Matthews: America Stinks Because We Don't Have Fast Choo-Choo Trains
Chris Matthews has a seemingly endless list of obsessions. Along with Dick Cheney, Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann the MSNBC host is fascinated by trains, especially fast ones, and on Monday night's Hardball he called on Barack Obama, in his State of the Union Address, to push for high speed rail as a solution to America's economic woes. Matthews complained that in the area of "fast railroads" the French, Italians, Chinese, Japanese and Koreans are "so far ahead of us" and then implored: "Is this president really gonna shove that throttle forward tomorrow night and say 'Let's join the world in getting around?'"
This isn't the first time Matthews has looked enviously at other countries and their faster trains as an inspiration for creating jobs in America, as back in 2009 he whined to Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter: "The Europeans seem to have fast trains that go 300 miles and hour and we're chugging along with Amtrak and Acela and we're still flying around short distances...Why can't this federal government use the power of the, the workforce we have out there, put 'em all to work and build a train system in this country of fast rail so we can – and this sounds so pathetic – catch up to Europe and Japan! Why don't we do that?! Catch up to the other major countries!"
(video, audio and transcript after the jump)
On Monday night, Newsweek's Jonathan Alter stoked Matthews' most recent high speed rail rant by claiming GOP Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's opposition to more stimulus spending was "at odds with 200 years of American history" and even Abraham Lincoln before concluding: "Right now it seems like the Republican Party doesn't really believe in investing in the future...it's really a problem for the future of the country."
The following is the relevant exchange was aired on the January 24 edition of Hardball:
JONATHAN ALTER, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Mitch McConnell teed it up correctly. He said Democrats call it investment, Republican call it wasteful liberal spending. The problem with McConnell's position is that he's at odds with 200 years of American history, where starting with Alexander Hamilton, through Henry Clay, Abraham Lincoln - his big thing was internal improvements. Building railroads, canals. That's infrastructure. Right now it seems like the Republican Party doesn't really believe in investing in the future in these capital programs and it's really a problem for the future of the country.
CHRIS MATTHEWS: It's so awful. They are so awful. Look I'm gonna say this. They are so awful and the Democrats are just as bad. Because look if they hadn't built the railroads this country wouldn't be, there wouldn't have been a Manifest Destiny without the rails. If Ike hadn't built, with a Democratic Congress, a highway there wouldn't be a 95 going to Florida. They're wouldn't be a 70 and 80 crossing the country. You wouldn't be able to see the America and the U.S.A. – you wouldn't be able – in your Chevrolet. It wouldn't happen. We would be riding around in county roads trying to figure out how to get from here to there in some crappy little road somewhere. And today we have superhighways. Eisenhower did that. I just wonder why we don't have what the French have, fast railroads. We don't have anything like that, the Italians have them. Not knocking the Italians but they are so far ahead of us, I was just over there. The Chinese, the Japanese, the Koreans, all have fast rail, they all have infrastructure and we're diddling around here [John] Heilemann. Is this president really gonna shove that, that throttle, forward tomorrow night and say "Let's join the world in getting around?" Are we gonna catch up?
—Geoffrey Dickens is the Senior News Analyst at the Media Research Center. You can follow him on Twitter here
- Geoffrey Dickens's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Chris is such a tool
Submitted by cheesegrater on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 8:17pm.
If the Dems proposed bringing back a UNIONIZED pony express, "Leg Thrill" Matthews would be for it.
Unions get about 3% more than un-union...big deal
Submitted by jorae on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 9:47pm.
Back to topic.
1. The purpose of a "fast train" comes down to buying less oil from the middle east...You don't get that?
2. Fuel effciency is what we are talking about. The less fuel you use from getting from point A to point B...the less you need to buy from the middle east.
The logic is, by moving 50 people on a fast train, you use less fuel then moving 50 people in cars.
I don't see the complaint...
If you want to park your ass on a high-speed train designed...
Submitted by Dave. on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 10:05pm.
...by government-approved engineers (usually selected for reasons other than their qualifications), that will be built by union goons who hate their employer (and who will be building the track system, as the cars themselves will most likely be imported from Europe), and ultimately operated by Postal Service rejects, then go right ahead.
Ever seen video of a high-speed train wreck? Amazing what happens to the human body when it impacts a bridge abutment at 250+ mph.
And don't forget the massive tax increases that will be required to keep these boondoggles in operation, as there is no way they will be self sufficient.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Dave and Everyone Else Too
Submitted by Free Stinker on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 10:14pm.
I've said in the past that we seem to get more Trolls everytime Obama is in trouble.
Seems like a Troll Tsunami today! Obama must be worse off than I thought.
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
A Troll Tsunami
Submitted by Blonde on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 10:21pm.
That's pretty good...I may have to steal it.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Free,
Submitted by Dave. on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 10:22pm.
What's really funny is that even now, 2+ years into the screw, Soros can still scrape enough of them off the bottom of the barrel to put 'em in the game.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Dave
Submitted by Free Stinker on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 10:25pm.
P.T. Barnum was wrong. There isn't a sucker born every minute. Dozens of suckers are born every minute. We refer the them as Democrats.
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
My dad sys
Submitted by panzerakc on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 12:19am.
that Barnum underestimated the birth rate.
Free,
Submitted by Dave. on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 1:12am.
LOL.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
One more thing, Dave
Submitted by miss911ninja on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 10:25pm.
There would need to be hundreds of miles more of track laid, crossing deserts, plains, and forests. So the usual suspects would be filing law suits to protect whatever species or "environmentally sensitive" area they believed might suffer because of it.
miss911,
Submitted by Dave. on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 10:45pm.
Exactly, as existing railroad right-of-ways cannot be used, as they were not designed to accomodate the speeds involved.
And then there are land acquisition costs, which even in these depressed economic times will be confiscatory.
And there are the reasons you mention.
Plus the fact that we are broke as a nation.
They will spend hundreds of billions (that we don't have) before the first train even runs, and what is worse, most Americans aren't going to ride it, anyway.
Far cheaper to start drilling for more oil right here, before the Chinese and the Cubans suck our own oil right out from under us, as they are currenly doing in the Gulf.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
ninja---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 11:42pm.
and the lefties will go nuts when Glenn Beck drives in the Golden Spike at Promontory Point, Utah; him bein' a Mormon and a gold hoarder and all.Hee hee!
Submitted by miss911ninja on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 1:10am.
They'd really go nuts if the train was called the "Gold Line."
XXX
Submitted by miss911ninja on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 1:17am.
Double post
So, all your reasons Dave,
Submitted by jorae on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 11:49pm.
So, all your reasons Dave, are more important that our dependence on Foreign Oil
You would rather be subject to every OPEC whim, tthan decrease out useage of oil....
Building trains in AMERICA....I repeate....BUILDING TRAINS IN AMERICA....WITH AMERICAN WORKERS is so awful...
