Should canada have high-speed rail?

[bobnoorduyn]

It's pretty difficult and impractical to do a financial or even technical assessment of a concept when it's still in the discussion stages. On a bigger scale, I don't think they were busy figuring out why they couldn't go to the moon when JFK said they were going there by "the end of the decade" back in the early 60s.

Like I've said before, Sir John A. had a vision - a national railroad to link the country together (by keeping the Americans from taking over the western part of it). It seems to have worked fairly well.

Well, you might notice a common thread here, and if you've forgotten, the race to the moon was a Cold War exercise. The Soviets beat us to space, we'll beat 'em to the moon. Wars, or threats of them are ripe breeding grounds for innovation. I personally don't want that to be the impetus for progress, though the advancement is good, the human cost is too high.

Mind you, we apparently don't have any leaders around with that kind of vision - which is demonstrated by the fact that we don't have much of a "national vision" for the future, so our alternative seems to be to simply think short term and leave the future thinking to "someone else."

There is an old and very true expression that says, "If you don't go ahead, you'll go backwards" and perhaps we should be paying more attention to it. Countries don't progress by accident, it's planned. And planning starts with a vision.

What's our vision today? Do we have one? If we do, I haven't been made aware of it. Vast areas of land are one of our 'national treasures' but also one of our big challenges. Imagining what something like a high-speed rail system could do - overlaid on top of some sort of vision for the future - might help it all make more sense.

About as goofy as trying to figure out where Canada is heading, and how it's going to get there! Call it the "big picture of the future", or even a "vision."

The problem with a national "vision", or leaders wth one, is that it ends up being someone's birthchild. Politicians use them to bolster their egos, gain favour, gain power. If it is a failed "vision", they will pump rediculous amounts money into it, our money. Stalin had a vision, so did Mao, not all visions are benevolent or altruistic. A entrpreneurial vision, on the other hand, incurs some risk without an infinite flow of our capital and requires some caution. But the driving force is still money.

 

[talloola]

Does anyone have any idea where canada would get the money
needed to build a bullet train from coast to coast, with
the huge country we have and such a small population.
I would think 'that' money has much more important areas to
be spent, other than a train that goes so fast, one will
almost fly across the country, 'and' for what.
The big waste of the 'people's' money spent on the vancouver
olympics, would look like a drop in the ocean, compared to
a venture like that.

 

[bobnoorduyn]

As you pointed out earlier, WWII was a long time ago in a very different society. I'm talking about today's Japan. It is different in so many ways.

It is different in many ways, but like any other country with a long history and very little immigration, it is the same in many ways too. Customs don't erode so much even if society appears to change. We live on a contenent of such diverse ethnicity we don't really have customs we can call our own that haven't been imported or borrowed from others. It is pretty hard to have a collective national mindset in that case. Especially when we have a province that considers itself a nation. That's why I say comparing ourselves to Japan, or even France, Norway, Italy, is nearly impossible. I wouldn't even compare ourselves to the UK, they've changed a lot in the past 30 years, and not for the better I'm afraid, but I digress.

 

[bobnoorduyn]

Does anyone have any idea where canada would get the money
needed to build a bullet train from coast to coast, with
the huge country we have and such a small population.
I would think 'that' money has much more important areas to
be spent, other than a train that goes so fast, one will
almost fly across the country, 'and' for what.
The big waste of the 'people's' money spent on the vancouver
olympics, would look like a drop in the ocean, compared to
a venture like that.

I think you partly answered your own question. The people are the biggest source of capital. It would only fly, so to speak, if it were for service that the private sector couldn't provide, and even then... I worked for Ontario Northland at one time and they did provide that service until someone got ambitious and started competing with the private sector. That turned a wee bit ugly.

I would say the best chance would be high traffic routes in high density areas are the most viable locations, where driving and flying are either just too arduous or too time consuming. Again, the private sector would have to fill the bill. AmTrak anyone?

 

[talloola]

I think you partly answered your own question. The people are the biggest source of capital. It would only fly, so to speak, if it were for service that the private sector couldn't provide, and even then... I worked for Ontario Northland at one time and they did provide that service until someone got ambitious and started competing with the private sector. That turned a wee bit ugly.

I would say the best chance would be high traffic routes in high density areas are the most viable locations, where driving and flying are either just too arduous or too time consuming. Again, the private sector would have to fill the bill. AmTrak anyone?

Yes, I agree with you, ontario and quebec will be the first,
the west has no need for that type of train, with exception
'maybe', for workers going to and from vancouver from the
fraser valley, but, still not enough population to cover
the high cost.

