlines
> will lose their subsidized position in the transportation hierarchy.
No airlines are beloved by me. Now subsititue "airlines" with
transit... Pot meet kettle.
>
> http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_16289952?source=most_emailed&nclick_check=1
>
> Opinion: Paul Krugman: America's road to greatness is blocked by penny-
> pinchers
>
> No matter what Christie says, NJ is NOT broke. It has billions coming
> into the state treasury
So NJ is taking those billions of taxpayers' money and stockpiling it?
Most entities still have a lot of income when they go bankrupt, but
inflows are only one half of the cash flow statement. ....
>
> Plus the NJ Tpk raises billions every year
>
> The PA is the same
>
> as I said earlier, there does have to be some sort "stop loss" or it
> could conceivably make the "big dig" look like small change.
>
>
> The NJ gas tax SHOULD be inc 10c a gal for the next 5 years. No one
> would notice it
>
> but of course the idiots would scream blue murder
Noone would notice it......would scream blue murder.... Your own
contradictions/whining are interesting.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> > But what is relevant when talking about NJ roads is that the secondary
> > road system is paid from property taxes--in many other states,
> > including Penna, such road networks are paid for by fuel taxes.
>
> I believe only county and local roads use property tax funding. The
> same is true in Pennsylvania although there are few county roads there.
The situation in Pennsy is completely different than NJ. There is a
widespread county network in NJ paid for by property taxes. The
equivalent roads in Pa are covered by fuel taxes.
NJ property owners would save hundreds of dollars in property taxes if
the Penna arrangement was followed.
> >> Ahh more taxes, more taxes, more taxes---more spending, more spending,
> >> more spending.
>
> > I guess you were opposed to Eisenhower's Interstate highway network
> > and the airport building frenzy of the 1950s.
>
> Please state where I stated any such thing.
In your previous sentence "more taxes...more spending". That's
exactly what the Interstate program was and the airport program was.
> > Funny, Eastern Airlines old president went around screaming about
> > government spending being bad--and at the same time complained towns
> > weren't spending enough on airports.
>
> One person from one company.....so what?
You views mirror his.
> > Or we could raise road tolls to pay for it.
>
> Ahh, how creative. Let's build something for one group and bill it to
> another. Nice.
Well, general taxpayers subsidize much of the costs of the highways.
Even highway advocates admit that.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> how much in property taxes does O Hare, PGH, PHL, JFK, etc pay???
Not a dime. In the meantime the railroads had to pay many millions of
dollars on their passenger facilities in the NYC area.
Nor were there any taxes imposed on the bonds, as railroad investors
must pay.
John S
Yes, your insistence on ad hominem attacks makes you so much more
convincing....after you explain what all NJ drivers can afford. So if
you are so "smart," when is your "smart" policy being implemented again?
>
> I don't believe for one minute you live anywhere near NJ or NYC.
You don't believe many facts, you've shown here.
>
> because if you did, you would be familiar with 45+ minute backups at
> the tunnels and hour long delays at the GWB.
Where did I suggest that the GWB has not backups? Or tunnels for that
matter. Please cite.
>
> the point of transit is to move PEOPLE. If you make transit more
> accessible
Transit is very accessible today. If it is not, then NJ Transit should
shut down immediately and liquidate.
people will leave their cars behind, i.e., not use them at
> all.
That's nice. How does your increased gas tax statewide help, say Cape
May County again? How many PEOPLE are being moved?
>
> Again your ignorance, NJ is a very congested state.
Please indicate where I suggested otherwise. You do a great job of
railing against opinions of mine that don't even exist. Keep it up! It
is amusing to read.
>
> I will tell you again, the NJ state gas tax should inc 10c a gal a
> year for the next 5 years. Half for roads and half for transit
>
> you will barely notice it.
Of course not! I live 1000 miles away! </sarcasm>
>
> and before you start whining my guess is it might cost me $200 a year
> $4 a week
>
> now start whining
>
>
> one more thing, Tpk tolls inc every year
> they inc annually to pay off the bonds that Repub Gov Kean had issued
> by the Tpk Auth
> to widen the Tpk north of 8A
All the more reason to not extract any more money from drivers in NJ.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> >But just for argument sake, two trains arrive NYP at the nearly the same
> >time on, say, tracks 3 and 4 -- and each has a thousand passengers. How fast
> >do you think that could be evacuated? Do you think a new station with modern
> >safety concerns 100 feet down, or Penn Station built with no safety concerns
> >at all 40 feet down is safer?
