Smart electric cars, that electronically form aerodynamic “trains:” using GPS and other navigation, on already existing freeway surfaces, are the future of high speed tech, transportation. No deficit spending required.

The future of work is already here, with telecommuting, and computer communications. The ridership will be too low, and the rider projections are based on old models of how our economy works. The system will be obsolete if built.

This project will have cost over runs, and at the same time will compete with airlines, and the next thing there will be an outcry to bail out the airlines. One boondoggle leads to an imbalance, and the next fiscal emergency. Supporters of more trains, please read the long history of train projects. Trains have their place at times, but the history is full of overbuilt situations, that caused serious financial troubles for states, taxpayers, investors, and central governments.

I built my own electric vehicle, so please do not call me a NIMBY, as I am walking my talk.

Regarding the previous posts, with accusations of NIMBY. I ask. Are native peoples who are impacted by road incursions into their lands called NIMBY’s? No. So it appears that there is a double standard on residential civil rights, and civil discourse.

Second, just because the Bay Bridge is way over budget, does not mean the high speed rail system will. The recently completed subway lines in Los Angeles came under budget.

You statement on green is completely illogical. High speed rail is not meant to replace cars or plains. It is there as another alternative, which runs on electricity. Cars and plains use petroleum. Electricity can be produced many different ways and leaves production option only as far as the imagination can think of ways to make power.

You are right, California does need critical investment. The project will create 150,000+ construction jobs at a time when the state is scratching and clawing to lower the unemployment rate.

Apparently you cannot see things “plain as day” as you said.

First, ridership numbers. They say between 88 million and 117 million passengers a year. That’s between 10,000 and 13,300 passengers PER HOUR, 24/7. Who believes that? Anyone.

Second, cost. This is projected to be one of the cheapest high speed rail projects in history. I would have thought the Chinese (cheap land, cheap labor) would have owned this. But Caltrans thinks they can bring it in on time and on budget. The bay bridge is $5 billion over it’s $1B budget. Who thinks they’ll come in at only twice the budget?

Finally, the “green” argument. This simply won’t make people drive less. How much driving that you do is between LA and SF? If you want to protect the environment, raise the tax on gas. Or expand commuter rail.

California needs critical investment. Our schools and levies are falling apart.

This program does nothing but weaken our state and drain us of cash. I live nowhere near a railroad, and I can see that plain as day.

I hope they build an 8-lane freeway down Alma Street some day…. I have a doctorate and I Am important too. So there.