Whenever I return back to America from visiting Europe, I'm always depressed by how badly things have turned out here. Our buses suck; our trains are a joke -- there's no high-speed rail; our roads can barely support traffic moving at 70mph (look at Highway 280 in the California Bay Area someday to get a taste of how good roads could have been).

It's a good thing we blew all that money on our multi-trillion dollar military while the rest of the civilized world invested in education and infrastructure, because that shit's paying nothing but high dividends, right?

The answer is....republicans. Obama had proposed, and funded, high speed rail along the east coast,through Ohio,,,all destroyed by republicans.

It's a maglev monorail? I thought this was going to use pneumatic tubes and stuff. I'm all for high speed rail, but I'm much more for Jetsons-style wooshy tube transportation.

Our public transportation is a joke compared to other countries. Sold out to the oil companies and car manufacturers. Obama is even trying to bring some high speed rail here, but he sends his people to Spain to learn how. Idiot we know how, it's a fucking crock.

The US can't even pony up the money for the kind of high speed rail that Europe has had for 30 years. I see China beating us to this one by about a century.

BTW, high speed rail, internet, phone, cable are all things we have that government didn't install. Rail roads also existed, as well as many open source programs and the like. Looks like rewriting history is in both parties. Also, what does that government know about high speed internet? What they will HAVE to do in the end is hire some private firm to advise then install it, crony capitalism at its best. Thanks for being a complete tool Biden, going back to my dump truck next to the tubes.

What happens when business starts breaking windows, through layoffs, low wages, labor abuse, exporting of jobs, fraud, financial manipulation, offshore accounts, golden parachutes, executive excess and gross payroll diparity? Who fixes those windows? I suppose that kind of vandalism would be dismissed by freemarketists as 'market forces', right? Greedy business practices have contributed to this depressed economy as much as anything else.

If the private sector comes up with some meaningful ideas, then great, but in the meantime let's put people to work strengthening our infrastructure. High speed rail from SD to SF? Great idea! It's about time. Money well spent. Art centers? Awesome. Convention centers? Great. I'm all for it. Think of how much businesses would benefit from improved transportation and more active civic centers.

"but what do tariffs, subsidies, taxes and stimulus packages have to do with bin Laden?"

Bin Laden? Is this the video where people are coming to make their straw man arguments today? To answer this, they probably have nothing to do with Bin Laden. They may have everything to do with 9/11 and the war on terror. And because so much of this is affected by causation, you could lump in the recession as a result of 9/11 as well, therefore stimulus, tax increases, subsidies for buying homes and cars, and duties placed on Chinese imports would make sense as being caused by 9/11 or rather government reaction to 9/11.

"but do you think more or less movie tickets would be sold if roads and highways were unsafe? Do you think more or less surfboards would be sold if public beaches did not exist or were not maintained? Do you think more or less refrigerators would be sold if there were no food safety standards?"

I understand how some may take these examples as literal, but they'd be doing so erroneously. Tickets in and of themselves, like surfboards and refrigerators, wouldn't affect wealth generation in our economy, by aggregate them into all services and goods, and you get the idea.

I don't think the issue of "public works" this video is addressing can be boiled down to just the "roads" or "public beaches". It's more about things like the high speed rail system from San Diego to San Francisco which was partly sold to the public as a job creation initiative.

So are things like multimillion dollar art centers, multimillion dollar convention centers, etc. If the individuals who are being taxed to build those public works projects could instead spend their money how they personally needed, you'd see it spent more efficiently and in the areas they require instead of getting sifted off the top to pay for bureaucracies. If businesses needed an art center, they'd invest in the construction of one. And so on. By doing so, wealth is created out of demand.

This is the requirement for high speed rails. The tolerance is very small @ high speeds, so a hammer and a driving screw won't cut it. High speed rails are very effective and pleasant over short distances. California and the North East corridor are both investing in HSR.