>
> It is a slow slog but we are talking only a 2 - 3 floor climb to
> street level.
I am not an expert on fire safety, but I suspect part of the
protection in modern buildings is to isolate the fire, not evacuate a
large group of people a long way. I believe that's the reason the
HBLR Bergenline station has walls within it, and that new stairwells
added to Penn Station have heavy doors at both ends--to keep a fire
from spreading or give people enough time to get out.
(Of course, a new apartment building complex burned down to the
ground. The owners argued it "was built to code and was safe" since
the firetowers held and everyone had time to get out, which was the
goal, not saving the buildings)
Anyway, in the case of Penn Sta, the staircases are both narrow and
few. I would've preferred that the new stairs have wider space so two
people could travel on them simultaneously.
> >It has a far better chance of being evacuated than NYP in a similar
> >situation. In fact, with wide platforms and multiple escalators, there might
> >even be some ruinning in the right direction to evacuate people.
As much as I don't like the ARC, the above may be correct--assuming
they build the stairways wide enough and have sliding doors, not
swinging doors.
John S
Notice there has been no reply to date.... I'm sure it's coming soon
though...
>>>
>>> Funny, Eastern Airlines old president went around screaming about
>>> government spending being bad--and at the same time complained towns
>>> weren't spending enough on airports.
>>
>> One person from one company.....so what?
>>
>>>> Last time I checked, there are already vehicle tolls for the crossings
>>>> parallel to this proposed tunnel, so the raise gas tax argument is just
>>>> more of the same money transfer, except how much "less road congestion"
>>>> would be there be outside of the rail corridors, eg. most of
>>>> western/central/southern NJ?
>>>
>>> Or we could raise road tolls to pay for it.
>>
>> Ahh, how creative. Let's build something for one group and bill it to
>> another. Nice.
>
> How do you think highways got built?
PA and NJ Turnpikes: Sold bonds. Funded construction with bond sale
revenue. Charged tolls to pay bonds.
>
>>>> If the tunnel is a worthwhile venture that will help x many millions of
>>>> rail commuters, may I recommend a ticket tax on all rail ticket sales
>>>> that will pay for it.
>>>
>>> How about having motorists pay the true costs of their highways, such
>>> as the loss in property taxes and public safety (fire, police, rescue)
>>> costs?
>>>
>>> The book Empire on the Hudson details this.
>> True costs of highways? Moments ago you were arguing that motorists
>> should be paying for costs of transit! If paying for true costs is so
>> important to you, let's start with transit users, they have the most to
>> do to even catch up.
>
> That's really out of left field. Catch up to what, exactly? Nationally
> speaking, tolls and gas taxes combined only pay for ~70% of the highway
> transportation system (that's comparable to Amtrak's and NYCTA Subways'
> respective farebox recovery ratios).
Wait a second, the first two words of your sentence are "Nationally
speaking...." in reference to gas taxes (and tolls). Then in the same
sentence your reference is Amtrak and NYCTA. Are you talking about
Amtrak's fares nationwide, or just in the northeast? And if "nationally
speaking" is good enough for a road discussion, let's hear about transit
recovery rations...."nationally speaking."
Where do you suppose the rest comes
> from? And how about the entire non-highway road network?
> If rail performed so poorly, it would be slandered as socialism!
Sure. Like General Motors? Or Obama's health care?
John S
Well why not? Hardly a non-sequitur, you brought up the route and now
you missed that I wrote the question in the subjunctive. Try again.
>
> and answer the question, why are the airlines not rolling in the
> dough???
Costs are high, fewer people are traveling.
>
> from what I understand the airlines make most of their miney from
> routes like Helena to Denver
>
> costs are low and fares are very high
Cite for "costs are low?"
The fare on Delta, taxes inclusive, is 272 dollars, round trip for the
600 mile (straight line) journey. Are you suggesting that Amtrak could
build tracks, start a route, charge less and make money?
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>> Should bus companies fund the police and street light departments
>>>> too?
>>
>
> if you are talking about Greyhound, etc, they pay property as well as
> fuel
> taxes
As do airlines, except the passengers pay fare taxes.
