Biden: Hey, let’s spend $53 billion on high-speed rail

posted at 4:13 pm on February 8, 2011 by Allahpundit

Why not? The federal budget is now like a teetering Jenga tower that stretches into the Earth’s upper atmosphere. There’s no question that it’s going to topple pretty soon, so in the meantime, why not have fun and see how many more pieces we can stick on there before it does?

Vice President Joe Biden on Tuesday announced an ambitious $53 billion program to build new high-speed rail networks and make existing ones faster over the next six years.

Biden, who estimated he has ridden Amtrak between Washington and his home in Wilmington, Delaware, some 7,900 times, made a strong pitch for rail transportation to enable the United States to compete and lead internationally.

“This is about seizing the future,” he said, making the announcement at Philadelphia’s busy 30th Street station with Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.

Japan and China are already building high-speed rail, and “there’s no reason, none,” that the United States cannot do the same, Biden said.

Actually, there are reasons we can’t do the same. See this recent Michael Barone column for a primer. Our version of “high-speed” rail won’t be nearly as high-speed as theirs, making this option uncompetitive with air travel over even moderately long distances, and the property-rights culture in those countries isn’t as strong as it is here, which means all sorts of tangles for the feds in finding land to lay dedicated track. There’s also the teensy matter of our crippling leviathan deficits, which explains why GOP transportation honchos John Mica and Bill Shuster are already giving Biden the thumbs down on today’s announcement. Interestingly, as recently as a week ago, both men sounded bullish on HSR. I wonder which member of the GOP leadership was tasked with having a little chat with them about spending.

Here’s Reason TV from last March with a quick-and-painless guide to America’s latest boondoggle in the name of Progress. Note well the bit about Amtrak subsidies for a sneak preview of the sinkhole that high-speed rail will become. Serious question: Is there any federal spending initiative that Democrats won’t defend on grounds that it’ll either create jobs or (giggle) end up turning a profit “eventually”? Theoretically, there has to come a point where the budget grows so bloated that even leftists agree that pursuing risky new projects is imprudent for the time being, until we retrench fiscally and reprioritize. And yet, evidently, we haven’t yet reached that point. Where is that point, exactly?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Who let him out of the attic?

red131 on February 8, 2011 at 4:14 PM

Monorail!

Caper29 on February 8, 2011 at 4:15 PM

Clueless

bhawknine on February 8, 2011 at 4:17 PM

Is there any federal spending initiative that Democrats won’t defend on grounds that it’ll either create jobs or (giggle) end up turning a profit “eventually”?

My new house?

CTSherman on February 8, 2011 at 4:17 PM

“This is about seizing the future.”

WTF?

percysunshine on February 8, 2011 at 4:17 PM

“Seize the Future”, or STFU.

WTF transitioned into STFU.

How smart are they at the WH?

Schadenfreude on February 8, 2011 at 4:18 PM

I remember when the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the princes of greed. He said, ‘Look, we need to build a high speed rail.’

/

O/T: Recent push by MSM to make Obama look like a centrist/Reagan/sensible moderate/Superman/hot sexy stud is a FAIL.

Kataklysmic on February 8, 2011 at 4:18 PM

For $53 Billion you could double deck the Chicago freeway system and have twice the congestion in the same space.

Skandia Recluse on February 8, 2011 at 4:18 PM

Stuck on stupid.

Count to 10 on February 8, 2011 at 4:19 PM

“This is about seizing the future your assets,” he said, making the announcement at Philadelphia’s busy 30th Street station with Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.

Tim Zank on February 8, 2011 at 4:19 PM

Why are Democrats so obsessed with trains?

joejm65 on February 8, 2011 at 4:19 PM

There are pretty much two areas where high speed rail MIGHT work…

1. The Eastern Seaboard, which is densely populated

2. Wide-open areas in the Big Sky states where there is currently no interstate highway

The problem with #1 is getting the land to lay the track and/or buying up the right-of-way from the existing rail companies. Getting land in New York, New Jersey, Maryland, and Massachusetts to lay the damn track would get VERY expensive quickly.

The problem with #2 is that there are no highways there because VERY few people live there and few would want to visit, which is why Amtrak is subsidized to keep operating there.

teke184 on February 8, 2011 at 4:19 PM

This is about seizing the future, cutting it’s carotid and watching it bleed out.

SKYFOX on February 8, 2011 at 4:20 PM

If everyone in America will go out tomorrow and start smashing windows on government buildings, the spending resulting from the repairs will generate such tremendous growth in the economy, it’ll make the 80s growth look pathetic!