 

[L Gilbert]

Ah, so long routes don't cost any more than short routes. I see.

Considering the fact that avgas costs money, people like to get paid more for working longer, etc. longer routes cost more., yes.

Balogna.

You misread what he said. He said it IS physically possible.

.........I don't believe you.

I don't believe him either. It takes a little work sometimes to convince a government something is a good idea, but when gov't catches on it can heap wads of our dough into a project. Private concerns are not necessary. EG, some freakin asshat thought it'd be cool if the Gliberal gov't of the day bought "The Voice of Fire" for $1.8 million and stuck it in the national gallery. Voice of Fire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It seems to me that Canada already has a national railway, anyway.

 

[L Gilbert]

Really?

From Folkestone, England to Calais, France in about a half hour.

 

[L Gilbert]

I'm saying it is hard to compare ourselves with Japan, it was a defacto dictatorship until the end of WWII, but people are still willing, or eager even, to do what the leader(s) say(s). The incident in the Tunnel could have been a major disaster rather than major inconvenience, but I'll leave it at that. I'm not saying either that it is impossible, but there has to be reward for the risk, the love of trains, while important, (Canada's other airline's success is due in large part to a love of airplanes),isn't enough to get a viable rail system going.

Really? Look at what I said about the Glibs buying the "Voice of Fire". Governments have spent lots on projects before without a return, I can't see why intercity lines are a big deal. connect enough of them and we'd have a countrywide rail line.
And you are wrong about the Japanese. They are highly competitive even amongst themselves.

Prairie folks bought up spur lines after the mainline dropped them, leaving many farmers without reasonable means to get their goods to market. This is a co-operative effort that seems to be paying dividends, so I'm not saying it won't work. But they already had the infrastructure largely in place. If there is a market, a plan, and a reasonable possibility of a good return on investment, there is a chance. But I don't want to see the govenment being a stakeholder. It cannot be in competition with private enterprise in a free market economy.

What has stopped it from doing just that before?

 

[L Gilbert]

I'm sure you would stop laughing had you been in China or Pearl harbour when they were invaded by forces willing to die for their emperor, for the ultimate reward of Senshi. Japanese workers, at least in the past, worked extremely long hours with little time off. Family life, if there was any to be had, suffered greatly. This is a work ethic that led to family breakdown, burnout, and suicide, (though probably not by means of seppuku), possibly due to no longer being able to perform to their company's expetations and losing face. It may have changed now as well, but JAL captains were not equal to the rest of the crew, they were management, Commanders essentially, kind of a my way or the highway arrangement. They have an interesting history, and it can take more than a few generations for old ways, good or bad, in any society, to fade away.

Yes, they can act very well in concert.
If they encounter a problem they are quite good at focusing on it and solving it.
Post WW2 Japan is not what Japan is today. Japan has changed over the years, unlike Canada.

 

[L Gilbert]

Well, you might notice a common thread here, and if you've forgotten, the race to the moon was a Cold War exercise. The Soviets beat us to space, we'll beat 'em to the moon. Wars, or threats of them are ripe breeding grounds for innovation. I personally don't want that to be the impetus for progress, though the advancement is good, the human cost is too high.

You might have something there. Perhaps we could talk the USA into telling Ottawa unless we have a Canadian version of Japan's bullet train, they will invade. Maybe that would get Ottawa off its Criscobutt.

The problem with a national "vision", or leaders wth one, is that it ends up being someone's birthchild. Politicians use them to bolster their egos, gain favour, gain power.

So? It got done. Who gives a crap if Banting got a fat head after he developed Insulin? The results of what he did far outweighs any silly notion of ego.

If it is a failed "vision", they will pump rediculous amounts money into it, our money.

They do anyway. Dump that freakin dumbass gun registry and pump the money into a useful project.

Stalin had a vision, so did Mao, not all visions are benevolent or altruistic.

Stalin was an ass and caused major problems for his people. Mao is still highly regarded by a lot of the Chinese people.

A entrpreneurial vision, on the other hand, incurs some risk without an infinite flow of our capital and requires some caution. But the driving force is still money.

Yep. A little at a time.
But, as wifey said, sit back and relax, Bob. But only if you think you can. If the thought takes too much effort, forget it.

