Arnold Vants Der High-Speed Rail

[Zkribbler]

Yes, I'm sure Mexico has been following an economic theory of supply side economics, especially considering their highly progressive tax rates and Clinton era like corporate tax rates and highest marginal tax rates - until 2001 anyways (was Clinton a supply sider?). You moron.

Talk to me of their minimum wage, of their free, quality educational system, of their Social Security system, of their health care system, of their unemployment insurance, of their workers' compensation system and of their environmental controls. Then we'll have something to talk about.

[Imran Siddiqui]

So basically you have no idea what supply side economic theory is. I figured as much. I now know why KH puts you on ignore.

[Dinner]

The line simply isn't economically feasable. We already had this discussion wrt to the east coast, which is more viable than the west coast, but still, LA-SF alone doesn't make sense let alone extending it to SD.

As for expansion across the us, what are you smoking? Do you know just how big the US is, especially in the west?

We're not talking about expanding it nation wide, as you well know. There is a lot of effort being spent planning for expansion to Nevada (specifically Las Vegas and Reno) and with some suggestions to expand it into Arizona (specifically Phoenix). Expansion into the Pacific Northwest would be a distant thing if it ever happens but if they start their own high speed rail system then I could easily see a push to link the two systems.

[Zkribbler]

So basically you have no idea what supply side economic theory is. I figured as much. I now know why KH puts you on ignore.

It's a theory whereby the money of society is concentrated into the hand of its richest members in the vain hope that some of it will trickle down to the rest of us. It's the theory that lead to the Great Depression and to the Bush Depression.

Compare it to FDR's demand-side New Deal, which focused on putting money into the vast middle of society on the theory that a rising tide raises all boats. This theory gave us the world's largest middle class and thereby made us the richest nation in the world.

[Drake Tungsten]

You are an idiot.

Today, supply-side economics is often mistakenly conflated with the politically rhetorical term "trickle-down economics," but as Jude Wanniski points out in his book The Way The World Works trickle-down economics is conservative Keynesianism associated with the Republican Party.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply-side_economics

[Ben Kenobi]

We're not talking about expanding it nation wide, as you well know.

Ok, just so we are clear:

Tokyo - Osaka

(20+35 = 55 million people)
(Distance = 310 miles)
(177k/mile)

SF - LA

(7 + 13) = 20 million people
(382 miles)
(52k/mile)

Bay Area - Greater LA:

(7 + 18) = 25 million people
(382 miles)
(65k/mile)

Still about 1/3rd the numbers of Tokyo-Osaka.

+SD

(3) = 3 million people
(Distance = 129 miles)
(23k/mile)

+LV

(2) = 2 million people
(Distance = 229 miles)
(8.7k/mile)

+PX

(4) = 4 million people
(Distance = 375 miles)
(10k/mile)

Whole System:

(SF-LA-SD) + (LA-PX) + (LA-LV)
(7+18+3+4+2) = 35 million people
(511+376+229) =
(31k/mile)

(SAC + REN)
(2 + 0.3) = 2.3 million people
(218 miles)
(10.5k/mile)

Added to the whole system:

(29 + 2.3) = 31.3
(1116 + 218) = 1334
(23k/mile)

+ POR + SEA

(2 + 3.5) = 5.5 million people
(838 miles) =
(6.5k/mile)

Added to the whole system:

(36.8)
(2172)
(17k/mile)

[Ben Kenobi]

Put it this way, SF to LA is 1/3rd about what is profitable, assuming American ridership would be the same as in Japan. Everything else is absolutely crazy. If CA wants to go bankrupt building bullet trains and raising taxes to try to pay for it, you folks are welcome to it. Just don't tax other americans to pay for your ****!

[Dinner]

Your numbers are all screwy. Greater LA has around 18.5 million which means you're claiming the bay area only has 1.5 million. That's a completely retarded claim as are your other assumptions and claims.

[Drake Tungsten]

Greater LA doesn't even have the mass transit infrastructure needed to service a high-speed rail terminal.

[Zkribbler]

You are an idiot.

Today, supply-side economics is often mistakenly conflated with the politically rhetorical term "trickle-down economics," but as Jude Wanniski points out in his book The Way The World Works trickle-down economics is conservative Keynesianism associated with the Republican Party.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply-side_economics

Trickle down = give money to the weathy and some will trickle down to the rest of us.
Supply-side = give money to the wealthy, they will create products, which will create jobs, which will cause some of the wealth to trickle down to the rest of us.
So, how are those McJobs working out for you?

Bottom line for either term = give money to the rich, and they will keep it. That's what they're good at. That's why they're rich.

[Drake Tungsten]

That's it. You're going back on ignore.

[Zkribbler]

Hmmm. A most interesting phenomenon. I explain to someone how he's wrong. He has no intelligent response. So he calls me "stupid" and puts me on ignore.

I must have entered the Land of Ostriches.

[Zkribbler]

Greater LA doesn't even have the mass transit infrastructure needed to service a high-speed rail terminal.

You do know about the communter heavy rail lines to Ventura in the west, Lancaster in the north, San Bernardino and Riverside in the East and San Diego in the South?

And the subway to North Hollywood and the light rail lines to Sierra Madra, to East L.A., to the beach communities, to Long Beach and [coming soon] to West L.A.?

And they're all centered on Union Station in downtown L.A.

[DinoDoc]

Bush Depression.

This is typical of why people put you on ignore.

[Zkribbler]

I see what you're getting at. Unlike recessions, which are defined as two quarters of negative growth, there is no precise definition of "depression." A depression is merely a recession which is of great intensity or duration.

So granted, this might just be the "Bush Recession."