Californian Billionaire's plan to break up California into 6 states.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Johnykbr

If congress signed off on a state that is purely of the tech region then that proves there is a God because every politician in DC would have sold their soul to the Devil.

Not to mention, the dominant tech region in the world twenty years from now could be in Shanghai.

[BroncoBeavis]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

Not to mention, the dominant tech region in the world twenty years from now could be in Shanghai.

Crony capitalism won't work any better there than it does here.

Innovation will follow freedom. Whether that be freedom from Commie task masters or Trial Lawyer Politicians playing engineer.

[24champ]

Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis

We spent $50 million on the Hoover Dam.

Today, you'd be lucky to spend less than that defending yourself in the Lawsuit Greenpeace brought to end the project.

Hoover Dam would be about 850 million dollar project with inflation. Maybe more given had to pay more for workers, bigger and better machinery, etc

Probably looking at 1-2 Billion dollar project, easily.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis

Crony capitalism won't work any better there than it does here.

Innovation will follow freedom. Whether that be freedom from Commie task masters or Trial Lawyer Politicians playing engineer.

Are you kidding me? Crony capitalism works great! The Dow just crossed 17050. Pay attention.

[SoCalBronco]

Actually the premise of the proposal....that the state is ungovernable.....is no longer the case as the top two open primary system has really helped promote centrist winners to the detriment of far left and far right winners.

[BroncsRule]

Originally Posted by 24champ

Hoover Dam would be about 850 million dollar project with inflation. Maybe more given had to pay more for workers, bigger and better machinery, etc

Probably looking at 1-2 Billion dollar project, easily.

The Hoover Dam could not be built today. The environmental impact study would bog down and take decades. Not to mention the safety concerns. Dozens of people were killed making the dam in the 30's.

Sad but true - those grand projects were conceived and attempted is a far more simplistic, "can do" world. And if a few dozen (or few hundred) people die in the process... "well, sure - but look at the awesome dam we built!"

We probably couldn't go to the moon today either. Too risky.

[broncocalijohn]

Originally Posted by Guess Who

It doesn't matter that there is nothing between San Diego and L.A. How many people per day commute between the two cities? No population in between will make it easier to build.

What happened to this country. We used to build things. We built Hoover Dam. We built the interstate highway system, which at the time was one of the amazing inrastructure projects ever. Build the highspeed rail and a 100 years from now you will still be using it!! Why do people think so small? Hell, I don't even live in California but I think Federal dollars should be spent on this. Have you ever seen the high speed rails in Europe or Japan? It is amazing you can zip around Europe in a few minutes. I went from Amsterdam to Frankfurt, Germany in under 4 hours.

People today always just say, "we can't" when of course the real answer is, "we Can" and "We should".

Obviously you don't live in California. I said in my post LA to SF. You thought I said SD (San Diego) and you stated (in bold) "nothing in between SD and LA". I guess you never been here either because there is a population of at least 3 million people in a county called Orange County. That is what is between SD and LA. You know what we have for public transit for this area? Metro Rail. It is along side Amtrak. Guess Who? You don't get it. You need population to make it feasible. It is not even close to being worth it. Our state is near bankruptcy in the future. State is putting up most of the money and it is now being called "Brown-doggle" named for the persistence of Jerry Brown lying about the project.

Phase I was supposed to start in the Central Valley. Maybe there as it is cheaper with land prices and not as much construction in the way but ridership, when completed, would be barely sustainable for cost. I doubt anyone will want to go through the first phase and then have to rent a car to continue on to SF (unless you want to go to Fresno at the end of phase I). I believe Phase II is LA to SD which would get a ton of riders if it doesn't have many or any stops in between the two cities. The project was promised LA to SF at 2 hours and 40 minutes for $50. BS! It will cost much more and I can do a round trip for less or at $125 (some flights have at $100 round trip if purchased early). It takes about 2 hours (waiting at airport each time) and 40 minutes of flight. High rail will need to match the time at least with ticket price. We voted on it based on a $68 billion price tag. Cap n Trade is going to need to come up with a lot of money to sustain the price tag for the bond years. Luckily inflation hasn't been huge but this bond can be 30 years so who knows what happens then.

Basically a lot of promises have been made and probably won't be kept. Cost go up much higher than what was promised and money hasn't been forward coming like I am sure the proponents have assumed would be there.

[BroncoBeavis]

Originally Posted by 24champ

Hoover Dam would be about 850 million dollar project with inflation. Maybe more given had to pay more for workers, bigger and better machinery, etc

Probably looking at 1-2 Billion dollar project, easily.

That would be the inflation adjusted amount. But you couldn't dream of constructing it today for that amount of money, assuming you could cut through the lead wall of red tape.

$800 mil wouldn't even buy you a decent new Casino in nearby Vegas nowadays.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by 24champ

Hoover Dam would be about 850 million dollar project with inflation. Maybe more given had to pay more for workers, bigger and better machinery, etc

Probably looking at 1-2 Billion dollar project, easily.

Republicans would never in a billion years allow a project like that. It would have to be built privately or not at all. Same with Brooklyn Bridge, Grand Coulee Dam, Golden Gate Bridge, Interstate Highway System, etc. And if the Hoover Dam started cracking, I doubt they'd allow the money to fix it, unless you cut some old folks' lunch money or something to pay for it.

