Alon Levy Reply:
May 2nd, 2011 at 5:02 pm

Um, no. What actually happens: the proximate causes of famine are large swings in relative prices of food items. People living on the edge of subsistence have enough to survive; famine is not a general condition. But when there’s a sudden shock, in either direction, people could be thrown into outright hunger, and many more could be thrown into malnutrition. Even in completely rural societies, food price increases lead to mass death: the Bengal famine of 1943 was caused by an increase in rice prices coming from a supply disruption in the war.

And just as importantly, the world today is not the same as it was in 1943, or even 1999. The world’s poor are much more urban than they used to be. Even in Africa and South Asia, there are entire classes of people living on $1 a day who are consumers rather than producers of food. And the number of those people is growing quickly, since if you’re a subsistence farmer, then Dharavi and Kibera are a step up. (Americans have to let go of the fantasy of the happy American industrial worker exporting manufactured goods to the happy third-world farmer. Those third-world farmers lived to be 40.)

Paulus Magnus Reply:
May 2nd, 2011 at 7:59 pm

Neither of which would be significantly affected by electrification.

BruceMcF Reply:
May 2nd, 2011 at 5:37 pm

In the potatoes case, in the case of a supply disruption, the potatoes can simply be sold as uncut potatoes, so that’s not a strategic vulnerability of food supply to disruption of oil supplies.

The butter is greater exposure, but there are substantial subtitutes, so not a substantial risk either.

swing hanger Reply:
May 1st, 2011 at 8:43 pm

If five years from order to delivery is any indication, apparently they are more complex to Americans.

Beta Magellan Reply:
May 1st, 2011 at 8:58 pm

Joe, 19 railcars isn’t going to spark a giant industrial employment renaissance in America. And we still make a lot of stuff—people tend to overlook the role increased productivity has had in shrinking industrial employment in this country because it’s harder to demagogue.

Alon Levy Reply:
May 1st, 2011 at 9:17 pm

Yes, it is actually a skill issue. When Boeing tried to build trains, the result was a disaster Muni still has to live with.

Alex M. Reply:
May 1st, 2011 at 9:35 pm

Being good at building airliners and rockets does not mean you’ll be good at building trains. We do have a lot of skill here, but not train-building skill.

Joey Reply:
May 1st, 2011 at 9:40 pm

here

Of course, this is doesn’t happen all the time, it’s just one expression of the fallacies of this policy.

Alon Levy Reply:
May 2nd, 2011 at 1:30 am

Of the two major US airlines that don’t subsist off of bailouts, the larger already buys Boeing.

Wad Reply:
May 3rd, 2011 at 12:21 am

Wrong question, Joe.

Organic domestic work is precisely how American workers are building Japanese, Korean and German cars in American factories.

Foreign carmakers set up domestic plants after a proven well of consumer demand as well as a hedge against the U.S. trying retaliatory tariffs to protect Detroit carmakers.

The carmakers initially built cars in their home countries for export. When there was enough demand, it became cost-effective to produce cars in the U.S.

First they would set up a branch office. Then they would conduct sourcing deals with U.S. parts suppliers (the economic activity was already here — organic — as opposed to having to recreate the entire production chain for a new market). The assembly plant and the search for workers would be the very last step.

The jobs they wanted did show up, and it happened over time.

Insisting on a factory is going about it backwards. Plus, the focus of creating jobs, often in areas that have the most trouble doing it on their own, ignores broader economic activities beyond job creation that create healthy economies and cities.

Factories end up stifling these economic activities. A community that gets this end-state factory doesn’t benefit from the upside of interconnected business networks or import replacement. Factories, and this is especially true for capital-intensive durable goods, have closed-loop business-to-business networks that are extremely tough to crack.

These side transactions account for more than the payroll outlay for the factory workers, which do benefit the local areas. But when the factory is placed, say in Arkansas, it will obtain its financing from New York. It will source parts from factories in Ohio, Indiana and Michigan. It will import proprietary core components from seaports in Texas and Florida. UPS, based in Georgia, will run the logistics with its package fleet and subcontracts a North Carolina trucking firm to do some hauling to handle the work. The train maker will then set up branch offices in California, Pennsylvania and Illinois to land contracts for areas most likely to buy the train sets and run training centers for maintenance workers.

The factory, meanwhile, only needs about 100 workers in total. Thousands apply for the jobs. The train maker finds it has enough orders to run the factory for about four years. It expects the trains to run an average of 30 years.

