Home Open Account Help 169 users online

Passenger Trains > "Feds clear Gateway bridge for funding — but not tunnel"


Date: 02/11/20 08:28
"Feds clear Gateway bridge for funding — but not tunnel"
Author: joemvcnj




Date: 02/11/20 09:24
Re: "Feds clear Gateway bridge for funding — but not tunnel"
Author: highgreengraphics

They're waiting for the Hudson Tubes to collapse so many people will drown in the disaster, many more will be severely inconvenienced and even hogtied in the resulting traffic jams, then they will have to muster a gigantic force and undertaking to get new tubes built, sunk and installed in the least amount of time, still 4 years, resulting in cost overruns that will at least double the price. Then after they are done and passengers are going through the then- Memorial Tunnels again, stress and seal cracks will soon develop because they had to be constructed so hastily, and they, too will become a maintenance nightmare in short order, closing them again intermittently for week-and month-long periods of time until they have to be replaced again, using "more modern" methods, at much less than the century the original ones lasted. Wouldn't it just be easier and more beneficial to construct new tubes next to the old, so that the time can be taken do do the new ones right to begin with? === === = === JLH



Date: 02/11/20 10:26
Re: "Feds clear Gateway bridge for funding — but not tunnel"
Author: Lackawanna484

Getting Portal bridge construction under way is a good sign.



Date: 02/11/20 12:23
Re: "Feds clear Gateway bridge for funding — but not tunnel"
Author: ClubCar

We don't need new tunnels haven't you heard, we will be riding in self driving cars everywhere and we don't have to worry as the computers operating these self driving cars will take good care of us, that is until the computers and the system guiding all these cars gets hacked and then we just sit and wait until it gets fixed.  It might take days, weeks, months, who knows.  Why worry?  Our politicians are not worried about us.  They don't believe that this can happen.  But who really knows?  There are always hackers out there trying to disrupt us.
Our politicians are living in a dream world right now.  They cannot see the woods for the trees.  We all realize that these railroad tunnels need to be replaced, but the politicians just put their heads in the sand just like the ostriches do.
Trust me, in many ways our country is in trouble.
John in White Marsh, Maryland



Date: 02/11/20 12:42
Re: "Feds clear Gateway bridge for funding — but not tunnel"
Author: restricted_speed

Everything can be hacked.  That's just one of the problems.

And yes, I think self-driving care will force Amtrak out of existence eventually - but not necessarily in the northeast.

Those Hudson River tubes need to be built.



Date: 02/11/20 12:46
Re: "Feds clear Gateway bridge for funding — but not tunnel"
Author: rbenko

Let's all calm down - the tunnels are in no imminent danger of a catastrophic collapse.  The major concern today is the possibility of a failure to one of the tunnels that could take a tunnel out of commission for an extended period of time, thus drastically decreasing service levels to/from Penn Station from the west.  New tunnels are needed in the long term to allow the existing tunnels to be taken out of service and completely overhauled, thus allowing a continuation of current service levels.

I agree with Lackawanna484 - greenlighting the Gateway bridge is a good first step.  The existing, outdated, deteriorating Portal bridge currently causes way more delays to traffic than the North River tunnels, and is a bottleneck to traffic between Secaucus Transfer and Kearny Junction.



Date: 02/11/20 13:39
Re: "Feds clear Gateway bridge for funding — but not tunnel"
Author: abyler

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Getting Portal bridge construction under way is a
> good sign.

Welding Portal Bridge permanently shut would be a better sign, as the replacement $100M span could be floated into place and the rest of the $1.7 billion reidrected towards the tunnels and 4 tracks across the Meadows.



Date: 02/11/20 13:39
Re: "Feds clear Gateway bridge for funding — but not tunnel"
Author: Nomad

highgreengraphics Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They're waiting for the Hudson Tubes to collapse
> so many people will drown in the disaster,

Well...either that, or they're waiting for NY/NJ to submit a proposal for the tunnels that actually meets the legal requirements for obtaining federal funding...



Date: 02/11/20 15:34
Re: "Feds clear Gateway bridge for funding — but not tunnel"
Author: livesteamer

This is going to "light a firestorm" of disagreement from others, but as someone who lives in the great midwest and who, in all likihood, will never ride on the NEC through NYC, I don't want my taxpayer dollars paying for this project.  Let the riding passengers pay a user fee to use the tunnel,  just as airline passengers get charged for landing fees and cruise ship passengers get charged port fees.

Marty Harrison
Knob Noster, MO



Date: 02/11/20 15:44
Re: "Feds clear Gateway bridge for funding — but not tunnel"
Author: Lackawanna484

livesteamer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is going to "light a firestorm" of
> disagreement from others, but as someone who lives
> in the great midwest and who, in all likihood,
> will never ride on the NEC through NYC, I don't
> want my taxpayer dollars paying for this
> project.  Let the riding passengers pay a user
> fee to use the tunnel,  just as airline
> passengers get charged for landing fees and cruise
> ship passengers get charged port fees.

There was a user fee on Amtrak and NJ Transit passengers in the aborted proposal.

There was general agreement among President Trump, Governor Cuomo, Governors Christie and Murphy, all four senators and Rod Frelinghuysen to get the deal done.

The President torpedoed the agreement. Whether in a pique with Mr Schumer, or concern from his real estate buddies isn't clear.

Posted from Android



Date: 02/11/20 17:55
Re: "Feds clear Gateway bridge for funding — but not tunnel"
Author: bioyans

livesteamer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is going to "light a firestorm" of
> disagreement from others, but as someone who lives
> in the great midwest and who, in all likihood,
> will never ride on the NEC through NYC, I don't
> want my taxpayer dollars paying for this
> project.  Let the riding passengers pay a user
> fee to use the tunnel,  just as airline
> passengers get charged for landing fees and cruise
> ship passengers get charged port fees.