You are accepting whatever OPEC will charge a barrel oil is better than using common sense to brake away from their grip.
Dig your heals in now...don't think it though....just be stuborn ...and your retain your title of AmericanTinker.
excuse me for butting in...
Submitted by MidAmerica on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 11:53pm.
I think you're missing the point that high speed rail won't save a drop of oil because we are still going to drive our cars anyway.
I've taken the train many times - it is great
Submitted by jorae on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 12:17am.
Of any form of transportaion, the train has always been my favorite. You can look out and see America while listening your your IPod and drinking coffee.
Of all people who commute to work in New York City, 32% use the subway, 25% drive alone, 14% take the bus, 8% travel by commuter rail, 8% walk to work, 6% carpool, 1% use a taxi, 0.4% ride their bicycle to work, and 0.4% travel by ferry.....54% of households in New York City do not own a car, and rely on public transportation....
Yes, a well designed system, gets more people to work by mass transportation.
I can't immagine not wanting to take a train just for a day excursion on weekends...
Where I live may be a little corny but...
Submitted by MidAmerica on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 12:30am.
I can't imagine living in NYC. Plus I live where New Yorkers won't move to. It's the best of both worlds.
But you are talking about commuter traffic. High speed rail is a whole different animal. If you are going 300MPH you aren't stopping every five blocks.
I need a train too
Submitted by stunned on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 12:43am.
I live in NJ outside NYC with a train line that used to take vacation goers up to my neck of the woods years ago. It now is just a freight line. There is no train because it is not economical and all the trains that do go into Hoboken from NJ, you then switch to the Path train into NY, are subsidized as are the trains that go into the city from Long Island and NYS. The auto tolls at the tunnels and bridges into the city and commuter taxes we pay subsidize the train service that does exist as well as the NYC subway system. No one is arguing to get rid of the trains as NYC would shut down due to gridlock but to ignore the fact any new train service would have to subsidized as Amtrak is to the tune of millions of dollars is idiotic.
The Democrats could have funded Chrissy's trains but they blew the trillion dollar stimulus but he doesn't hold them accountable. No new roads, bridges, dams that are desperately needed were built nor is any new train system. We are also a much bigger nation than Japan or European nations, most of those trains connect cities only an hour or two by train and most passangers use the trains to commute as well to make them more economical. Here outside of the north-east corridor the cities are much father apart and only a few additional commuters would be added to offset the cost. High speed trains would be a money pit after they were built.
tired of liberal lies
Republican Gov returned Hight Speed train money
Submitted by jorae on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 1:04am.
The choice was each states's governor to pick and chose what grants they wanted. One of the Stimulus grants had to do with high speed trains.
At least two Republican governors took the money at first, then returned it.
Wisconson was one...just think, your could have applied for a job 100 away and not have to sell your home...Or you could go to Chicago for the day...
And...jobs...internet ticket sales...a lot of things would have improved.
How much of the Auto industry is substized lately?
As long as Congress acceptance that only big business deserves tax dollars, that is the way America will work.
Is Soros hiring foreigners now?
Submitted by Denny Crane on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 3:22am.
This trolls grasp of the English language is horrible.
states's?
substized?
Congress acceptance that?
................
The elipse fairy called and said you've used your allotment for the year.
We Are The 53%
I can't imagine....
Submitted by ckc1227 on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 1:00am.
"I can't immagine not wanting to take a train just for a day excursion on weekends..."
I can't imagine you'd know your ass from a hole in the ground.
Then just go to the unfree city that is New York
Submitted by Unsane on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 10:23pm.
Then you can move to NYC.
As the rest of the country is NOT NYC, rail does not work here. In my TX town of 50,000 people, rails would be utterly stupid. Just by choosing a decent spot to live, you can get around this town quite easily on foot, or with a bicycle - both of which I do routinely.
So, great, you love the romantic vision of the train - looking out and seeing America while listening to your iPod and drinking your coffee, as you say. I can do the exact same thing in a plane - the only difference being is that I will be at my destination a lot faster, and I will be looking out at America drinking my coffee, listening to "Learning to Fly" by Pink Floyd, at such a commanding level, I can see EVEN MORE of America.
If there is a market for it, great. If not, too bad.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
jorae---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 11:56pm.
Precisely our problem; American liberal politicians would rather "tinker" than be a "thinker".Continue to remain uninformed
Submitted by Unsane on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 12:12am.
So, when we have trains, the oil imports from OPEC giants like Canada and Mexico will magically stop?
Before you utter the acronym OPEC one more time, you need to actually be informed about the world of petroleum. As to price manipulation, at that OPEC has basically been a dismal failure.
Do you SERIOUSLY believe that IF we got passenger trains in this country, that they would be built in the United States? BS. Instead of buying oil from evil countries like Canada and Mexico, we will be buying rail cars and rolling stock from evil European nations. Why? Because those are countries most knowledgeable and equipped to build passenger rail cars.
Oh, Japan would probably also get in on that act.
Why should Dave dig in HIS heels? You already are, and are happily advertising your being uninformed, as well as constantly vomiting talking points and regurgitating tired myths...
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
jorae,
Submitted by Dave. on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 12:23am.
Believe me when I tell you that what you are supporting is financially unobtainable.
I spent 30+ years in the construction, surveying and engineering business.
My father, a Georgia Tech trained mechanical and civil engineer, land surveyor, as well as a registered landscape architect, trained me from the age of 13 to work in that arena.
I am now nearly 47 years of age, and I know damn well what I am talking about.
The land acquisitions alone would be prohibitive in today's real estate market. The NIMBYs would be coming out in force, and government regs, environmental and otherwise, along with the myriad of lawsuits that would spring up would take care of (as in kill) the rest.
Bottom line? We have now regulated ourselves into a position of impotency when it comes to major construction projects - particularly ones that stretch for hundreds of miles.
12 years ago, I was involved in a 5' wide easement that ran parralel to an existing 100' wide existing Georgia Power powerline easement that ran fiber optic cable from from the Florida border to Decatur, Georgia.
Even while the cable was being run, I was still spending half of my time dealing with irate property owners, researching the hell out of property deeds in excess of 100 years old, and trying to keep from getting shot at the same time.
Ever faced a double-barrel loaded 12 guage shotgun?
I have, more than once.
And I have been shot at, too.
More than once.
And just try building a nuclear power plant, or even a hydroelectric dam, under todays prohibitive regulations.
Not gonna happen.
I have vast experience in both areas, and I can tell you first hand that they are now essentially impossible to construct.
And we have plenty of oil right here in America, but getting to it has been rendered virtually impossible due to, once again, hideous and largely dubious government regulations.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
So you'll understand...
Submitted by cheesegrater on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 9:57pm.
I'll say this slowly. P e o p l e w o n' t r i d e t h e t r a i n u n l e s s t h e y a r e f o r c e d t o.
