GOVERNACIDE: Politicians ribbon-cutting opportunities cost people’s lives and Taxpayers’ wealth

Tuesday, January 2, 2018

https://www.cato.org/blog/questions-ask-about-amtrak-501

DECEMBER 20, 2017 9:21AM
Questions to Ask About Amtrak 501
By RANDAL O’TOOLE

*** begin quote ***

The wreck of the 501–the Amtrak train that crashed near Seattle on Monday–is raising lots of questions about Amtrak operations, but they aren’t always the right ones. Here are some questions that should be asked and some of my preliminary answers. Answers from Amtrak (the operator), FRA (the funder), Sound Transit (the track owner), or WSDOT (the train owner) may differ.

*** and ***

2. Around 800 people die in railroad accidents a year. PTC would prevent only about 1 percent of these fatalities; far more would be saved by spending the same amount of money on better grade crossings and fencing of rail rights of way. Why do we put so much emphasis on an expensive technology that will do so little?

Answer: Accidents that PTC could have prevented tend to be more spectacular than people getting killed when a train hits their car at a grade crossing. This suggests that, when politicians decide where private businesses spend their money, it’ll get spent on grandiose programs rather than things that could really make a difference.

*** and ***

5. Why do so many reporters call this a high-speed train? The top speed between Portland and Seattle is 79 mph, the same as it has always been and the same as most other Amtrak routes. In technical terms, this was a conventional, low-speed train.

Answer: Though this was a low-speed train, it was funded by Obama’s high-speed rail fund. By repeatedly using the term “high-speed trains,” reporters are keeping that idea in the public consciousness, perhaps in the hopes that Trump’s infrastructure plan will include money for more such trains. (This could backfire, however, by making people think that high-speed trains are more dangerous. They aren’t–but they are a lot more expensive.)

*** and ***

Question: So are all trains obsolete?

Answer: No, only passenger trains are obsolete. Freight trains are extremely productive, and America has the finest, most advanced rail system in the world. That’s because it is mostly private and operates to produce profits, not to give politicians ribbon-cutting opportunities.

*** end quote ***

So the answer is that politicians and bureaucrats, their egos, cause the waste of Taxpayers’ wealth on their egos.

Argh!

Happy New Year; new year same as the old year.

# – # – # – # – # 


INTERESTING: Do we believe what we are being told?

Sunday, June 9, 2013

*** begin quote ***

Japan’s Radiation Disaster Toll: None Dead, None Sick
by Soulskill
An anonymous reader writes “This article discusses a recently-released U.N. Scientific Committee report which examined the health effects of the accident at the Fukushima nuclear plant. Their conclusion: ‘Radiation exposure following the nuclear accident at Fukushima-Daiichi did not cause any immediate health effects. It is unlikely to be able to attribute any health effects in the future among the general public and the vast majority of workers. … No radiation-related deaths or acute effects have been observed among nearly 25,000 workers involved at the accident site. Given the small number of highly exposed workers, it is unlikely that excess cases of thyroid cancer due to radiation exposure would be detectable.’ The article even sums up the exposure levels for the workers who were closest to the reactor: ‘Of 167 exposed to more than the industry’s recommended five-year limit of 100 mSv (a CT scan exposes patients to up to 10 mSv), 23 recorded 150-200 mSv, three 200-250 mSv and six up to 678 mSv, still short of the 1000 mSv single dosage that causes radiation sickness, or the accumulated exposure estimated to cause a fatal cancer years later in 5 per cent of people.’ The report also highlights the minute effect it’s had on the environment: ‘The exposures on both marine and terrestrial non-human biota were too low for observable acute effects.'”

*** end quote ***

I hope this correct and not “biased” by Gooferment.

If it is, then despite a huge blunder nuke energy makes sense.

Only if we trust the dikw (i.e., data, information, knowledge, wisdom) we are receiving, then we should be pushing nuke versus carbon as our civilization’s savior.

# – # – # – # – #   


TECHNOLOGY: Diesel is a better answer than gas – electric hybrids

Wednesday, January 5, 2011

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig11/peters-e8.1.1.html

New Year’s Wish List
by Eric Peters
EricPetersAutos.com

*** begin quote ***

More diesels

And fewer $40,000 hybrids that barely outdo the mileage of an ’80s-era Plymouth Champ. Diesels, unlike hybrids, work – if “working” means they deliver very high gas mileage without a very high price tag. Gas-electric hybrids and electric cars are impressive as technology but crap as consumer products – if the point of the exercise is to produce economical transportation. If you have to pay $30,000 or $40,000 (or even $25,000) to get 35 or 40 MPGs then MPGs don’t really matter since whatever you “save” in fuel costs is negated by the cost of the car itself. But diesel engines can deliver 60 MPG in a subcompact car that costs less than $15,000. Just not here. They have such cars in Europe. Santa needs to bring a few of them to us. But first, he’ll need to put some coal in the stockings of the government bureaucrats who have made the American car market unfriendly for diesel vehicles by imposing one regulatory obstacle and expense after the next. It’s not that diesels are “dirty” – the Europeans are just as obsessed with saving the planet as we are. It’s simply that our bureaucrats and politicians aren’t as smart as those in Europe.

*** end quote ***

I loved the three diesels I’ve had in my life.

Once upon a time, diesel fuel was cheaper than gasoline.

Don’t understand why that is? It’s easier to refine.

We know that the taxes on petrol of all flavors is a significant cost component. And, a good way for the Gooferment to bury taxes. With the illusion that it’s all going to “roads”, which is “barbara streisand”!

So why don’t we exploit technology that works?

# # # # #


%d bloggers like this: