YES!

Yes!  Motion carries (at 220 mph)

Of course I'll vote yes!  It's time we catch to the advanced mehtods travel in Europe and Asia.

No, why should my money be looted from me, so that it can be used as a revenue generation tool for the state, and for a number of other corporations? They can fund it themselves. This is so stupid, vote to have your money wasted on it, so that you can spend your money on it every single time you want to use it. Not to mention, if the government is involved, why in hell does anyone believe it will even work at all? Do I get profit sharing? No. Do I get stock? No. Is it free to ride? No. Do I have to pay for it? Yes. Hmmmmm.... sounds like a raw deal.

John Braveo

 1.  It'll stop 10 lane highways from being built through pristine areas.

2.   It'll cut down on the amount of fuel needed to move goods and people from the Mexican border to Alaska.

3.   It'll make travel to metropolitian areas faster, cheaper and easier.

4.  It'll drag us out of the 19th century into the 20th centrury.  Maybe the rest of the world has the right idea for once.

Yes.

Fantastic. If a business wants to make it, let them. And if I deem it necessary, I'll give them my money. Until then, this is corporatist fascism. Taking my money, to make their own.

Why haven't we started it already? YES I'll vote for it 100 times. The initial investment will pay off, because it will generate more jobs, and will improve the transportation throughout the state. 

Your going to get a yes vote from me on this one.  I would use it too.  If I could get to SF in two hours?  Hello that makes for a nice dinner date! 

Yes!

Oh I am soooooo voting for this! I don't care if it costs money, I'll gladly pay my share because this would be so useful to so many people.

 Until then, this is corporatist fascism

Never use big words if you don't comprehend their meaning.

As for the topic at hand - this is one spending bill I'll definitely vote for.  One thing to think about is that such a project would actually stimulate our economy, as it creates jobs needed to not only build the system, but maintain it.  This could also solidify Bakersfield as a transportation hub.  I'm pretty sure most of the local industries here will support this.

Yes.  But then mass public transit is something that California has always lacked.

Oh?? What is it called then when corporations control the government and use it for their own purposes? Who was that one guy, oh yeah, Mussolini, described fascism specifically as this corporate control. The only difference between this and Blackwater is fewer people will be killed.

What I'd like to know is how SPENDING hundred billions of dollars that don't exist, stimulates the economy? If you haven't noticed, this country/state is already in a recession, chief. Yeah, more debt under the guise of public service is just what we need. It's been going so well as the dollar has lost 30% of it's value over the last 7 years. Vote or not, taxes fund it, corporations profit. Hence the need for the Republic opposed to "democracy". To protect freedom from idiots.

johnbravo - explain to everyone here how exactly corporation would be controlling the government if a high speed rail system was built here? 

What I'd like to know is how SPENDING hundred billions of dollars that don't exist, stimulates the economy?

Considering this project would be funded through bonds, the money would exist, so long as there are enough investors.  Ever heard the term "you gotta spend money to make money" ?  If they can make this system into something which upon completion would begin to generate revenue, there shouldn't be a problem paying back the people who bought into the bond program.

Would I be paid back? Nope. Sure wouldn't, not one red cent. Federal money does not exist, every cent spent is debt. Tax money is all gone before it gets spent on anything, it's all going towards this corporate "bailout" and "subsidies", but really, it's just collusion. I lose money, they profit. That's not a coincidence, no matter how fun it is to deny it. "Bonds" are never repaid and you can tell because the country is bankrupt. How can they lend money they don't have? They don't, and they don't have to, because it's not their money they spend. It's just one more black hole with money disappearing.

Besides, pretend that $42 bil is legitimate... with interest on 20 years, easily eclipses $100 billion. What does that equate the ticket price to, for this nonsense to profitable? They're already saying $55 per, in now conditions. in 2030? Inflation alone makes that closer to $90 a ride, then ask yourself if 100 something million people are really going to use it a year? Is this thing an aircraft carrier or did I miss something? It's delusional, visions of grandeur. Who really needs to get from SF to LA, that won't fly, faster? This does nothing.

Look, there aren't enough investors, hence taking tax money? it means specifically, the private sector can't fund it. I don't benefit if the government or corporations start making profit. I just fund their mistakes and failed projects, and then get stuck with the government debt again for being forced to fund it.

I vote yes.

Who really needs to get from SF to LA, that won't fly, faster? This does nothing.

It seems to me you're not a supporter of building up infrastructure.  There are plenty of people who would use the rail system, especially here in Bakersfield where there are many people who commute from here to LA on a daily basis.  There are also plenty of people who visit family all over the state that could easily benefit from such a system.  I'll give you a great example - there are tons of Raider fans in this area who'd love to be able to get up to Oakland for a game and get back home in the same day without worrying about whether they can drink a beer at the game or not and then drive.

Look, there aren't enough investors, hence taking tax money? it means specifically, the private sector can't fund it. I don't benefit if the government or corporations start making profit. I just fund their mistakes and failed projects, and then get stuck with the government debt again for being forced to fund it.

Let me ask you - what public funding do you support?

Oh, yeah, count me in! I already think that they should start running a passenger train through Tehachapi again.

Let me ask you - what public funding do you support?

Post offices, congress authorized military in time of war only as a defense, firefighters. At this point however, generated revenues and more specific taxes should be able to pay for them and the few others, as opposed to income taxes. Like gas tax, and postage stamps, public utility taxes.

Raiders play for 3 months out of the year... And look if they want to they can fund this themselves with investment. I don't care about them, and shouldn't be asked to pay for their convenience. This highspeed rail website admits, that profits are only going to be a billion a year? You don't actually think that will even pay back the debts' interest do you? It will never see the light of day. Even their numbers do not work.

Are you taking into account the fact that this rail system would decrease the total cost needed to maintain roads? What about the decreased air pollution? 

Gas taxes, already SHOULD pay for roads. Not to mention, have you noticed the roads outside of town? They aren't maintained now, why would that change when the government incurs more loss?

Pollution? Minimal. Cars are greener than powerplants at this point, and this suckers is going to use a great deal of electricity. 1/100 of all power used is going to be for this single train. But, the "capabilities" are there, right. Well, good luck. It's already taken 12 years to get to this point in the rail project, don't hold your breath on renewable energy. Not to mention, the open road between cities is very green. Trees work wonders. In town, this does nothing, it's a city-city transporter.

So you don't believe that solar power and/or non-emissions forms of power wouldn't be able to power this? Wow... you really do have a closed mind.

OK, whatever. That was lame and pathetic congratulations. But even still, they don't even admit that it will run on renewable energy, only that it might be able to. If 12% of the energy is renewable in this state, how can they determine that only that portion is going towards the train? But then the environmental cult requires fixed ideology.

What took so long? Of course I'd vote yes.

The Obama speech I attended this Saturday, he talked about building a bullet train system across the US since we are the only developed nation without it. Creating such infrastructure would definitely lessen the congestion on interstates and highways (and create jobs).