Merced to Fresno and Fresno to Bakersfield would be the first two segments built. In part because it's going to take a lot longer and be costlier to buy land around the Bay Area, Los Angeles and San Diego.jkisha wrote:Like I said, I can't really argue this, as I know nothing about it. I was surprised at the route you said they would build first. But personally speaking, I know if it were high speed and went to San Francisco I would use it. And I know the LA/Vegas route would be busy as well, probably busier.ygmir wrote:Bob wrote:Might credit the fleabaggers for burying local elections in the news. No news would tend to favor the career politicos. Conspiracy?
How, does the teaparty bury things in the news?
@JK:
I don't think the comparison between the subway and the high speed train is valid.
different creatures, IMO.
and, the billions to be spent on it now (it is projected to go way over budget), for a route that will not do anyone any good (Manteca to Bakersfield? huh?) seems just a waste.
Even L.A. to S.F., seems it'd never catch up on costs......it's not like people would use it daily to commute.
And, you know, as it was being built, there'd be a ton of law suits, from environmentalists, and indians (because, somehow, somewhere, it'd go across sacred land), and a host of others..........And, then, being it's in PRC, once finished a previously unknown earthquake fault would be found, and,it'd be shut down, have to get a huge retrofit, or, have to drive at 25 mph for safety, and, not be "high speed" anyway.
yeah, I know.....cynical me..........
And jk, there's at least one Los Angeles to Vegas high speed rail in the works.
