Jim,
Your post might have had some credibility until you brought in the comparison to spending on Trump's ridiculous wall. In case anyone had any doubt, now we know where your priorities and biases lie. Thanks for making that clear. And good luck trying to get elected to City Council again.
An OMV neighbor

And on the merits of your argument against the HSR project...

I actually think the draft Business Plan that was just released (Web Link is a welcome dose of reality from the HSR Authority. While acknowledging that the overall cost estimate has increased from the last update, the Business Plan notes that by 2022 there will be 119 miles of completed track running from Merced to just north of Bakersfield and by 2027 there should be 224 miles of track including upgraded, electrified track from San Francisco to Gilroy. The Business Plan talks about the potential to use the Central Valley segment for Amtrak service in the interim while the system is expanded, and recognizes the great value of upgraded, electrified track from SF to Gilroy.

Given the size of this project, I think it's reasonable to expect that it will be delivered in phases, and work on the high-complexity sections (e.g., Pacheco Pass) will take longer to advance and secure funding for while other sections are completed and put into operation.

@OMV Resident - I get it that you may have a strong dislike for the president and/or the border wall. My comparison between the bullet train and the wall is meant exactly to put the two in perspective. It has nothing to do with a bias of any type. If $25 Billion is too much to spend on a National project, then why isn't $100 Billion too much to spend on a very localized project that benefits only a very few?

As for running for city council, I've already said many times that I have no intention of doing so because it's clear to me that special interests ( like those interests that support HSR ) have far too much influence in our elections. It would be nice though, if people felt they could talk about issues with the need to take petty personal shots.


Jim Neal
Old Mountain View

Jim,
Just above you write "It would be nice though, if people felt they could talk about issues with the need to take petty personal shots." You frame your comment as if you're taking the high road, just presenting and discussing issues in a reasoned manner.

Yet your initial post started with inflammatory and false statements like "I am sure that you all remember this boondoggle project that no one wanted, but the politicians insisted that we had to have; even if it means that the State will go bankrupt..." Let's take just the "that no one wanted" piece. You may want to re-write history now, but 52.7% of voters, or over 6,680,000 people, voted for Proposition 1A in 2008. And while I'll certainly acknowledge that the project is likely to cost more and take longer than the ballot language in 2008 stated, it's just false to say that "no one wanted" this project.

If you want to have a conversation about issues, fine... try starting out without the inflammatory spin.

52% of those voting in 2008 approved borrowing some $12 billion (was it?) by selling bonds for high speed rail. Voters were not told how much such a project would really cost. The $77 billion pricetag was later concocted to counter estimates of $100-200 billion as I recall. After the vote, people on the Peninsula started thinking of how dumb it would be to run a train at 100-150 mph on the Peninsula. And we started to learn that HSR is not economical. In addition, I raised the point that one terrorist (or blackmailer) could end ridership with one attack or credible threat. It would be an easy and inviting target. Sure, no one listened to my point. Years later and even though there are no government funds at any level for HSR, proponents continue to push it. The idea appears to be to row out to sea and then cry for help. I remember the war in Vietnam. One argument to contimue it was that, otherwise, tens of thousands of American soldiers would have died in vain. The more money wasted on HSR, the more the politicians and special interests will argue that stopping would waste all of the money already spent. There was talk that maybe Red China would be willing to fund HSR in California. Of course, such a foreign regime would then have control over how it would be used. Red China has established facilities in countries around the world. Have you seen those reports? Foreign investments have strings and spies and ulterior motives. There was also talk of handing roads and bridges over to foreign regimes or their operatives to make repairs and get reimbused through tolls. Putin has a few bucks to invest in that idea. Look for it on RUSSIA TODAY. So, bottom line, thank you Jim Neal for reminding us that the HSR boondoggle is still in the works.

God bless the Mountain View Voice comments section for reminding me that there are people alive that still talk about "Red China."

Yes. And if you thought mainland China was some kind of free society with a representative democratic government that is just a happy-go-lucky trading partner of the USA I am glad to have helped you understand otherwise.

It's long past time to cut our losses on this project. Far better ways of spending money in this state than on Brown the Youngers fantasy Choo-choo.