Amazon.com Widgets

Do you think California Governor Jerry Brown is correct in believing high-speed rail is the future of transportation in his state?

  • It is not the future of Transportation

    High Speed Trains are 1970's technology and with all the other issues that I've stated with this project, this is by far the worst part of all. We are not developing new technology by building a high speed train, we are going backwards because on the west coast in certain regions, not all, people mostly like to just take their cars. Google's self-driven cars and Korea's underwater highways are projects of the future. They are constantly coming up with new, innovative technology to take themselves into the future. The US should take examples of what other modern countries around the world are doing as far as infrastructure and try to implement them here.

  • Yes, and not just for California.

    California has the geography and population that would benefit from a high-speed rail. A lot of people inside of a long, narrow state would be served well by a rail running its entire length. It would relieve automobile congestion, help the environment, create jobs, and expedite travel. And, again, I think the entire United States would benefit if it was nationally applied.

  • Yes, I believe high-speed rail should be the future of transportation in many states.

    I think Jerry Brown is very forward thinking. High-speed rail could be the solution to many problems that currently plague both us and the environment. It would drastically cut down individual vehicle use, thereby cutting down on emissions, which are harmful to both the ozone layer and people's lungs. There would be less demand for fossil fuels with decreased vehicle use. Given the right circumstances, this could be a win - win situation.

  • California would be revolutionized by high-speed rail.

    California Governor Jerry Brown is correct in believing high-speed rail is the future of transportation in his state. High-speed rail will wake up the transit systems and corridors across the United States, but in a state like California it would really revolutionize it. Los Angeles is deeply in need of more public transit options, and high-speed rail would greatly reduce congestion.

  • It is not the future of Transportation

    High Speed Trains are 1970's technology and with all the other issues that I've stated with this project, this is by far the worst part of all. We are not developing new technology by building a high speed train, we are going backwards because on the west coast in certain regions, not all, people mostly like to just take their cars. Google's self-driven cars and Korea's underwater highways are projects of the future. They are constantly coming up with new, innovative technology to take themselves into the future. The US should take examples of what other modern countries around the world are doing as far as infrastructure and try to implement them here.

  • I do not think he is correct

    This whole high speed rail system is just a political boondoggle. At first I supported it, but I am now against it because there were several misconceptions about it. First of all, the system taxpayers were promised was a direct connection from San Diego to LA and straight up to San Francisco. After the bond measure was passed in 2008, it was stated that there will now be more stops in places like bakersfield and Fresno and the train would go much slower than originally promised. Instead of the whopping 220 MPH the train would originally would have gone, that speed went down to 80 MPH because state officials said that they would build some of the segments on track that was already built instead of having to spend more money on building all new track. If it is not located on tracks specifically designed for high speed trains, that substantially lowers the maximum allowed speed of the trains for safety reasons. They also got the price wrong when they were giving estimates. This system was originally projected to cost around 11 billion dollars and now it is projected to cost over 118 billion dollars! Jerry Brown is just worried about creating a legacy for himself instead of doing what is best for the state.

  • We do not have the funds or the money to go into this project

    Americans are an independent people. They would rather sit in traffic for 2 hours than sit on a train with a schedule. Let's deal with real problems affecting the future of California such as mental health, water, jobs (real jobs that pay real money), and the fact that we ware so determined to drive business and people out of California with the amount of ridiculous regulation and restrictions.... Don't even get me started on gun control or the continuous erosion of my personal liberties, sometimes I feel like I should raise my hand to ask to go to the restroom.......

  • High speed rail is only cool in movies.

    Utilizing high speed rail systems to move commuters in and out of a city looks like a great idea on paper. Unfortunately, Americans are an independent people. They would rather sit in traffic for 2 hours than sit on a train with a schedule that they must adhere to. What if one day something happens and they miss the train? Now they are not just 5 or 10 minutes late, they are an hour or two late. That is the fear that keeps regular people from using mass transit. Their own irresponsibility.

  • No I do not think he is correct in believing that.

    Jerry Brown is definitely wrong in believing that high speed rail is the future transportation for California. The fact that I live here I can state we do not have the funds or the money to go into this project and the taxes it would add would surely stop the project before it even began.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.