/leftist economic theory

mankai on February 8, 2011 at 4:20 PM

This is about seizing the future,

why does it feel like I’m being told to bend over and ‘seize my ankles’ then?

ted c on February 8, 2011 at 4:22 PM

Goodbye manned space program.
Hello choo choos.
This is winning the future? More like embracing the past.

redshirt on February 8, 2011 at 4:22 PM

I honestly think they think this sort of thing is good for the economy. Government creates jobs with its magic bottomless well of money — didn’t you know?

S. Weasel on February 8, 2011 at 4:23 PM

Obama: Well, sir, there’s nothing on earth
Like a genuine,
Bona fide,
Electrified,
Six-car
Monorail!
What’s it called?
Monorail!
That’s right! Monorail!
……
SEIU: What about us brain-dead slobs?
Obama: You’ll be given cushy jobs.
Congress: Were you sent here by the devil?
Obama: No, good sir, I’m on the level.
Throw up your hands and raise your voice!
All: Monorail!
Obama: What’s it called?
All: Monorail!
Obama: Once again…
All: Monorail!
Congress: But Main Street’s still all cracked and broken…
Pelosi: Sorry, guys, the mob has spoken!
All: Monorail!
Monorail!

Monorail

Dr. Carlo Lombardi on February 8, 2011 at 4:24 PM

Vice President Joe Biden on Tuesday announced an ambitious $53 billion program to build new high-speed rail networks and make existing ones faster over the next six years.

Paint shiny new stripes on them.

Stripes make everything faster.

mudskipper on February 8, 2011 at 4:24 PM

Great idea!!
Californista is doing it and we are busted so you know it has to be a terrific thing to do. Also grow some pot along side the rails to sell as a government project.

dragondrop on February 8, 2011 at 4:24 PM

sputnik

sandee on February 8, 2011 at 4:24 PM

O/T: Recent push by MSM to make Obama look like a centrist/Reagan/sensible moderate/Superman/hot sexy stud is a FAIL.

Kataklysmic on February 8, 2011 at 4:18 PM

link fixed

Kataklysmic on February 8, 2011 at 4:24 PM

Why are Democrats so obsessed with trains?
joejm65 on February 8, 2011 at 4:19 PM

Built and run by unions.

Akzed on February 8, 2011 at 4:25 PM

John Galt… come out come out wherever you are!

upinak on February 8, 2011 at 4:25 PM

Why are Democrats so obsessed with trains?

joejm65 on February 8, 2011 at 4:19 PM

because of the law of killing >1 bird with 1 stone.

Approval of 1 HS Train (1 stone)

Kill car travel
Kill freedom to move
Kill choices of destination
Force you into their templates of movement, lifestyle, housing
Stupid you down to the train schedule (control)
Slush fund for union cronies
Not just jobs, but UNION jobs jobs
You can point at it and say “lookit my train!”
when it fails to work you subsidize it

It’s a democrat wet dream.

ted c on February 8, 2011 at 4:25 PM

They no longer want to ‘win’ the future, instead, they are just going to ‘seize’ it.

Winning implies there are risk of losing, while seizing means just that, they have the power and they can damn well pleased to do whatever.

Very apt metaphore. Always look to Biden to give us the few seconds truism.

Sir Napsalot on February 8, 2011 at 4:26 PM

Don’t they send cows to slaughterhouses in trains?

lorien1973 on February 8, 2011 at 4:28 PM

Clueless

bhawknine on February 8, 2011 at 4:17 PM

x10. Some one should point out to little Joey what happens when property is government secured for public use. (Hint: check with your local, state, and federal environmentalist) It would be easier to build a nuke plant.

Rovin on February 8, 2011 at 4:28 PM

Seriously, What in the f^&k is the obsession with high speed rail? Does no one in the Democrat party own a map?

Do they think trains can turn right and left? Do they think the “land fairy” tosses out parcels?

For the love of God, switch dead horses for a while and give this one a break.

Tim Zank on February 8, 2011 at 4:28 PM

Supertrain!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUERtAe73NI

paragon27x on February 8, 2011 at 4:29 PM

Look! if you monetize this out over 53 billion years its only a dollar a year; cheaper than a cup of coffee.

Geochelone on February 8, 2011 at 4:30 PM

Jenga tower – good analogy, Allah.