 

[L Gilbert]

Does anyone have any idea where canada would get the money
needed to build a bullet train from coast to coast, with
the huge country we have and such a small population.
I would think 'that' money has much more important areas to
be spent, other than a train that goes so fast, one will
almost fly across the country, 'and' for what.
The big waste of the 'people's' money spent on the vancouver
olympics, would look like a drop in the ocean, compared to
a venture like that.

Joint operations between feds, provinces, municipalities, and companies could do it. Especially if governments dumped stupid things like gun registries.

 

[L Gilbert]

It is different in many ways, but like any other country with a long history and very little immigration, it is the same in many ways too. Customs don't erode so much even if society appears to change. We live on a contenent of such diverse ethnicity we don't really have customs we can call our own that haven't been imported or borrowed from others. It is pretty hard to have a collective national mindset in that case. Especially when we have a province that considers itself a nation. That's why I say comparing ourselves to Japan, or even France, Norway, Italy, is nearly impossible. I wouldn't even compare ourselves to the UK, they've changed a lot in the past 30 years, and not for the better I'm afraid, but I digress.

Yeah, nothing can unite Canadians into action. Forget it, folks. Bob's right, we Canucks are useless.

 

[bobnoorduyn]

Really? Look at what I said about the Glibs buying the "Voice of Fire". Governments have spent lots on projects before without a return, I can't see why intercity lines are a big deal. connect enough of them and we'd have a countrywide rail line.

Yeah, and what was that other one, the two red rectangles on a white background, and the sh*tstorm that one created too. Governments, especially the Glibs are wonderful custodians of our money, 'cause they think it's theirs. So you trust them with it then?

 

[bobnoorduyn]

Who gives a crap if Banting got a fat head after he developed Insulin? The results of what he did far outweighs any silly notion of ego.

Banting was a politician??

 

[talloola]

Yeah, and what was that other one, the two red rectangles on a white background, and the sh*tstorm that one created too. Governments, especially the Glibs are wonderful custodians of our money, 'cause they think it's theirs. So you trust them with it then?

They're all like that with our money.

 

[L Gilbert]

Yeah, and what was that other one, the two red rectangles on a white background, and the sh*tstorm that one created too. Governments, especially the Glibs are wonderful custodians of our money, 'cause they think it's theirs. So you trust them with it then?

*shrugs* I don't trust any government. But, sometimes they fluke out and do something good. Do you think that if a private outfit did it, it'd be free?

 

[L Gilbert]

Banting was a politician??

OK, you didn't specify what sort of leader you were referring to so I just picked a name out of memory.
Tommy Douglas developed the first working healthcare system in Canada. Who cares if he got a fat head over it?

 

[L Gilbert]

They're all like that with our money.

... and private companies are greedy and gouge us.
Perhaps Bob is right. We shouldn't try to do anything because it'll cost money.

 

[bobnoorduyn]

Joint operations between feds, provinces, municipalities, and companies could do it.

First, why don't these government agencies get together and get rail freight back to where it was? Oh yeah, they cut funding in the first place, and the trucking industry enjoyed a massive expansion. If the governments start to fund railways again who do you think will be crying fowl? I would love to see fewer trucks beating up the highways and more trains hauling freight, but I know a lot of folks who would lose thier livelihoods who would disagree with me.

Enough people are sick of government subsidizing businesses as it is. Do you think they'll put up with more, especially the people who will be impacted negatively? Governments have an abysmal record when it comes to picking winners and losers. The loser becomes the money pit and the winner goes broke. I'm sure we all know a few for-instances. But it's politics, that is what has to be kept out of the equasion because it sabotages any chances of honest profit. You can't compete with government.

Especially if governments dumped stupid things like gun registries.

Well, that's a puppy that should be given a quick and merciful death.

 

[JLM]

First, why don't these government agencies get together and get rail freight back to where it was? Oh yeah, they cut funding in the first place, and the trucking industry enjoyed a massive expansion. If the governments start to fund railways again who do you think will be crying fowl? I would love to see fewer trucks beating up the highways and more trains hauling freight, but I know a lot of folks who would lose thier livelihoods who would disagree with me.

Enough people are sick of government subsidizing businesses as it is. Do you think they'll put up with more, especially the people who will be impacted negatively? Governments have an abysmal record when it comes to picking winners and losers. The loser becomes the money pit and the winner goes broke. I'm sure we all know a few for-instances. But it's politics, that is what has to be kept out of the equasion because it sabotages any chances of honest profit. You can't compete with government.



Well, that's a puppy that should be given a quick and merciful death.

With the exception of very small geographic locations with high popuation density and easy terrain, the construction of routes for bullet trains are fiscally impossible.