And the government won't force people to---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 11:36pm.
buy health care; unless, of course, ObamaCare forces them to.Pop. densities
Submitted by Unsane on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 11:47pm.
Oh, people DO ride trains, under one condition:
Population densities must be very high. (But even then, still not over long distances.)
This is the reason why mass transit rail is remotely feasible in the northeast. The light rail zealots here in TX still cannot figure out that very tiny basic fact...
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
→ Exactly Unsane
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 11:59pm.
Once you get there, you're at the mercy of cabbies?
We know Texas don't quite work that way.
Wow, I never saw anyone stutter while typing
Submitted by SickofLibs on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 10:37pm.
Just po-pointing it out.
Of course you don't see the complaint...
Submitted by Unsane on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 11:46pm.
1. The United States has the BEST freight rail system in the world.
2. Europe has a horrible freight rail system.
3. Europe's rail system is more often than not heavily subsidized by governments. Low cost air carriers are more widely used in Europe over long distances than trains are.
4. We buy more oil from Canada - FAR more - than from the Middle East. The Middle East, upon which you are so deeply hung up - accounts for, at most, 15% of our oil imports. Take a look at a globe; they are too damn far away and we have closer sources of oil. And in some cases, we have some suppliers pretty well screwed - Venezuela's crude is such that it can only be refined in the Carribbean and the southern United States.
5. Aircraft already do this much better than in trains. Trains have to deal with more friction than an aircraft with 200-300 people does.
You don't see the complaint because you are horrifically ill-informed.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Who pray tell...............
Submitted by Patriot II on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 12:11pm.
let this dim wit bastard out of his box? This clown is nuts!!!
Hurry up and wait.
Submitted by Ashrak on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 8:20pm.
Because we have Freedom here Chrissy, where government doesn't have the authority to decide for us how we will travel, where we will travel and where the workforce will be employed.
See, Chrissy, you may want to collectively go 300 miles per hour toward Socialism, but the vast majority of people in this country stand in your way with their SUVs and their pick em up trucks.
I'll keep my truck, TYVM, you can keep the change.
Investing in the future?
Submitted by Blonde on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 8:27pm.
What an idiot...with borrowed money, Chrissy?
Normally, the way it works, is you have to have money before you invest it.
Perhaps we ought to just kill Amtrack while we're at it. And charge the Northeastern commuters the true cost, instead of subsidizing them.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Call to prayer echoing down a street near you 5 times a day
Submitted by wedapeople on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 8:28pm.
Actually Tingles will be saddened to lean that President Hussein Obama will not be focussing on Choo Choo's.
From what everyone else has been reporting, President Hussein Obama is tinkering with jargon. ObamaBiden's, "Recovery summer's, "Economic Recovery Advisory Board" is being replaced with "The competitiveness panel".
The speech will focus on President Hussein Obama's "Five Pillars of Economic Recovery"....
Hmmm Five Pillars....? interesting choice of words. Wonder if he is plagiarizing fro The Koran.
Someone call his pastor's Mssr's Wright and Flager
t'ain't the same
Submitted by MidAmerica on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 8:28pm.
Japan is already short of land so building a massive road system won't work. China is so huge and full of billions of people with few roads that a train system is far cheaper (to say nothing of travel control). And countries in Europe are small compared to the US. If you traveled the distance all the way across France in Texas you wouldn't even be out of the state.
Travel
Submitted by WestHoustonGeo on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 9:26pm.
You mentioned that traveling across France wouldn't get you across Texas. True. Which reminds me of a story...
A Texan said to a New Yorker, "I can get in my car and drive all day long and still be on my ranch"
The New Yorker says, "Yeah, I had a car like that once."
You Texas guys aren't kidding!
Submitted by Blonde on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 9:59pm.
We drove to Costa Rica and back last year, and I thought I'd never get out of Texas, both ways!
Great roads, although those feeder roads in Houston can be kind of annoying. Got my first $2 coin from a toll guy on the Beltway road, it was pretty cool. THAT was an expensive road, but worth it!
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Big Sky Country
Submitted by miss911ninja on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 10:12pm.
Montana's like that, too. Drove clear across it from east to west, and thought it would never end! But every minute was a pleasure because the weather was great and it was beautiful. Now I know why they call it Big Sky Country. It's hard to explain how or why, but the sky really does look bigger there!
You really can't understand the size of it
Submitted by Blonde on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 10:18pm.
Until you drive through it.
The skies in Mexico were incredible, too...kind of "Big".
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
You really can't understand the size of it
Submitted by Blonde on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 10:19pm.
Until you drive through it.
The skies in Mexico were incredible, too...kind of "Big".
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Let's put it this way
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 1:29am.
A person traveling by car from El Paso to San Diego would be on a beach with an adult beverage before a person travelling from El Paso to Orange could get through Baytown.
Yes folks, Texas is so big, sometimes you just can't get there from here.
I don't even like driving from San Antonio to Houston. Ain't much between Buc-ee's and Katy.
Frank's
Submitted by Unsane on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 8:43pm.
Are you kidding? Exit 674 on I-10. Frank's Restaurant.
I mention that because I have been stopping by there since, oh, about 1979-1980 or so, virtually any time I drive down I-10 to or from Houston.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Split personality
Submitted by MidAmerica on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 10:20pm.
Driving top to bottom in Illinois is a long slog also. You can start at the top with people who sound like Canadians and drive for many hours and when you finally get to the southern part of the state you hear people who talk as if they are in dixie.
Islamosavvy
Submitted by miss911ninja on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 10:32pm.
I love road trips, from anywhere to anywhere! Even if there was a fast train, I'd choose to drive anyway, in most cases. Besides, if the rail system were expanded, it would just give the Islamists one more thing to blow up.
Pensacola to Key West is a haul, too.....
Submitted by noncom on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 11:14pm.
Not to mention from the Oregon state line to the Mexican border south of California....
True...long slogs
Submitted by Blonde on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 11:21pm.
I miss the Road Tripping, though.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
A 300 mph train thru the NE Corridor would kill hundreds daily
Submitted by SickofLibs on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 8:31pm.
Tingles knows this. Tingles doesn't care about bums and children.
There is reason Govt got into the train business
Submitted by Jackrv on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 8:37pm.
There is a reason the Govt. got into the train business.
The major railroads in 1971 or 1973 decided they wanted to be freight roads only and discontinued their passenger services. Daddy Govt. didn't think that was good so they formed AMTRAK.
Jack Van Nostrand
GM was more of why
Submitted by Bull Moose Prog... on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 8:49pm.
General Motors back in (not looking it up, so I"m easily wrong) about the 50s bought out most of the small light rail passenger services so that they could bury the rails and increase car sales. Whether or not it was good for GM is highly debatable, and doubtful. It certainly wasn't good for the country to go towards monopolization.