Alana on February 8, 2011 at 4:30 PM

Sheriff Joe apparently hasn’t checked prices at the grocery store lately. Ah, the rewards of investing for the future with freshly printed greenbacks.

a capella on February 8, 2011 at 4:30 PM

The people who say that some day high speed rail will be big in this country because it’s big in Europe remind me of the people who say that some day soccer will be big in this country because it’s big in Europe.

radjah shelduck on February 8, 2011 at 4:30 PM

Seizing the Future

STF(U)

Missy on February 8, 2011 at 4:31 PM

Watching the Reason video gave me an idea. If Joe and Barry think Amtrak and trains are “da bomb”, Republicans should challange the President to make all his campaign trips by train. I’d love to see Barry stammer..hu.hmm.ahh. until he finally submits and says “we’ll that wouldn’t be practical,”. It’d be comedy gold!

WisRich on February 8, 2011 at 4:31 PM

Light rail would help Americans move from one dustbowl to another during the coming domestic upheaval. So I support it.

Bishop on February 8, 2011 at 4:33 PM

Great idea!!
Californista is doing it and we are busted so you know it has to be a terrific thing to do. Also grow some pot along side the rails to sell as a government project.

dragondrop on February 8, 2011 at 4:24 PM

All aboard the Ganja Express! (everything will only seem slow)

Rovin on February 8, 2011 at 4:33 PM

Seriously, What in the f^&k is the obsession with high speed rail?

I will never get it either. But I suspect it has to do with the desire to get government and taxpayer dollars and union labor involved in as many infrastructure projects as possible.

Missy on February 8, 2011 at 4:33 PM

The people who say that some day high speed rail will be big in this country because it’s big in Europe remind me of the people who say that some day soccer will be big in this country because it’s big in Europe.

radjah shelduck on February 8, 2011 at 4:30 PM

and when we fail to adopt the John-Kerry-Europe-is-so-great positions, we’ll be called rednecks, backwater, racists and status quo lovers or something else…

ted c on February 8, 2011 at 4:33 PM

Seizing the Future

STF(U)

Missy on February 8, 2011 at 4:31 PM

Smack The Fools

Sounds better.

upinak on February 8, 2011 at 4:33 PM

Biden belongs in the little red caboose waving goodbuy as the sun sets.

fourdeucer on February 8, 2011 at 4:34 PM

Lets invest in a lightening fast Telegraph line!

Lets invest in planes that fly over 200 mph!

portlandon on February 8, 2011 at 4:35 PM

I have the perfect high speed train solution and once patented will make me a gazillion dollars. This system will need no new land, travel to virtually every city, and allow people to quickly travel from one end of the country to another. The genius of my plan is the trains will actually move high up in the air!…errrr wait, I’ll think of another plan!!!

trs on February 8, 2011 at 4:36 PM

Lets invest in a lightening fast Telegraph line!

Lets invest in planes that fly over 200 mph!

portlandon on February 8, 2011 at 4:35 PM

maybe they wish they were back in the Teddy Roosevelt era… where up and comings traveled via train around the country to spew their crap?

Hmmmmmm now only if they could get there FAST!

upinak on February 8, 2011 at 4:37 PM

Biden: Hey, let’s spend $53 billion on…

Democrats don’t do “spending cuts”.

Scrappy on February 8, 2011 at 4:37 PM

What if the high speed rail hits an animal.. bear, deer, elk, PETA protesters, etc. Will it splatter? Does the train have a scoop?

upinak on February 8, 2011 at 4:38 PM

Seriously, What in the f^&k is the obsession with high speed rail? Does no one in the Democrat party own a map?

Do they think trains can turn right and left? Do they think the “land fairy” tosses out parcels?

Tim Zank on February 8, 2011 at 4:28 PM

They’ve been playing too many games of “Ticket To Ride” for their own good.

They figure they can do what they want if they draw enough cards of the right color over the next few turns.

teke184 on February 8, 2011 at 4:38 PM

Why do Dems need high speed rail?

So ACORN voters can vote in many states at once.

faraway on February 8, 2011 at 4:38 PM

Trains are awesome, the way they stay on rails and really can’t go anywhere.

But I’m a dreamer… perhaps someday government investment will lead to individual vehicles that can be steered in every direction… and with an even greater commitment from the government we might even be able to create a machine that can fly.

You may say I’m a dreamer, but not the only one. Joe Biden will lead the way.

mankai on February 8, 2011 at 4:40 PM

As someone who works on a Class 1 Railroad, we don’t much like high speed passenger rail either. High speed rail means you can’t use the tracks for anything other than Passenger trains, the least efficient form of goods. Heavy freight cannot share the same tracks as these high speed trains for the simple reason that freight beats the crap out of the rail.

