One attack by a terrorist or extortionist on any part of the long track would end ridership. Select transportation projecs in light of real-world risks.

Will this scam never die? Nobody needs this. California is drowning in red ink already.

@Gary... What kind of rationale is that? You could say the same thing about shopping malls, concert venues or any other public gathering space... by your logic, one terrorist attack would scare everyone away, so we shouldn't build any place that people gather.

If you don't support high-speed rail, just say so - and cite some reasonable arguments. Don't just throw up ridiculous straw-man arguments.

Well actually if you STOP and THINK, some means of transportation are far more vulnerable than others. If a terrorist attacked a car, would everyone stop driving? No. How about a bus? No. But transportation on a line presents a huge risk. That is what I am saying. Are people vulnerable in places they congregate such as a mall or school? Yes. But one attack on a mall or school would not end our going to malls or sending children to school. Although two attacks may be another matter. Do not bury your head in the sand. The world with all its problems is closing in.

The train to nowhere that will drop off people in suburban LA where they will need a car to get anywhere.

The official price keeps rising. Does anyone really think this will wrap up under $100 billion by the time it is completed? Web Link

"The train to nowhere that will drop off people in suburban LA where they will need a car to get anywhere."

That reminds me, when I lived in central Florida, the long-distance commuter rail included cars for passenger automobiles, so when you got to your destination, you still had your own car. I don't see any reason why the high speed rail in California can't have a similar arrangement.

For the love of god, just build this train. Right now we have a 19th century relic that pollutes, is slow, and not frequent enough for citizens' needs. It will be packed, day-in and day-out, so the economics should be a no-brainer.
Unless costs skyrocket because we have to save some spotted owls or a couple of squirrels.
P.S. If you keep commenting on the SF-LA project, you are commenting on the wrong article.

@21st

Costs for this foolish project have ALREADY skyrocketed.

There is absolutely no reason to continue with this huge money-waster. Nobody wants it going through their town, so the state is forcing it on communities that don't want it. Nobody rides what we have now, so why they think anyone will use this is a case of delusional thinking.

How about we take the money that has been set aside for this project (which would serve few) and spend it on something that MANY will use, like improved water storage to deal with the thousands of people the communities keep building housing to hold? Stop the pie-in-the-sky projects and spend on what people will USE for a change.

Just think, all the billions going into this could have fixed our roads a long time ago, but no, the Gov wants to double tax us for road repairs. Why, because the current funds going into road repair have been so called, "borrowed" by other agencies.