But what is past is past. Government will be no more successful at high speed rail than they are at... running Government Motors. We could do Amtrak a HUGE favor by breaking it up into 6 different regional organizations and give them a 10 year warning on the government cutting them loose.
Having riden the train from the SW to the SE and NW to the NE... service varies greatly in different regions. As do the obvious levels of government bureaucracy involved in it. Rail service could probably survive and do a lot better in the west if cut loose from government strings. In the east I expect it would shrivel up and die because it is full of bureaucrats and their trains are ancient beasts falling apart.
But Tell Chris Matthews if it wasn't for the federal government shoveling "Light Rail" down the throats of cities and states that didn't really want it, we'd probably have high speed rail already up and down the west coast.
I agree
Submitted by cheesegrater on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 9:03pm.
I also believe that GM bought the light rail cos. to replace them with busses powered by engines built at their newly acquired diesel manufacturing plant.
Three that killed rail
Submitted by Unsane on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 11:50pm.
Ultimately what killed trains wasn't GM. Rather, it was Boeing, Douglas, and Lockheed.
Especially when those three companies began using jet engines.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
JVN
Submitted by cheesegrater on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 8:57pm.
When this was a free country, people voted with their wallets to choose personal transportation over mass transport. In order for us to join the new community of earthly hellholes that must be changed. It starts by making us to the point where we are too poor to afford personal vehicles, then the only way we will be able to move is on public financed mass transport.
I wish
Submitted by Bull Moose Prog... on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 11:51pm.
I wish people had gotten to vote with their wallets. Back when it was a free country and people did we had both systems working well. Then one near monopoly at the time (GM) bought out the mass transit (trains) to create their own (busses and private cars). Then another monopoly (federal government) stepped in to create new mass transit with the dollars from people transporting themselves personally. The end result being the few surviving U.S. automakers had so little competition that they were unprepared to compete with foreign automakers when they started selling in the U.S.
But I guess that is why I'm a Bull Moose Progressive. I believe governments job isn't to get involved in business, but to stand back and just make sure that businesses are competing and hit them over with a club when they try to stifle competition. People should be free to vote with their wallets and have their choices eliminated by anti-competition from monopolies (government or otherwise).
Oligopoly
Submitted by Unsane on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 11:52pm.
No mention of the oligopoly that brought down the rails?
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
rail
Submitted by stan25 on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 8:58pm.
The reason the United States does not have a viable passenger train service is that they priced themselves out of the market. The airlines took over the bulk of the people moving, because of cheaper fares. Yes, it used to be that rail passenger service was the method most people used up until the mid 1950s. Another cause of the decline in rail service, both passenger and freight, is the poor maintenence that was done on the tracks. Until the railroads get rid of the unions, there will never be a viable fast train service.
Yeah right, it's the cost.
Submitted by cheesegrater on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 9:06pm.
Nobody ever flew because you can go from coast to coast in a few hours as compared to days on the train.
The U.S.A. can't purchase
Submitted by mostlymoderate on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 9:20pm.
The U.S.A. can't purchase that expensive, innovative technology anymore because we have too many "social programs" that we have to pay for. For example, your "Katrina Crowd" that depend on the government for everything. Also, your anchor-babies that get all the benefits of being a citizen yet their parents don't pay any taxes (because they are not citizens). All the school lunch programs, inner-city welfare programs, etc. etc. take most of our money.
The days of innovation are mostly over. We are a government welfare state now.
Don't EVEN get me started on our inmate populations. Something strange.
We also have too much lawyer-created "liability" in the country. That's coming from a lawyer. I admit our civil tort claims can be outrageous and bullet trains are a major liability.
Add it all up and the U.S. can't afford fast trains.
I'll say it's strange
Submitted by mandrake on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 9:25pm.
That link you provided on inmate populations adds up to a male population of 8%?? Are the rest women inmates or is the US now imprisoning aliens from outer space?
I guess you need to take Wiki
Submitted by mostlymoderate on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 9:29pm.
I guess you need to take Wiki data with a grain of salt. All I know is that a GREAT AMOUNT of our inmate population is of illegal aliens. It costs too much.
Well as long as YOU know it,
Submitted by mandrake on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 9:32pm.
Well as long as YOU know it, that's all that really matters.
Well, I won't speak to the
Submitted by bkeyser on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 9:55pm.
Well, I won't speak to the veracity of the Wiki graphic, but it seems to me that it's saying that 5% of Black males are in prison, 2% of Hispanic males and 1% of white males; not that the prison population is 8% male (less Asians, American Indians, etc...).
In fact, if you scroll down (that's that little wheel on your computer mouse, or you can use the arrow down key, or the scroll bar on the right side of your browser window) and read the text, it says this: "On June 30, 2006, an estimated 4.8% of black men were in prison or jail, compared to 1.9% of Hispanic men and 0.7% of white men. More than 11% of black males age 25 to 34 were incarcerated. Black women were incarcerated in prison or jail at nearly 4 times the rate of white women and more than twice the rate of Hispanic women."
Now YOU know it too.
Silly English
Submitted by Denny Crane on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 12:07am.
They don't teach the meaning of "of" in the great white north.
Either that or the hot temperatures have addled its brains.
We Are The 53%
Sorry 'bout that
Submitted by mandrake on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 1:35pm.
I was hoping that Vet would take the bait..but he's too smart..thanks for playing ;)
Lean Forward!
Submitted by Rebar002 on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 9:14pm.
Tingly Leg Matthews' next rant will be about how the government needs to subsidize the construction and operation of a national Zeppelin fleet.
Matthews Didn't Study Again
Submitted by Boil It Down on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 9:15pm.
Had Matthews bothered to look around a bit before criticizing our lack of enthusiasm for high speed trains he could have avoided another gaffe for the archives. That thing he said that lets him recognize when he's about to make an ass of himself is on the fritz again.
I haven't even been all that interested in high speed trains but I've read three or four articles to explain why States and communities don't want them. Sure it would be nifty to have bragging rights about our own supertrain but, they would be massively expensive for the service they could provide. They are simply an extravagance we cannot afford and don't need all that much.
So there you have it, just one more example of Matthew's ineptitude.
The Texas high speed debacle.
Submitted by drsamherman on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 9:22pm.
For y'all who live in Texas, remember our state government wetting itself over the past high speed rail projects that went bust? The formerly Democratic-controlled legislature was salivating over all of the potential graft, patronage and boondoggles. It was a better example of conditioning than Pavlov and the dogs.
High speed trains cost money, and they will not be the free substitute for other modes of transportation-challenged liberals. Even in Europe and Asia, where high speed trains are in place they are expensive even for commuter travel.
Chris fantasizes over large public work projects that cost lots of money and produce nothing but union jobs and Democrat votes.
True. I remember at least
Submitted by WestHoustonGeo on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 9:42pm.