[BroncoBeavis]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

Republicans would never in a billion years allow a project like that. It would have to be built privately or not at all. Same with Brooklyn Bridge, Grand Coulee Dam, Golden Gate Bridge, Interstate Highway System, etc. And if the Hoover Dam started cracking, I doubt they'd allow the money to fix it, unless you cut some old folks' lunch money or something to pay for it.

Uh, the feds didn't build Hoover either. They put it out for bid and then helped fill in where they could.

Even in a supposed golden age, things didn't work how you think they did.

[broncocalijohn]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

Republicans would never in a billion years allow a project like that. It would have to be built privately or not at all. Same with Brooklyn Bridge, Grand Coulee Dam, Golden Gate Bridge, Interstate Highway System, etc. And if the Hoover Dam started cracking, I doubt they'd allow the money to fix it, unless you cut some old folks' lunch money or something to pay for it.

You mean the highway system in California? Seemed our favorite Republican, Ronald Reagan, didn't have a problem making it a priority for the growing state. Of course our current Governor back in his first swing at being a governor basically turned his father's idea around by trying to stop construction of highways so more people would take public transportation.

In Orange County (conservative county), we approved twice a half cent sales tax for improvements on our roads. We took the worst traffic highway in the area (the 22 freeway) and made it one of the best. Republicans want projects that are cost effective and not with so much BS. Democrats see the future for projects but cost is no object regardless of the economy. Worst it red tape that liberal groups create for these projects.

[24champ]

Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis

That would be the inflation adjusted amount. But you couldn't dream of constructing it today for that amount of money, assuming you could cut through the lead wall of red tape.

$800 mil wouldn't even buy you a decent new Casino in nearby Vegas nowadays.

You'd likely be correct. Someone pointed out the deaths of those that worked on the dam, the workers were worked extremely hard in extremely tough conditions. There were delays in the Hoover dam project, and today it would probably face lawsuits from environmental groups that want to protect turtles or Rams.

There also wouldn't be the vegas that you see today, all the water shows and lights on the strip are direct results of the Hoover dam project.

[Guess Who]

Originally Posted by broncocalijohn

Obviously you don't live in California. I said in my post LA to SF. You thought I said SD (San Diego) and you stated (in bold) "nothing in between SD and LA". I guess you never been here either because there is a population of at least 3 million people in a county called Orange County. That is what is between SD and LA. You know what we have for public transit for this area? Metro Rail. It is along side Amtrak. Guess Who? You don't get it. You need population to make it feasible. It is not even close to being worth it. Our state is near bankruptcy in the future. State is putting up most of the money and it is now being called "Brown-doggle" named for the persistence of Jerry Brown lying about the project.

.

Well I knew you said something I did not go back and read it again to make sure. I am lazy that way. I respect your opinion on it especially since you live their. I just think we need to get back into build big things in this country. I also stand by the fact that it really doesn't matter how much it costs because you will get you money out of it and 100 years from now it will still be there.

[BroncoBeavis]

Originally Posted by 24champ

You'd likely be correct. Someone pointed out the deaths of those that worked on the dam, the workers were worked extremely hard in extremely tough conditions. There were delays in the Hoover dam project, and today it would probably face lawsuits from environmental groups that want to protect turtles or Rams.

There also wouldn't be the vegas that you see today, all the water shows and lights on the strip are direct results of the Hoover dam project.

I agree. Had the Recovery fiasco actually accomplished some big iconic American achievement, it likely would be much more popular than it ended. But our government can't do big anymore. Not when it only takes one bored lawyer to push it off for years.

Obama admitted as much when he said 'there's no such thing as Shovel Ready'

America's shovel used to always be ready. Now we don't even know where to find it.

[Arkie]

Did you know that there were over a hundred people killed on the Hoover Dam project? The first guy drowned while they were still looking for a site. The last guy was his son on the exact same day 13 years after his dad’s death. What are the chances?

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Arkie

Did you know that there were over a hundred people killed on the Hoover Dam project? The first guy drowned while they were still looking for a site. The last guy was his son on the exact same day 13 years after his dad’s death. What are the chances?

All just so the Bellagio could have its fountains.

[broncocalijohn]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

All just so the Bellagio could have its fountains.

I am willing to accept those loses for our Vegas.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

Sounds like he has too much time on his hands. He should find a hobby.

President Draper?

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27

President Draper?

Yeah. Businessmen make such good presidents.

[Guess Who]

Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis

We spent $50 million on the Hoover Dam.

Today, you'd be lucky to spend less than that defending yourself in the Lawsuit Greenpeace brought to end the project.

in the 1950's

[Arkie]

Just think, if we split every state into 6 states, then the 300 resulting states would better represent the 300 million people. There wouldn't be as much disparity between the electoral college and actual population. Hillary would have won the election.

[broncocalijohn]

Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27

President Draper?

What made you bump this? Ultra Liberals now want to split off from USA after the elction. No way they want to lose the power here as a whole California.

[DenverBroncosJM]

Central California is screwed...Bakersfield and Stockton?

[Rohirrim]

How ****ty would it be to live in a state called "Silicon Valley?" What's on the state flag, a microchip? State bird, Twitter? Change the name of the local port to USB? What do you call the high school team, the Terrabytes?

[Guess Who]

Originally Posted by broncocalijohn

What made you bump this? Ultra Liberals now want to split off from USA after the elction. No way they want to lose the power here as a whole California.

Actually it has been proven the who California splitting movement was started by Russia, with fake news and propaganda.