Canadian Imperialist Running Dog on February 8, 2011 at 4:41 PM

The only “high speed rail” worth $53 Billion would be the one which the angry mob uses to carry Biden and Obama out of DC and out of our lives!!!

landlines on February 8, 2011 at 4:44 PM

What if the high speed rail hits an animal.. bear, deer, elk, PETA protesters, etc. Will it splatter? Does the train have a scoop?
upinak on February 8, 2011 at 4:38 PM

Train doesn’t care, it happens all the time.

Signal Maintainers and Track Forces hate it, because they are often the ones stuck cleaning up the mess. We had one where an unknown animal was struck by a train at a crossing, the remains contaiminated the crossing bungalow, on the inside… the animal in question went through a 5″ door vent.

Canadian Imperialist Running Dog on February 8, 2011 at 4:45 PM

Seriously, What in the f^&k is the obsession with high speed rail?

I will never get it either. But I suspect it has to do with the desire to get government and taxpayer dollars and union labor involved in as many infrastructure projects as possible.

Missy on February 8, 2011 at 4:33 PM

If a stipulation was put on the project that rail workers couldn’t unionize, that all construction companies had to be from right to work states, prevailing wage requirements would be waived, and that on going operations could not be subsidized, I suspect they would walk away.

WisRich on February 8, 2011 at 4:45 PM

Everybody down at Cathy’s Diner wants zeppelin service to Scranton, right Joe?

Hening on February 8, 2011 at 4:46 PM

Train doesn’t care, it happens all the time.

Canadian Imperialist Running Dog on February 8, 2011 at 4:45 PM

Maybe in Canada. But I was being sarcastic actually. Step Dad was a engineer for the AKRR. And they left the “remians” on the side. Most of the trains (freight or passenger) have scoops in the front.

upinak on February 8, 2011 at 4:47 PM

Why are Democrats so obsessed with trains?

joejm65 on February 8, 2011 at 4:19 PM

Aside from their obsession with running people’s lives and creating more public employee voters who, in turn, contribute to their campaign chests and vote for them, I haven’t the faintest idea.

Dusty on February 8, 2011 at 4:47 PM

Why are Democrats so obsessed with trains?

joejm65 on February 8, 2011 at 4:19 PM

Efficient means to transport people to the camps they would so like to have.

Aviator on February 8, 2011 at 4:48 PM

No, no, no, no!!! Stupid, stupid, stupid!

Invest in my future: stop spending!

MeatHeadinCA on February 8, 2011 at 4:48 PM

Minnesota spent about $750 billion constructing a whole 12 miles of light rail line that runs basically between Minneapolis and Bloomington. It costs $20 million per year to operate but fares can only cover half of that, the rest is paid by state taxes and local county taxes.

Yeah, let’s do this on a national scale.

Bishop on February 8, 2011 at 4:49 PM

HighSpeed Bankruptcy!!

portlandon on February 8, 2011 at 4:50 PM

HighSpeed Bankruptcy!!

portlandon on February 8, 2011 at 4:50 PM

we are already there. Warp Speedy Snotty!

upinak on February 8, 2011 at 4:50 PM

Seizing the future didn’t work, soooooo:

We’ve got to seize the past!!!

…and besides ‘high speed rail’, there’s ‘light rail’ which will fix all the problems we have steering the empty buses around town….

/SARC>

landlines on February 8, 2011 at 4:51 PM

If a stipulation was put on the project that rail workers couldn’t unionize, that all construction companies had to be from right to work states, prevailing wage requirements would be waived, and that on going operations could not be subsidized, I suspect they would walk away.

[WisRich on February 8, 2011 at 4:45 PM]

Like they walked away from TSA? Seriously, the money would be doled our for 20 to 30 years. Stipulations like that would get changed to their liking in less than four.

Dusty on February 8, 2011 at 4:52 PM

In the inimitable words of Bugs Bunny… “What a maroon”!!

ultracon on February 8, 2011 at 4:52 PM

Democrats oppose tax cuts for the wealthy because “we can’t afford it” but then insist of spending on wasteful projects. Go figure.

MeatHeadinCA on February 8, 2011 at 4:56 PM

They like it because it’s a clarion call to their idiot voters, number one. Your average Democrat thinks that massive public transportation will change America into Europe and at the same time save Gaia from the evil SUV.

Mostly, though, the politicians know that it’s a public outlay that guarantees a certain and guaranteed level of government spending, government jobs and government control forever.