True.
I remember at least 5 separate initiatives to make that "Texas Triangle" Dallas/Ft Worth, San Antonio/Austin and Houston(no slash).
Never came to anything other than multi millions in "studies".
Leave it alone. If rail is better, it will happen in the free market.
Yes, we had the same agitators here in Florida
Submitted by Blonde on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 10:02pm.
Oh yeah, I want to ride the bullet train from Tampa to Miami, not! Seeing how it only takes about 45 minutes to fly.
Fortunately, it was cost prohibitive.
We do have a charming little commuter line called "Tri-Rail"....which is a subsidized boondoggle, too. Oh yeah, and they don't run much of a schedule on weekends, very convenient.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Blonde, We have our own
Submitted by Chris Norman on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 1:08am.
Blonde,
We have our own little boondoggle dedicated railway between Albuquerque and Santa Fe named "The Rail Runner", Boss Bill Richardson's "gift" to the state of New Mexico that we will have to subsidize as long as it runs (after it cost about four times what he projected to build the damned thing). It's really just a convenience for state emplyees. The rest of us who may want to ride it for leisure purposes are out of luck because it's schedule is limited to state employee commuter trips - no mid-day runs, no weekend service except a few weekends a year.Grrrrrrr. Thanks a heckuva lot Boss Richardson - you played this state as a personal playground for you and your friends,
Democrats!
Submitted by Blonde on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 1:13am.
I feel bad for your state, Chris.
Bill Richardson is so bad even Obama won't touch him with a ten foot pole. That's BAD!
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Rail
Submitted by Unsane on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 11:59pm.
I've seen this happen before. Hell, the idiots in Bexar and Travis Counties STILL want to have light rail between Austin and San Antonio.
What they do not want to ever understand is that, like the high speed rail proposals I have seen, they all use existing rail lines - rail lines used by freight trains. While passenger rail is dead, freight trains are HUGE business in the country. The Economist pointed this out some months ago by noting that in the world of rail, there is general agreement that the best freight rail system in the world is in the United States.
Of course, since many government officials have decided we MUST have high speed rail, they will get it built, any way they can, and to hell with what people think.
I am all for light rail and high spped rail links - great. But exactly as you say, Houstonian - ONLY if the free market will support it.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Exactly. If you're going to
Submitted by Ken Shepherd on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 1:47pm.
Exactly. If you're going to argue for more government "investment" in rail, at least argue for freight rail. We already have a decent freight rail system and expanding capacity can lessen freight on the highways.
We're too spread out a country for high speed passenger rail to make sense. Makes perfect sense in Japan, UK, France, Germany, Switzerland. Not so much here.
JONATHAN ALTER, MSNBC
Submitted by Galvanic on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 9:26pm.
JONATHAN ALTER, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Mitch McConnell teed it up correctly. He said Democrats call it investment, Republican call it wasteful liberal spending. The problem with McConnell's position is that he's at odds with 200 years of American history, where starting with Alexander Hamilton, through Henry Clay, Abraham Lincoln - his big thing was internal improvements. Building railroads, canals. That's infrastructure. I'm not aware of Federally-built RRs in the 19th Century. I'm not sure about canals, but I think they were commercial enterprises, too. As for Matthews' wish for fast rail and the interstate system, ironically it was the interstate road system that undermined American rail, particularly passenger rail. But I'm sure Matthews would be satisified with fast rail from Washington all the way to Boston so that the thrill up his leg isn't TSA playing grope-a-dope.the little engine that can't
Submitted by MidAmerica on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 9:39pm.
The difference of the innovations you state and the present call for high speed rail is that the former investments were to fulfill an economic need. High speed rail will solve no actual need except in a few widely separated corridors. The main function of high speed rail is to provide jobs building it and a continual management and subsidy of the system by the federal government. Even if the rail system was done and paid for it would still operate at a loss because it only fulfills a political need not an economic one. Construction of high speed rail is not an investment but a down payment on a never ending spending program.
No, but....
Submitted by BBallleaper on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 9:29pm.
we have people on TV who drool and spray!
Chrissy and trains?
Submitted by UpNorth on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 9:50pm.
The symbolism explains it all.... A fast, streamlined bullet shaped train? Going into a tunnel? No wonder the thrill-up-his-leg guy is so fixated on trains.
Like Gal said, I think the RR's themselves paid for the miles of rail laid to and from the west coast.
And high speed rail systems also require electricity, lots of electricity. Where to get it? Certainly not from Nuke power plants, and certainly not from coal-fired plants, so where? Solar panels? I don't think so, not enough electricity generated. Wind? Nope, not dependable. And, I don't think diesel engines are efficient enough to generate the speeds Chrissy can only dream of.
The train cos. did invest some,
Submitted by cheesegrater on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 10:05pm.
but they were given or sold at a very low price public land, much of it stolen through immanent domain, for the roadbed and in most cases all of the land for miles on either side of the road, which they then sold to businesses like lodging and restaurants at full retail. The government involvement in the RRs was a dirty business.
Not to go
Submitted by UpNorth on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 8:25pm.
off on a tangent, but all land, public and private, at the time, was available at a "very low price". For instance, hard wood lands in Michigan, in 1895, sold for the sum of one to two dollars per acre, after the pines had been clear cut. In 1913, hard wood lands in the U.P of Michigan sold for $9.00/acre.
http://books.google.com/books?id=3yQDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA491&lpg=PA491&dq=land...
Have they given up on "The Green Economy will save us"??
Submitted by krendler on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 10:23pm.
Green jobs!!!
Green jobs!!!!
How that greens jobs thingy workin' out fer ya, libs? In the same bin as that hopey-changey thing? (Libs just love hearing the hopey-changey line repeated. Makes their heads explode)
What were thos "green" jobs again? Making curly bulbs?
There are no public
Submitted by jdhawk on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 10:36pm.
There are no public transporation systems in the United States that are profitable. The AMTRAK railway system has NEVER made a profit. It costs billions in taxpayer dollars to keep afloat. Public run bus systems in cities and towns across the United States are also NOT PROFITABLE.
The fact is that whether it is rail or bus run by a public entity it is in the red. In fact, many studies have indicated that it would be far far cheaper to scrap the existing public rail and bus systems and buy cars for all the riders. And, people would actually get to exactly where they want to go and not have to walk miles to get to a train/bus and miles to get to the next location after getting off a train/bus.
But, hey, I have a little experiment for you. Go down to your local city or town public bus depot and take a look at the number of busses leaving the station with only a couple or no people on them. When you are stopped at an intersection and a public bus goes by count the heads bobbing up and down inside the bus. It will be easy, you will be able to count them on one hand.
Wide open spaces and little population density make it impossible to run public train and bus systems in the black. The only exception is a couple of our city metros. They would run in the black if they weren't purposely subsidizing their riders. But, that is about it.