Maybe you can start by sending the NJ and NY residents their federal tax money back, since both receive less federal tax money, as compared to what they generate, than your home state.

Next time you want to whine about what "your" tax money is paying for, maybe you should make sure your own state is pulling its own weight.

Posted from Android



Date: 02/11/20 20:01
Re: "Feds clear Gateway bridge for funding — but not tunnel"
Author: RuleG

ClubCar Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Our politicians are living in a dream world right
> now.  They cannot see the woods for the trees. 
> We all realize that these railroad tunnels need to
> be replaced, but the politicians just put their
> heads in the sand just like the ostriches do.
> Trust me, in many ways our country is in trouble.
> John in White Marsh, Maryland

????

With all due respect, there are politicians who are not living in a dream world with respect to the tunnel.  On February 6, 2020, a number of US Senators sent a letter to Federal Railroad Administrator Ronald Batory expressing their disappointment that the FRA has not finalized and approved the Environmental Impact Statement for a new tunnel beneath the Hudson River.  They are:

Charles Schumer
Kristen Gillenbrand
Richard Blumenthal
Chris Coons
Cory Booker
Robert Menendez
Bob Casey
Jack Reed
Sheldon Whitehouse
Elizabeth Warren
Chris Van Hollen
Christopher Murphy
Edward Markey
Tom Carper
Benjamin Cardin

They definitely are not putting their heads in the sand.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/12/20 16:54 by RuleG.



Date: 02/11/20 20:11
Re: "Feds clear Gateway bridge for funding — but not tunnel"
Author: lordsigma

Airport fees do not necessarily cover everything. Like with roads, states often have to dip into the general fund (or go after federal money) to complete big projects - user fees/gas taxes don’t cover everything.

Posted from iPhone



Date: 02/11/20 22:35
Re: "Feds clear Gateway bridge for funding — but not tunnel"
Author: 4thDistrict

ClubCar Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We don't need new tunnels haven't you heard, we
> will be riding in self driving cars everywhere and
> we don't have to worry as the computers operating
> these self driving cars will take good care of us,

Self driving cars? Now some are talking about, and even testing, self "driving" flying taxis. What could possibly go wrong??



Date: 02/12/20 03:37
Re: "Feds clear Gateway bridge for funding — but not tunnel"
Author: abyler

lordsigma Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Airport fees do not necessarily cover everything.
> Like with roads, states often have to dip into the
> general fund (or go after federal money) to
> complete big projects - user fees/gas taxes
> don’t cover everything.

They don't cover anything, that's not how construction is financed.

Airport construction is financed with bonds, the ticket taxes and fees cover the ongoing interest payments.  There is zero intention of ever repaying the bonds, they are just rolled over in perpetuity.  That's how, for example, DFW Airport is more in debt today than they were in 1972.

The tax revenue is just a finance scheme to allow the creation of new money through bond issuance.



Date: 02/12/20 10:21
Re: "Feds clear Gateway bridge for funding — but not tunnel"
Author: bluesboyst

restricted_speed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Everything can be hacked.  That's just one of the
> problems.
>
> And yes, I think self-driving care will force
> Amtrak out of existence eventually - but not
> necessarily in the northeast.
>
> Those Hudson River tubes need to be built.

Ha ha ha... self driving cars....They are back peddling on that...... I see you like to embrace technology... I think you should take a ride on a Boeing 737 MAX....embrace that technology.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/12/20 10:21 by bluesboyst.



Date: 02/12/20 15:26
Re: "Feds clear Gateway bridge for funding — but not tunnel"
Author: joemvcnj

Windows 8, Democatic Iowa Caucus App - all great technology.



Date: 02/12/20 16:53
Re: "Feds clear Gateway bridge for funding — but not tunnel"
Author: ProAmtrak

Hey technology's great but everyone in their right mind knows it's not 100% reliable, at my work the self served machines crap out every week!

Posted from Android



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/13/20 22:04 by ProAmtrak.



Date: 02/13/20 07:30
Re: "Feds clear Gateway bridge for funding — but not tunnel"
Author: RRTom

abyler Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> lordsigma Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Airport fees do not necessarily cover
> everything.
> > Like with roads, states often have to dip into
> the
> > general fund (or go after federal money) to
> > complete big projects - user fees/gas taxes
> > don’t cover everything.
>
> They don't cover anything, that's not how
> construction is financed.
>
> Airport construction is financed with bonds, the
> ticket taxes and fees cover the ongoing interest
> payments.  There is zero intention of ever
> repaying the bonds, they are just rolled over in
> perpetuity.  That's how, for example, DFW Airport
> is more in debt today than they were in 1972.
>
> The tax revenue is just a finance scheme to allow
> the creation of new money through bond issuance.

Just like federal income taxes don't really pay for anything.  The government spends trillions more than they take in which is unrepayable.   So why do they even need to take our money?



Date: 02/17/20 04:44
Re: "Feds clear Gateway bridge for funding — but not tunnel"
Author: abyler

RRTom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just like federal income taxes don't really pay
> for anything.  The government spends trillions
> more than they take in which is unrepayable. 
>  So why do they even need to take our money?

I've been chided before about discussing Modern Moentary Theory here, which answers your question.  Please Google that and enjoy.

I believe Thomas Edison came to the same conclusions about how to pay for national infrastructure 100 years ago.  There is quote from him on the subject.



[ Share Thread on Facebook ] [ Search ] [ Start a New Thread ] [ Back to Thread List ] [ <Newer ] [ Older> ] 
Page created in 0.0976 seconds