Asher on February 8, 2011 at 4:56 PM

If Joe and Barry think Amtrak and trains are “da bomb”, Republicans should challange the President to make all his campaign trips by train.

WisRich on February 8, 2011 at 4:31 PM

Let’s ground Air Force One for few months à la late 70′s John Madden, in the spirit of seizing the future of rail travel and all…

But after a while, even Madden got a motor home (bus) because the trains didn’t always go where he needed to be.

The Onion article isn’t that far off from the truth.

Fallon on February 8, 2011 at 4:56 PM

Securing the Future eh?

How do you usually “secure” things?

With chains and locks.

Mord on February 8, 2011 at 4:57 PM

Austin has been “building” light rail for years, had it up and running off and on for one month only to find that it wasn’t running: rails not installed correctly, switches at intersections not functioning, no warnings, no stops as scheduled. People rode it the first week while it was “free” (tax funded). But as soon as riders were required to buy passage, it ran empty. Back to fixing what was just bought and paid for, requiring more expenditures, as if it will EVER actually function on a regular schedule if at all. Five miles from city limits, it costs $12. per ride into downtown each way, and it’s not a straight shoot, and it isn’t any faster than taking the bus. Now who is really going to take the rail at that cost and on that schedule?

maverick muse on February 8, 2011 at 4:59 PM

Lets invest in a lightening fast Telegraph line!

Lets invest in planes that fly over 200 mph!

portlandon on February 8, 2011 at 4:35 PM

Don’t forget typewriters and buggy whips! Where would we be without them?

UltimateBob on February 8, 2011 at 5:00 PM

At some point haven’t you wasted enough money?

Lily on February 8, 2011 at 5:00 PM

I am sure Joe will handle this project…

… just as well as he has watching the STIMULUS money.

Oh, wait!

Seven Percent Solution on February 8, 2011 at 5:01 PM

theperfecteconomist on February 8, 2011 at 4:48 PM

Thanks for that!

DarkCurrent on February 8, 2011 at 5:02 PM

FUTURA NEMINI PROMITTUNTUR – the future is promised to no man.

Of course, Obama and Biden are not men.

Schadenfreude on February 8, 2011 at 5:04 PM

Remember, this is the same guy who stated that Obama was so smart, his brains were simply too big for his skull.

betsyz on February 8, 2011 at 5:05 PM

Democrats won”t be happy until this country goes south…American, fiscally.

chickasaw42 on February 8, 2011 at 5:06 PM

Seizing the Future Utopia!

STFU!

“Utopia is Hard”, I forgot who said that here…

orbitalair on February 8, 2011 at 5:08 PM

If Joe Biden has ridden Amtrak at least 7,900 times at an average subsidy of $50 per ticket *clicka clicka clicka* $395,000

Um, that’s a lot of tax money spent on Joe Biden. Wait, was he counting the trips as round trip or one way? It might be twice that amount.

Fallon on February 8, 2011 at 5:10 PM

Hey, let’s spend $53 billion on high-speed rail slow-speed unionbots!

SlimyBill on February 8, 2011 at 5:13 PM

The stacks of worthless money will be kindling for the stakes. Print some more, monkeys!

SirGawain on February 8, 2011 at 5:14 PM

WTF and with what money? Good grief.

MainelyRight on February 8, 2011 at 5:19 PM

Had Biden actually PAID what it cost to ride AmTrak those 7k times, he wouldn’t be pushing HSR today.

GarandFan on February 8, 2011 at 5:20 PM

Why are Democrats so obsessed with trains?

joejm65 on February 8, 2011 at 4:19 PM

Himmler liked trains, too.

Vashta.Nerada on February 8, 2011 at 5:24 PM

The problem with #1 is getting the land to lay the track and/or buying up the right-of-way from the existing rail companies.

Who says you have to BUY anything when you can rent it? Or are existing rail companies on the East Coast having record traffic on their lines as it is?

I don’t think we can afford this system either, for the same reasons as everyone else says here, but I also don’t think we can pave enough of America to accommodate everyone who wants to drive everywhere all at once. Remember, our tax dollars also subsidize the highway system. (They’re not all toll roads, remember? And if you want more, you have to buy more land for them, just like you would for rail.) A nationwide rail system should have been done in the 1950s, but we opted for the Interstate. Europe took a more balanced approach, which is why theirs is more successful than ours could ever be. A national rail system built today would break the bank, but one along the Eastern Seaboard could work, and much of the infrastructure is already there (and underutilized).

manwithblackhat on February 8, 2011 at 5:24 PM

Biden: Hey, let’s spend $53 billion on high-speed rail

hillbillyjim: Why?

hillbillyjim on February 8, 2011 at 5:25 PM

Japan and China are already building high-speed rail, and “there’s no reason, none,” that the United States cannot do the same, Biden said.