>> ^Sniper007:

Trains? Who uses trains anymore.

the conservatives will never ever ever ever ever ever be pleased with anything he does, ever. and hes only pissing off everyone else.
so mr. president, with your 1 term.... give us a green and updated infrastructure, give us more high speed rails, pass meaningful climate change legislation, bitch slap wall street, actually fix healthcare, end some fucking wars, repeal dont ask dont tell.

>> ^blankfist:
And do we really need more superhighways? Where are you pro-green anti-global warming rabble rousers?!

Calling for your house to be knocked down and turned into a solar power plant, wind power farm, high-speed rail stop, or perhaps just a big public compost heap, with A$$ GR@V33!

I've visited my fair share of countries, and the US infrastructure is definitely NOT like a developing country's. You may not have decent rail, but there are alternatives for affordable and fast transportation.

To me, having a "developing country's" infrastructure involves being forced to drive on potholed roads or ride uncomfortable trains because you're given no alternative.

Anyway, his point about high speed rail is obvious to anyone who's even been to Europe. For trips under 500 km, I'd much rather travel by high speed rail -- it's cheaper and often quicker than flying once you account for the time wasted waiting for the flight and on airport security.

>> ^dag:
There's some truth in this video - and if the big 3 failed - things would get a lot worse before they got better, but damn it - I give you the Escalade. Has ever a more wasteful, irresponsible piece of mechanical hubris been manufactured?
The big 3 screwed the pooch because they didn't learn the lesson of the 1970s gas crunch. You could say that they were just responding to customer demand for blingy SUVs - but so are crack dealers. It doesn't make it right to supply an immoral product. Yes, I think Hummers and Grand Cherokees are immoral.
I'd like to see Obama take about 100 billion or so and invest it in high speed and light urban rail instead. Time for America to get over the automobile.
(yes, I take the bus to work so I get to be a preachy bastard)


Well, you can't argue with group think. I personally don't agree with gas consumption being the reason for the "big 3" doing poorly. All of them offer cheap, gas economical vehicles. Even during that "1970s gas crunch" my father had a Ford Fiesta, because, well, Ford offered it as an option. I think those manufacturers make shit cars, and that's why they are suffering.

That aside, why would it be okay for Obama to take 100 billion more of our tax dollars to invest it in anything, let alone a horrible high speed rail system? You say urban, so I assume you mean it would be a fund only available for the cities, and therefore I assume you figure it fair for our government to forcefully take money from all citizens, even those in the fly over states who won't benefit from such a tax hijacking, and distribute the money to the larger cities to fund a train system that so far no private investor has found a way to make profitable (else there would be rail systems all over this country). Boy, do I disagree with you there.

In California they passed a terrible proposition to fund a highspeed rail system from San Diego to San Fran. It's a multi-billion dollar initiative that was forced upon tax payers thanks to a majority vote. It's a worthless piece of legislation because they don't even know if the billions they are allocating will be able to finish the project. It will never make its money back, and therefore never be worth the large cost. If it was A PRIVATE CAPITALIST WOULD'VE MADE IT ALREADY! But, why have the private sector invest their money when we can pay for it?

I think those who vote up our taxes for bullshit like this should pay for it. My not so humble opinion. There, I said my peace. I will now immediately hop off of my soapbox.

I'm somewhat jealous, you had some real issues on the California ballot.

FWIW, the progressive California sample ballot is here.

They said:

1A> Yes "High Speed Rail"
2> Yes "Humane Farms"
3> Yes "Children's Hospitals"
4> No "Threatens teen safety & choice"
5> Yes "Rehab & Treatment"
6> No "Prison expansion"
7> No "Protect small solar producers and encourage solar energy production"*
8> No "Eliminates marriage rights"
9> No "More prison spending"
10> No "T. Boone bailout"
11> No "Biased redistricting"
12> Yes "Veterans home loans"

* Courage campaign actually gave no decision, but most of the other progressive/environmental groups said it was flawed and needed to be voted down.

blankfist, it seems you're almost a progressive. We just need to get you to love trains, children, farm animals, and veterans as much as you love drug addicts.