The difference is, the Arkansas factory workers get the bum deal after that fourth year. They don’t have any more trains to make, and they won’t have other economic opportunities unless they leave the area. Those other states? They can get along fine because they are more likely to find other business activity to replace the train maker when the products are finished.

BruceMcF Reply:
May 2nd, 2011 at 5:05 pm

Yeah, the real world sucks sometimes. The FAA does not do that because the US aerospace industry has the Pentagon.

You don’t like that the FRA does that, but then the analysis acts as if there are no institutional reasons for that outcome, and instead of getting serious about re-orienting the incentives to get a better outcome goes off into a deregulationist neoliberal fantasy.

joe Reply:
May 2nd, 2011 at 7:53 pm

Alon,

Planes **are** customized. Boeing and Airbus DO customize planes for airlines. Boeing even customized a plane for Google’s executives.

It’s also in our national interest to have domestic production and to define interoperability standards.

VBobier Reply:
May 2nd, 2011 at 8:00 pm

Oh their still fixing to do just that, Plus wanting to do the same to Medicaid(Medi-Cal in CA) and SSI(Supplemental Security Income), With no care as to the Harm while spending a Trillion Dollars for Defense, It called screwing those programs that they hate to pay for while cutting very big tax cuts for fat cats… They have a Year, Some are scared, But the rest are elected by fanatics who worship tax cuts for the rich and huge obscene military budgets, Maybe their going finally build the old Montana Class Battleships and start making shells for 16″ guns again…. Updated of course.

But then Republicans in Congress want to cut taxes again on the very rich, Keep Defense spending at or near $1 Trillion a year and make cuts to Medicare, Medicaid(Medi-Cal in CA) and a cut 25.6% to SSI(Supplemental Security Income) w/a spending cap and making Medicare, Medicaid(Medi-Cal in CA) & SSI into Vouchers(Which like Housing Vouchers have been reduced and reduced, Of course Housing Vouchers are set to be finally Eliminated), Seniors are outraged and so are the Disabled, I’m Disabled and Yes I get SSI & Medi-Cal, SSI I’d trade in heartbeat for SSDI, I’m permanently disabled and unable to work(I’m not a Parasite or a Moocher), Heck I’m barely able to take care of Myself, I can’t cut back anymore without going without a phone and DSL and probably Food or clothes and work on My car as food can’t be brought home on a dial a ride bus as they have a limit of 4 bags per trip and they only take coins, plus there is no shaded areas to sit at or any places for Me to sit as I would need help getting up off of the hot ground as I can’t stand for more than a few minutes(weight and joint problems from 2002 when I’d broken My left leg & no rehab, I have concentration problems which means I use a spell checker, I also use a cane, I have other problems too and I wish I didn’t). It’s ironic, President Richard M. Nixon signed SSI into law in 1972 and Years after He died, Republicans want to take the first step in Killing His Baby in 2011(39 years so far, 1972-2011). Osteoarthritis, Back pain, low output thyroid, eyesight, depression (I’m suspected of being Bi Polar, As My thoughts will race after an anxiety episode), weight(near 400lbs and I’m 6’1″ tall), core temp problems, anxiety, bad right hip(dislocated in 2002), bad right knee, bad left ankle and 3 titanium screws in the left leg(so No MRI). Of course I have a GED and I’m 50 years old, I have only 4 relatives and 3 can’t take Me in as there is just no room and 1 won’t as She says I’m a stranger as I think It’s cause She’s Catholic and My sister in law(After She’s dead Her 3 adult children can decide If I could live in Her house or not She said), Being I’ve been a loner who took care of His Mom until She died, I don’t have any friends and rooms for rent say No Pets and My Cat Grace was a former stray who likes to stay by My side almost constantly, She’d just run away as She loves Me very much. Besides I have a 1 year lease and no money for moving, Besides where could I rent for less than $320 a month? As to bills I have a cell phone(about $48 a month) and DSL(for almost $23 a month), trash & TV are free, Water is $15 and I have to drive to get the mail(5 miles round trip) or food(25 mile round trip).

Risenmessiah Reply:
May 2nd, 2011 at 4:46 pm

You are sidestepping the issue. Under your scenario there would be one train that would zip from SF to LA and another that would work its way back around to the San Joaquin Valley from SF or LA. That’s a great idea, but as our friends at Southwest Airlines have proven…it doesn’t make as money as sliding through more and more rolling stock through the same route with slightly different variations. For example, part of the reason there are so many flights from Northern to Southern California on Southwest (and vice versa) is that they are really portions of much long itineraries. Southwest wants to keep the plane full and not service places that won’t include a full plane.

The operator of HSR is going to have the same demands. They want full trains or no trains at all. Even though demand for Fresno may be small on a non-express LA to SF route, combined with other demand along the route for such a train, it will break even. If you try to have HSR dead-ending in Fresno from SF or LA, it will be a failure.

The other thing to remember is that Fresno ridership on HSR is going to be higher per capita most likely than SF or LA….for the simple fact that there’s no cheap air service. San Jose to Fresno, San Francisco to Sacramento, LA to San Diego all are going to be very lucrative. SF to LA will have the highest aggregate demand, but not necessarily the highest per capita demand.

Wad Reply:
May 3rd, 2011 at 4:10 am

Synonymouse, read this definition of opportunity cost from Investopedia.

What I gather is that your management of HSR would be to avoid costs above all else. Laying less track costs less. Fewer stations like Fresno bring down operating costs. Also, carrying more passengers is just going to cost more. So I gather that HSR should develop a phobia to anything that grows the numbers on the liabilities side.

You’re trading off costs for ridership.

So let’s take Fresno, which you say is not worth anything to anyone but foamers.

Fresno’s MSA population is about 1 million people. It also plans to have many more people living there, and it is the home to two universities. The HSR sets a goal of 1% modal capture of the MSA population. Just a minuscule 1%? Well, the target is to get 10,000 boardings from Fresno.

That would translate to 5,000 Fresno residents boarding a train and returning each day.

So, right off the bat, you would need to figure out how to sell 10,000 extra tickets from L.A.-to-Bay Area traffic, or raise ticket prices to cover the revenue lost by skipping Fresno.

You’re now in the position of figuring out how skipping Fresno makes the service attractive enough to warrant 10,000 additional boardings. Does the train go so fast that 10,000 more people would now ride versus the time spent serving Fresno? Is Fresno so repulsive that 10,000 or more people avoid HSR because they have to pass through it?

Plus, what will you do to offset the ridership lost by a diminished network?

Skipping Fresno lowers ridership by about 10,000 boardings. It also lowers the ridership Fresno would receive and send back in the opposite direction.

Let’s assume Fresno “trades” ridership proportionally.

Southern California’s CMSA has 20 million people. Fresno County is about 5% of that. There would be more people likely going from Fresno to Southern California than vice versa, like for commuting. There’s less of a demand for Southern Californians to go to Fresno, but it can still be served.

This means you can also calculate how many passengers Fresno might receive for people who leave. Proportionally, we could say that Fresno trades 20 boardings to receive one SoCal passenger.

Fresno would also be a more attractive destination to a smaller station. Merced, the next stop over, has a population of about 250,000. Fresno would receive four Merced residents and send over one rider in exchange.

Taking Fresno out of the equation also takes out additional passenger trips beyond the ones generated by its residents.

You now have to figure out how to replace the complementary ridership, too, and you must offset it with more riders who have fewer trip combinations.

Good luck with that.

Alon Levy Reply:
May 3rd, 2011 at 2:08 pm

Sure, but move MSP to the primate category, and Olympia (clearly fourth fiddle to Seattle, Tacoma, and the Portland suburbs) to the passive category.

Wad Reply:
May 4th, 2011 at 9:59 pm

Here’s how the capitals could be classified:

Primate (Capital city has the largest population, at least twice as large population as the next largest city or at least half of state’s total population, and largest economic activity in state):
Honolulu, Phoenix, Salt Lake City, Boise, Denver, Little Rock, Des Moines, Indianapolis, Jackson, Atlanta, Providence, Boston.

Dynamic city region (capital is not the largest city, is not less than half of largest city/metro, has above median population among capitals, supports a private-sector economy and has better than stable population growth):
Sacramento, Olympia (by Seattle CMSA), Austin, Oklahoma City, St. Paul, Madison, Columbus, Baton Rouge, Columbia, Raleigh, Richmond, Harrisburg, Trenton (close to New York and Philadelphia CMSAs), Albany, Hartford.

Passive city (small population, no visible private sector and population growth is below stable, flat or declining):
Juneau, Salem, Carson City, Helena, Santa Fe (fast-growing, but dwarfed by Albuquerque), Cheyenne, Helena, Topeka, Lincoln (fast-growing), Pierre, Bismarck, Jefferson City, Springfield, Montgomery, Tallahassee (fast-growing), Frankfort, Charleston, Lansing, Annapolis, Dover, Montpelier, Concord, Augusta.