Meanwhile it is always rich liberals that have never and will never actually have to ride on public transporation that are always for it.
Liberalism is a mental disease . . .
the wheels on the bus go round and round
Submitted by MidAmerica on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 10:45pm.
We have a bus system in my small town that is subsidized by the government. The buses run in circles all day long carrying a few riders all the while adding to traffic and spewing diesel fumes. It would be cheaper and environmentally cleaner to give people tickets to ride a taxi. At least when they aren't hauling somebody the taxis shut their engines off.
Blur
Submitted by nkviking75 on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 10:52pm.
Those of us in Flyoverland will have to change our name to "That blur between the coasts".
“Always love your country — but never trust your government!" -- Bob Novak (1931-2009)
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
It's called auto-mobility
Submitted by thestalkinghorse on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 10:59pm.
I must be a little like Chris Matthews, I too am hoping to hear the words "light rail".
When I hear a politician utter those words, I know that it is time to turn off the Tand V and go to bed.
Someone needs to do some homework
Submitted by octavioj on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 11:09pm.
Japan's rail system is heavily subsidized. France's SNCF just last year said they would shutter some of the unprofitable lines and the non-high speed rail loses an inordinate amount of money. All one has to do is some quick internet searches. It is not that hard.This is one of those great
Submitted by Chris Norman on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 11:35pm.
This is one of those great jobs mirages that liberals like to dangle in front of us as a panacea to all our economic problems. Their only problem is, no one is asking for high speed rail service except liberals and train enthusiasts. The rest of us know what a disaster and money pit a utra-program like this would be.
Here in New Mexico, ex- Gov. Bill Richardson's "big idea", the commuter train between Albuquerque and Santa Fe, has turned into a big bad joke that cost several times more than originally "estimated" - surprise - and the subsidies to operate it are huge and the ridership is sparce. The subsidies to a national high speed train system would make the subsidies to Amtrak look like pocket lint.
"High speed rail systems" are one of the ultimate liberal elitist "big ideas" they like to flash around to show what "big thinkers" they are. Heaven help them if one of these actually were attempted to be built and operated. The "big idea" would be exposed as the big scam the whole thing really is. The libs in government are probably happy to keep it as just a big idea to talk about every once in a while.
By the way, the reason the private railrods got out of passenger service is that, in the twentieth century, they had rarely ever turned a profit and were subsidized by the railroads own freigght service. As costs rose continuously, most railroads at first, then the rest, were happy to turn over the passenger business to the federal government.
→ Texans Unite!
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 11:42pm.
Calling on all Texans to join the Texan Resident Union, so we can get a special opt-out from Obama's Health Care mandate.
Seems you can't get one of those little doohickeys unless you join a union.
!
Submitted by compguytracy on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 11:47pm.
Let one hs train go off the rails, and any, and im being generous, any money saved, would be given 1000 fold in a class action lawsuit
"Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought?" Orwell, 1984
Ceteris paribus
Opec is better to support...
Submitted by jorae on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 11:56pm.
Opec is better to support...
Uninformed
Submitted by Unsane on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 12:02am.
Since when have Canada and Mexico joined OPEC?
You are woefully uninformed and as such you should stay away until you become much better informed.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
So it appears many countries
Submitted by jorae on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 12:36am.
So it appears many countries could black mail us, since it appears, we sure don't supply enough on our own...
the top ten countries that the U.S. imports from:
1. Canada
2. Mexico
3. Saudi Arabia
4. Venezuela
5. Nigeria
6. Angola
7. Iraq
8. Algeria
9. United Kingdom
10. Brazil
We should have no one on this list....and the less we need anybody, the better.
(Venezuela!)
*
Submitted by Dave. on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 2:30am.
Vote for the American in November
Actually...
Submitted by mrbuddhafreak on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 2:27am.
I'm fairly certain that you wouldn't endorse the 'Drill, Baby, Drill' solution to the problem instead of the financial boondoggle rail solution. But if you're really worried about importing oil, look at natural gas powered cars. The price on NG is through the bottom right now because of the huge reserves being discovered. It would be greener and more cost efficient than a rail line that will be underused and oversubsidized anyway.
OPEC?
Submitted by Denny Crane on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 3:36am.
"Since when have Canada and Mexico joined OPEC?" Unsane.
Dumb Troll response.
"Top 10 countries that the U.S. imports from"
1. Canada
2. Mexico
FWI illiterate trolliez
The OPEC member countries are Algeria, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Venezuela.
Looking, looking some more, nope don't see Canada or Mexico in that list.
We Are The 53%
Please cite your sources, etc.
Submitted by Unsane on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 8:54pm.
I immediately question 3 and 7. Why? Too damn far. And sorry, only 15% of our oil in total comes from the Middle East.
It would be nice if you would actually cite your sources.
And Ecuador doesn't make this list? Nor Colombia? Not buying it.
I realize that you apparently are a fan of autarky, but I am not. The importation of oil doesn't bother me as much as it bothers you. Besides, if the United States were remotely serious about it, we could tap much more of our own oil reserves, in places like MT and CO. Oil prices are high enough to where we could tap oil shale at a profit.
Also, we could use that piddling 2% of ANWR for drilling. And best of all, the infrastructure already exists to get that oil south of the Brooks Range.
Finally, as I am a huge fan of doing freaking everything in terms of energy - imagine if the United States were as reliant on nuclear power as France. Could you imagine if the United States got 78% of its juice from nukes, how awesome that would be? It's doable. All of what I outlined is very doable.
Yet I am willing to bet that if ANY of that sees the light of day, or even attempts to, you will SCREAM and SCREAM and SCREAM.
Trains? Yeah, I guess. IF the market supports it. We don't have the population densities for it, except in the northeast.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
jorae---
Submitted by matthewdean on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 12:00am.
Try out "One Trick Pony" for a username.
It would fit nicely with your message.
MD
When you realize, we are the
Submitted by jorae on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 1:34am.
When you realize, we are the richest nation in the world...then you realize, your pay check can be adusted by a limited amount of deductions to increase that money..
You might investigate and realize, that a good precent of the population has a lot more choices than you when it comes to increasing their pay checks.
Someone had to convince you that your money and their money worked the same to bring home that check.
The biggest Trick in the history of America...
No one wants the trains, because they look at their own pay check,, that has dwindled down to living from pay check to pay check -
You are no more than the bought goods for the more "free" pay check.. If you want to hold on to what little you've got (only because they determine what you get)...you will make a great wall - to stop our inferstructure...but you should not contribute, but you need to see who should.
→ Jorae
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 1:40am.
I'm sorry you live from paycheck to paycheck. I hope I never go back to that.
You might try living within your means for awhile, and see if you can start saving some money.
Good luck, rather, make your own luck.
Cool -->
Submitted by MrShy on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 1:47am.
