Here's the latest on California's high-speed rail project:
Early March: Construction company notifies HSR authority that it will not complete a section of the project through Kings County until 2025.
Late March: Authority shrugs, releases new business plan that says it will be done in 2023:
Later in March: LA Times asks about this, is told it's no big deal, just "part of a back-and-forth bargaining process normal in the construction industry."
It is left as an exercise for the reader to decide if even the 2025 date is likely to be met.
"It is left as an exercise for the reader to decide if even the 2025 date is likely to be met."
This reader is more concerned about "CDC Directot issues emotional warning about rising cases - 'Right now - I am scared!'"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/03/29/coronavirus-covid-live-updates-us/
If Kevin plus the entire Republican Party and its propaganda machine had been constantly kibitzing and scolding FDR over his spending on warships and fighter planes, all of Europe would surely be part of the Third Reich and China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, the Philippines and Vietnam, etc., would still be part of the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.
Nah, the contractors probably all came in under budget.
Or maybe should someone be minding the gap over "that vision thing"?
In other words, leading the way on a huge project is always subject to unexpected costs and delays. The only question is whether you have the guts to stick it out on something that is an obvious long-term necessity -- not only for California but for the rest of the country as well. A necessity, that is, unless we are happy with the U.S. gradually descending to third world status.
1. There's a big difference between unexpected costs and delays, and lowballing and lying. Obviously, if something unforeseen happens and something costs more than it was intended to, that doesn't necessarily mean anything in the larger scheme of things.
But it matters a lot if sponsors of a project deliberately lie about the expected cost to try and get the public to pay for it, knowing that it will really end up costing far more than the amounts they set forth. And it also matters a lot if the sponsors deliberately try to utilize the sunk cost fallacy, by building the cheapest, least needed segment first, hoping to then blackmail the taxpayers into far bigger outlays to complete the project. CHSR sponsors did both those things.
2. LA-SF high speed rail isn't possible at reasonable cost. The fact that you may define it as a "necessity" is irrelevant if it cannot actually be built.
And it can't. They don't know how to traverse the earthquake-prone mountainous terrain between LA and Bakersfield. It can't be done at any cost that California taxpayers would want to pay.
There's nothing wrong with high speed rail in places where it is possible to build it at not-outlandish cost. What was wrong was this particular city pairing. You actually have to study the feasibility of projects before you start them.
There will never be a completed high speed rail line between LA and San Francisco- and by the way, far from "third world status", California will continue to be paradise on earth without it.
CA HSR at its core is merely a device to further open the Central Valley to be bedroom communities for SF and LA metros. Further expansion of an already more than large enough population.
Ever get the sense that Drum is so anti-train to prove he's not actually a mildly embarrassed tech guy who still give too much credence to Ayn Rand?
I don't think he's anti-train at all. He's against one really stupid fantasy train.