Here are some reasons: population, distance, and topography.

There are three main lines for the TGV high-speed rail lines in France, all running through relatively flat land between large cities about 200 to 300 miles apart.

High-speed trains can only run on special track with very gradual curves and inclines, and there must not be any grade crossings. Even in France, high-speed trains run at lower speeds through congested areas, where the wind from a high-speed train could knock people off their feet while they wait in train stations.

If it takes 1 1/2 hours to get to an airport and go thru security, and a 1/2 hour taxi ride in the arrival city, a downtown-to-downtown train trip (at 180 mph) is only faster than a plane for distances less than about 500 miles.

The investment in high-speed rail can only be justified for (1) two very large cities (for enough passengers) (2) separated by less than 500 miles, and (3) with only flat rural land in between.

The Northeast corridor (Washington to Boston) is too congested, and people would want stops in Philly and New York, which would slow the trip down. San Francisco to Los Angeles is much too mountainous–the cost would be enormous.

There may be routes where high-speed rail could make money, such as Houston-Dallas, Chicago-St. Louis, or Miami-Atlanta, but then why should the government pay for it? Why not let an existing railroad company build it and run it?

Steve Z on February 8, 2011 at 5:25 PM

Biden On the rails? 7,900 times
Biden Off the rails? Permanently

ziggyville on February 8, 2011 at 5:27 PM

manwithblackhat on February 8, 2011 at 5:24 PM

Your suppositions ignore the fact of a more consolidated, clustered and crowded population that naturally exists in Europe, due to, among other considerations, the fact that they’ve been there a tad longer than we, and have less land per person to take into account.

Logistics.

hillbillyjim on February 8, 2011 at 5:29 PM

Why not let an existing railroad company build it and run it?

Steve Z on February 8, 2011 at 5:25 PM

Exactly. If it makes sense, it’ll be profitable.

The beauty of the free market.

hillbillyjim on February 8, 2011 at 5:31 PM

Bbbbbbut Europe and China and Japan have fast trains. So if we don’t we’ll fall behind.
– libtards

angryed on February 8, 2011 at 5:32 PM

We know what you’re thinking – how much gold would the government need to come up with in order to pay $53 billion for high speed rail at today’s highly elevated gold prices?

Using this tool, with today’s spot price of $1,364.20 per ounce of gold, it would take a solid gold cube with sides measuring 12.6 feet each, weighing over 2.4 million pounds. Or rather, over 1,200 tons of gold!

ironman on February 8, 2011 at 5:36 PM

Hey how many gize does it take to lay down some hard steel rail? 20. 1 guy laying it down with 19 perverts watching.

kerplunk.

jbh45 on February 8, 2011 at 5:37 PM

“We need to close the high-speed rail gap before the CHICOMs get to and from work faster than we do!”

BobMbx on February 8, 2011 at 5:38 PM

Using this tool, with today’s spot price of $1,364.20 per ounce of gold, it would take a solid gold cube with sides measuring 12.6 feet each, weighing over 2.4 million pounds. Or rather, over 1,200 tons of gold!

ironman on February 8, 2011 at 5:36 PM

And Chuck Norris could deliver it…in a paper bag.

BobMbx on February 8, 2011 at 5:40 PM

Japan and China are already building high-speed rail, and “there’s no reason, none,” that the United States cannot do the same, Biden said.

98% of the population of these countries live on the 2nd floor or higher. (That means they have high density population centers..esp Japan)

I can’t see my neighbors. But if Joey want’s to build a train line to my house, God bless him.

BobMbx on February 8, 2011 at 5:43 PM

Your suppositions ignore the fact of a more consolidated, clustered and crowded population that naturally exists in Europe …

hillbillyjim on February 8, 2011 at 5:29 PM

Your suppositions ignore the fact that I was confining MY suppositions to the Eastern Seaboard, which isn’t exactly like crossing Montana. You will note that I otherwise concur with the majority.

Logistics. Exactly.

manwithblackhat on February 8, 2011 at 5:44 PM

Low Speed Joe on a milk run.

profitsbeard on February 8, 2011 at 5:50 PM

Comment pages: 1 2