From a pen pal, on the hearings on High Speed Rail between Dallas and Houston:
Thought you might find this interesting. I could not bear to listen to the complete hearing, but all the pieces focused solely on the pork and only made veiled comments about managing expectations (my translation is that it clearly is a losing economic proposal for the average citizen). I suggest that the economic comments made by Glaeser at Harvard and David Levinson at U of Minnesota will have no affect. Finding the hundreds of billions to put in after the first 8 billion goes up in studies will be the game changer. It is sometimes sad that economics is such a blunt instrument.
House hearing on HSR
Levinson's Nexus research center and
also
his blog.
Me? I have the same question I had in Germany. Why does anyone think this saves money? It seems inconceivable.
Tyler's thoughts, useful and quirky as always. (I stop at Thai Thai? Lordy)
2 comments:
People in Tejas love their trains.
"Give us trains and football," they say.
They eat it up.
As for renewables, they appear to have some excess capacity. If only we could make a battery that works.
http://knowledgeproblem.com/2008/11/20/frequent_negati/
Previous poster is completely way off base...Texas is traditionally very anti-public transportation.
Also, why not allow trains to be setup in Texas if the French company can do it and make it profitable as they have done previously.
To the argument of economic benefit, were environmental externalities considered? There is significant commuting between the major cities in Texas via car and plane.
I still expect Texas legislators (Republican controlled) to screw it up.
Post a Comment