Where's your compassion? Sheesh. We need to feel for those "less fortunate". Period. It's what we all have to do. Feel, and express, and urge others to give. Now go and feel... and express... and urge us all to "have a better understanding"....
- Shy Vinyl
Join Mr. Shy and The 1* Percent
Leona Mindy Roberts
Submitted by jorae on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 2:01am.
Leona Mindy Roberts Helmsley was a billionaire who owned a New York City hotel and a rel estate investor.
Helmsley : "We don't pay taxes.Only the little people pay taxes...,"
Figure out who should be paying their fair share, like you do...then once the government gets basically the pay check to pay check crowds... see where it goes. Farm Substitues?
There is "Win Win" for some Americans...pay no taxes, but are given billions in substitutes..
What the heck is a "farm substitute"?
Submitted by Blonde on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 2:08am.
Seriously?
That's some whacky economic stuff you have going on there. If you don't know the word you are apparently reaching for is a "subsidy"...not a substitute, well.
I would say you probably qualify to be one of Obama's economic advisors with a vast knowledge that you've just displayed.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
It's what we get.
Submitted by Denny Crane on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 3:42am.
When the Farm is sick!
It might be what a rel estate investor sells.
Or it might be part of our inferstructure...
Or it might be singular of substitues?
OOOO I know!!!
It's an artificial Farm! Like the one's on FaceBook!
We Are The 53%
The majority of Americans are
Submitted by jorae on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 1:55am.
The majority of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck these days, according to a survey by the American Payroll Association here in San Antonio. 72 percent are struggling to get by, up one percent from last year.
Huh...the majority...
Two different tax programs, one lets you live pay check to pay check...The other bascially takes from you....
jorae
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 2:13am.
My parents came to this country from an Eastern Bloc country in the late 60's.
They had no money and didn't know the language.
They put up with prejudice in the middle of the Cold War era.
And there were many years they lived from "paycheck to paycheck".
And yet, through hard work and not pissing away their money on crap they didn't need, they somehow managed not only to buy their own home but also raise two kids who have gone off to actually not leach off of society.
How did that happen?
Luck?
jorae
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 2:20am.
Oh,
I'd love a link to backup this BS liberal view of America where the majority of Americans are living "paycheck to paycheck".
Hydro & Co.
Submitted by MrShy on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 2:26am.
American's are living "paycheck to paycheck".
American's (the leaches) are living video game to video game, unemployment check to unemployment check, food stamp to food stamp, car to car, affirmative assistance program to affirmative assistance program.... and so on.
- Shy Spin Cycle
Join Mr. Shy and The 1* Percent
MrShy
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 2:32am.
I guess a legion of lazy complaining liberals collecting their government checks constitutes living "paycheck to paycheck".
Shy Guy
Submitted by Denny Crane on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 3:48am.
well said.
Ya got me ROFL with that one.
Add two more, living from troll university to troll university.
From Soros website to Soros website.
We Are The 53%
Hydro & Denny
Submitted by MrShy on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 5:16am.
"(the *leeches)"
Sorry about that one. :p
- Shy Vinyl
Join Mr. Shy and The 1* Percent
FWIW, hydro...
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 4:02am.
Here are the results of a recent survey: About half of the workers surveyed said they were living "paycheck to paycheck", some of whom were earning a hundred grand per year.
Jer
Jer is trying to help a troll?
Submitted by Denny Crane on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 4:09am.
Since when is 72% the same as about half?
A correct statement would be "almost half" as in "not a majority"
;-)
We Are The 53%
Denny---
Submitted by matthewdean on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 4:18am.
people living paycheck to paycheck on one hundred grand a year either have champagne tastes on a beer budget, or they ain't budgeting at all. (signed) The LurkerNot at all, Mr. Crane...
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 4:37am.
I wasn't doing anything other than linking an interesting survey. Thus, the "FWIW" and the note about the hundred grand wage earners.
Jer
Three, 3, tres dots Jer?
Submitted by Denny Crane on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 5:27am.
Glad you haven't been slipping back to where you came from.
I remember one year filling out my tax forms and we almost got to 100 grand, I think it was about 94 grand?
We weren't living paycheck to paycheck, but our bills came awfully close to our take home.
FWI my friends call me Denny.
:-)
We Are The 53%
So noted...
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 8:28am.
Mr. Crane.
(Denny)
Jer
Jer
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 3:13pm.
The problem I see with that survey is that it relies on the honesty and openness of the people responding (as opposed to an objective analysis of each of the respondent's income and spending).
Some people will claim to be living paycheck to paycheck when in fact they don't.
And others who do live from paycheck to paycheck do so because of the lifestyle they have chosen.
It's impossible to tell from this survey what percentage of that 47% these people make up and so I would say the survey is useless.
But I'm sure that won't prevent people (I'm not saying you) who want to push the idea of a downtrodden, struggling America from using it or others like it.
hydro...
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 3:51pm.
I think describing it as "useless" is too harsh an assessment, although I'll readily concede it's not dispositive. And, frankly, it projected at least a patina of credibility which a couple of other surveys [reflecting higher per centages] lacked and were therefore disregarded by me.
However, my search was extremely limited, and there are probably much more rigorously conducted and far more illuminating studies than the one I linked.
Jer
Jer
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 4:15pm.
OK, let me clarify my use of the term "useless".
If you are using one of these studies to back up an argument about how obtainable the American Dream is for the average Joe, then I say a study which simply states that x% of the population lives paycheck to paycheck without addressing why is useless.
It's the "why" which is important in such an argument. If the study doesn't attempt to address that, then people are free to interject their own explanations which results in little more than a circular argument.
"I assert that the American Dream is unattainable by the average Joe and here's a study that shows most people live paycheck to paycheck and even though it doesn't explain why, the obvious answer is that the American Dream is unattainable by the average Joe."
By the way, I don't appreciate having to look up words like "dispositive" on a day when I'm feeling particularly lazy :)
Gee, did Professor hydro
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 5:12pm.
Gee, did Professor hydro stumble over one itty-bitty word? How do you think *I* felt having to sit with a dictionary in my lap, eyes completely glazed over before finishing even the first paragraph of one of your--dumbed down for us mere laypersons--elucidations on a given theoretical physics paradigm in various NB forums of yesteryear. The realization they were obliterated in the Great NewsBusters Makeover of 2010 was devastating as I was absolutely determined to some day, some how, figure out just what in the hell you were talking about.
[You know I'm just kidding ya, right? Wish you had been my Physics prof in college. I think I would have done better.]
Will be back later re this survey stuff.
Jer
Jer
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 9:21pm.
OK, that made me laugh.
Thanks for the compliment.
"...here in San Antonio"
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 8:49am.
NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!! Please say you don't live here.
I wondered when the Tx contingent would see that
Submitted by Blonde on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 11:06am.
...and object vociferously!