>
>
>>>> Actually AIR PASSENGERS and AIR SHIPPERS pay fare taxes and way bill as well they should
>
> how much in property taxes does O Hare, PGH, PHL, JFK, etc pay???
About the same as NYC transit pays.
>
> oh so they get police and fire protection that they are not paying for
Well considering they run their own fire departments, are you suggesting
the employees work for free? Not paying indeed.....
>
> not to mention billions in road improvements and new road const
>
> PGH got new freeways right to their fromt door
> SFO got I-380 right to their fromt door
>
> how much did they pay for that????
I have no idea where PGH is.
SFO got BART inside their front door. How much did they pay for that?
John S
> I suppose some folk here would say Warren Buffett knows nothing about making
> money. The fact is that the airline industry -- despite all the subsidies
> from municipal airports an associated facilities paid for with general tax
> dollars (and usually hidden so booboisie taxpayers don't ask questions --as
> evidenced here in this thread) -- has never turned a profit. Investors and
> taxpayers have always footed the bill.
Public bus terminals, rail stations, and airports, do not exist to turn
a profit anymore than Central Park does. Note that airline users pay
various local airport and federal ticket taxes on their fares.
>
> But business (both users and travel-related) needs air travel and makes sure
> that it exists where they want it -- at the expense of the suckers who
> invest or provide "economic improvement" subsidies.
Yes, who wants business? Let's get rid of all those businesses, them
freeloaders!
And others, say, living
> in the path of air technology are no compensated either for noisy airplanes
> or even those chunks of green ice that fall into their yards from time to
> time, melting into sewage.
>
> "The worst sort of business is one that grows rapidly, requires significant
> capital to engender the growth, and then earns little or no money. Think
> airlines. Here a durable competitive advantage has proven elusive ever since
> the days of the Wright Brothers. Indeed, if a farsighted capitalist had been
> present at Kitty Hawk, he would have done his successors a huge favor by
> shooting Orville down. -- Warren Buffett "
>
> See, for example:
>
> http://www.thestreet.com/story/10656047/professor-buffetts-airline-lesson.html
>
> Say what you will, and aply ignorant ideological arguments or equally
> ignorant anecdotes about high fares, the facts are out there for all to see.
Except your quote doesn't explain why so many millions travel by air
each and every day.
John S
> "J.R.Guthrie"<jgut...@pipeline.com> wrote in message
> news:8LOdnXUnxsYRqi_R...@earthlink.com...
>> I suppose some folk here would say Warren Buffett knows nothing about
>> making money. The fact is that the airline industry -- despite all the
>> subsidies from municipal airports
>
> Yes, our local airports get a subsidy of $10,000 a year. Budget? About 60
> Million +, a subsidy of ....well, .017%. Guess what? If they paid taxes
> on the land, you could cover that with a $1 surcharge in the parking lot,
> and no one would notice. They already have their own police, fire training
> and telephone.
Their own police and fire? How is that possible? We just had rshersh
tell us all that airports don't pay for any such thing.... :)
What about charging Amtrak passengers $5 terminal usage fee
> (PFC to be technical), and $5 to get off too. Airline passengers pay that.
> Amtrak should too.
That plus fare percentage tax as well, which airline passengers pay.
John S
> On Oct 9, 10:00 pm, John S<joh...@no.spam> wrote:
>
>> Actually AIR PASSENGERS and AIR SHIPPERS pay fare taxes and way bill
>> taxes which fund the national airport and airway system. Note the
>> contrast to RAIL passengers.
>
> FALSE TO FACT:
>
> Almost all US commercial airports were built and are operated with
> public money provided directly or indirectly by the taxpayers. As
> mentioned, the book "Empire on the Hudson" documents this in detail.
Are you seriously trying to claim that the federal airway and airport
trust fund, which builds airports and receives its income from ticket
taxes does not exist??? Such a claim would be very wrong.
>
> Unlike the railroads, which built and maintained their stations
> through private capital,
Just like Amtrak, right? Ha!
and then paid heavy property taxes; the
> airlines could never afford to build and operate the airports using
> private capital. Likewise with road networks.
Read what I wrote again. Airline passengers pay taxes on their tickets.
Air cargo shippers pay taxes on their waybills. These taxes go
directly into the aviation trust fund. In addition, they pay separate
taxes to each local airport on the ticket in the US. These taxes may
only be used for airport improvements.
Rail passengers do not pay any of these taxes on their tickets. Why not?