Don't worry, we have more moonbats per capita in Florida...it's so bad the local mullet wrapper has a "FloriDuh" section...where you can read articles about people going postal in traffic and attacking other drivers with talcum powder...drunks trying to arm wrestle alligators, great stuff like that.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Gotta be a carpetbagger.
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 1:15pm.
Hopefully, this is just a temporary residence.
foray/e into jorae's mind....
Submitted by MrShy on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 1:59am.
"You are no more than the bought goods for the more "free" pay check.. If you want to hold on to what little you've got (only because they determine what you get)...you will make a great wall - to stop our inferstructure...but you should not contribute, but you need to see who should."
What tha' ???
Join Mr. Shy and The 1* Percent
Great Wall-China-lending to US-inferstructure---
Submitted by matthewdean on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 2:07am.
Hoo noze, Shy, jorae may be onto something. Or maybe on something.Dude!
Submitted by Blonde on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 2:13am.
Farm substitutes and inferstructure....who knew?
Just think of all of the money Obama could spend on structuring inferences....it would pale in comparison to that Hopey/Changey deal.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
jorae's single post busted my typo meter---
Submitted by matthewdean on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 2:19am.
AND destroyed my faith in economic theory. :o)Obviously a Krugman Fan
Submitted by Blonde on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 2:35am.
But I hear you, that typo meter is clanging rather badly. As is Mrs. Malaprop's head.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
J,
Submitted by Dave. on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 2:24am.
LOL.
Farm substitutes fer whut, and just whut inferstructure does he think this will fix?
Damn, I'm soooooooooooo confoooooooooosed.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Blonde
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 2:24am.
I like the Hopey/Changey thing.
The other stuff involves too many big words.
Think about it, hydro....an "Inference Czar"
Submitted by Blonde on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 2:31am.
A Department of Inferences. Staffed by a hundred thousand or so Hopey/Changey (that's just for you) SEIU drones. They could police all the mean inferences us right-wingers make against Saint Obama, et. al.
And think about Farm Substitutes...we could substitute, oh say, tamale factories, or after market auto supply parts manufacturers for farms.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Blonde
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 2:39am.
Sadly, you might be on to something.
The fact is, the government has become the largest employer of people who are otherwise totally unemployable in our economic system.
Post office.
DMV.
And coming soon - health care?
Exactly
Submitted by Blonde on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 2:52am.
Anyone who is an advocate of Obamacare ought to be made to go to the DMV for five days in a row....and then have someone explain to them that this is what their future healthcare will be like.
When we were in Costa Rica, we went by the "socialized" hospital ("free care" for all, called CAHA...which employers must pay for). The line was literally around the block. I'd love to make one of these idiots stand in that line for however long it takes to get their "free" medicine.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Try out "One Trick Pony" for
Submitted by MrShy on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 1:42am.
Try out "One Trick Pony" for a username.
I was in that movie... a total bomb (oops, sorry for the violent rhetoric) released in 1980. It was Paul Simon's autobiographical film about his life growing up in the 50's. I was one of the kids singing for a few seconds in the opening scene. :p
- Shy's Past
Join Mr. Shy and The 1* Percent
Honolulu is entering the boondoggle
Submitted by Denny Crane on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 12:18am.
They just broke ground after 30 years of debate on the "mall choo choo"
6.5 BILLION dollars, and it goes about 20 miles. It will also take up to 20 years to complete.
This is what happens when Democrats control the entire legislature of a state. They are worried that since R control the house, they will have a harder time getting the feds to pony up the 1.5 Billion that they thought was secure.
Hawaii is now the most liberal state in the Union. Even though they know they can't afford it, they are still going ahead. Damn, there go my property taxes.
We Are The 53%
72% paycheck to
Submitted by jorae on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 5:29am.
72 percent of Americans living paycheck to paycheckhttp://www.woai.com/content/news/newslinks/story/72-percent-of-Americans-living-paycheck-to/SAZVoXrh6EyDHujPgxn3Kg.cspx
The recession may be over, but a majority of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck these days, according to a survey by the American Payroll Association here in San Antonio. 72 percent are struggling to get by, up one percent from last year
Published: 9/22/2010
------------------ The American Reality, Living Paycheck to Paycheck?2009
http://managingmoneygodsway.com/the-american-dream-living-paycheck-to-paycheck/
he Statistics- The Wall Street Journal
- USA Today
- Time Magazine
- The Department of Commerce
Oh look the cut and paste troll is back.
Submitted by Denny Crane on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 5:50am.
Funny thing about surveys, when they aren't linked in the story, they aren't relevant.
How do we know the questions and the answers. What is the definition of "paycheck to paycheck"?
We Are The 53%
"he statistics"?
Submitted by UpNorth on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 12:41pm.
WTF are "he statistics"? As opposed to her statistics? Seriously, or sureously, Jorae, or whoever you really are, go back to cut and paste university, or whatever other rock you may have clambered out from under, and get your degree in trolling. Your week here hasn't turned out like you envisioned, has it?
UpNorth---
Submitted by matthewdean on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 10:05pm.
jorae is a typo titan without peer.
I believe you are absolutely correct, in that trolls, whether drive-by hit and runners, or those who demonstrate a bit more staying power (likely proportionate to the thickness of their skulls), all end up either speaking defensively about their liberal beliefs, which eventually burns them out, causing them to drop out; or offensively; (1) either on the direct attack against conservative views, or (2) making obnoxious comments about both conservatives and conservative beliefs, ultimately getting themselves banned.
Trolls, indeed, never envision their vision as the stigma that it represents, which is tunnel vision.
Small wonder, eh, that their time here not only is not what they envisioned, it doesn't even come close to the triumphal end they expected.
MD
OK...
Submitted by Unsane on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 8:55pm.
Your point?
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
jorae
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 9:16pm.
Funny how the writer in that second link expresses the opinion that "a large percentage of us could save something every month if we just cut back on our lifestyle."
What does that tell you?
Jeez.
Submitted by Morganfrost on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 11:44am.
My six-year-old son really likes trains, too, and his voice is less grating than Matthews'... maybe he could have his own t.v. show!
Why doesn't he go live where it doesn't stink?
Submitted by TheHistorian on Tue, 01/25/2011 - 2:51pm.
How about Saudi Arabia, where they have camel trains (oops, caravans)?
Dennis Prager
A couple of reasons...
Submitted by uhohshortsonthe... on Wed, 01/26/2011 - 4:55am.
Europeans pay on average about the equivalent of 8$ per gallon of gas, no exaggeration, I live here and see it every day. The trains are plentiful, fast and reasonably efficient, and always crowded because the governments tax the crap out of the fuel so that average people can't afford to drive their cars. More reasons? The European countries are much smaller than the USA-they were able to make it work due to the geography. You can't drive high-speed trains on the tracks that were laid with the "golden spike," you have to start from scratch.