J. Wong Reply:
April 21st, 2012 at 8:31 am

So Palo Alto’s opposition to HSR is based on economics? I don’t think so.

Tom McNamara Reply:
April 21st, 2012 at 11:17 am

Indeed, it’s funny how in this debate the cities that have the most to lose by shunning high speed rail (Palo Alto, Atherton, Cupertino, Menlo Park) are the ones fighting it the hardest. Whereas the cities that have the most to gain are still the biggest supporters.

The enemy of your enemy is not always your friend.

nslander Reply:
April 20th, 2012 at 6:25 pm

Since when are comments on any newspaper site NOT poinsonous?

Loren Petrich Reply:
April 21st, 2012 at 12:46 am

The downside of unmoderated forums. I remember one whose staff members were unwilling to police nastiness and belligerence and trolling and the like. Many members, including many founding members and early staff members, decided to leave and create a forum where they would not tolerate such behavior.

flowmotion Reply:
April 21st, 2012 at 3:21 am

Sorry “DPed” Public, your future has been sold down the river for some guy’s 6-figure pension annuity. You will be bound to be cynical and venomous about it soon or later too.

synonymouse Reply:
April 20th, 2012 at 11:17 pm

What do these four mayors have most in common? An overwhelming desire to spend your money. Not theirs – yours.

D. P. Lubic Reply:
April 20th, 2012 at 11:30 pm

Darn, that last one didn’t work. This should, though–access through the search page, first entry:

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=young+americans+turn+away+from+driving

Comments are interesting, as always, particularly the ones from “Real Americans” ™:

“This is merely an article geared to getting the young to eschew driving. The ability to travel is enshrined in the Constitution but the government wants to eliminate the right of the people to travel. This makes them easier to control as they continue to enlarge the dependency society.”–Jim Peel

High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/78420798-895c-11e1-bed0-00144feab49a.html#ixzz1seYypU8E

“Too many wars on demand in quick succession….just for barrels full of oil and blood….and dirty rich corporations….now rollover IRAN and play dead…it is ordained by the masters of the universe.”–wychwood

“If the kids don’t want to drive and want to be dependent on government-subsidized mass transit, that’s fine. It’ll be more fuel for us that do not want to live in urbania, and to those that think driving is nothing more than a past pleasure, you can’t be more wrong.”–Desert Storm Vet

“So, teenagers aren’t buying cars. Lots of aborted babies would be buying cars now…but they aren’t, pun intended. Others are unable to find work due to Obama’s masterful touch with the economy. And others still, have no interest in working because the rich have all the money, the rich control all the jobs, and the American dream is over, Obama said so.”–Phocus

“The oil fields discovered in Saudi Arabia in the 1930s could produce a barrel of oil for as little as $1. The tarsands of Alberta are economical at $65 and up. This “oil” takes the equivalent of 0.7 barrels of oil (in natural gas, to heat and crack the bitumen which is like asphalt) and lots of water to produce. Net gain: 0.3 barrels of oil for the price of many barrels of old time conventional crude. Bitumen is strip-mined at tremendous cost to the environment. No government tyrannies need apply for this job. Economics beats not only the environment, public health, and social and political justice, but the Curse of Oil even beats governments and the manufacturing and trade sectors to death. Meanwhile, Fox News pointed out, correctly, the President doesn’t control the price of oil in 2007, but in 2012, he’s a diabolical mastermind who does. This Useful Idiot is surprised that ostensible readers of the FT don’t know all of this. A good newspaper is a poor man’s encyclopedia, after all.”–Brant Boucher

“@ReportDesertStormVet I sincerely thank for your service. Respect. However, I don’t think our forefathers wanted us to be compromised by oil producing cartels. I don’t think trying to decrease dependency on foreign oil is treehuger nonsense. Increasing drilling makes sense too. We’re always going to need oil and we should try to produce more than we use. But most of what we use we use in transport. A lot of us in rural areas (I have family in North Dakota, as rural as it gets) will always be driving. But in the aggregate, there’s a big difference between cars that get 20mpg and 30mpg. And as for those of us that live in cites, so many US cities could have smarter infrastructure. It’s not European social engineering to want to use energy efficiently. It’s not simply a matter of government subsidies either. The government builds infrastructure whether they do it intelligently or not. In the case of the US, we did most of the thinking in the post WW2 years when the US was the largest contributor to the global supply. Encouraging the use of oil made sense then because it was mostly coming from very friendly and dependable sources. Now, we use more than we do our could produce and the 1, 2, and 4 biggest oil producers and hence those who make the most off of the burning of oil are Saudi Arabia, Russia, and Iran. It’s a different reality than the 1950s and we should rethink how we live in it. Further, the roads don’t pay for themselves. The government builds them using tax money. In effect, it subsidize the cost of the car+road+oil transport system, even if we don’t call it a subsidy or think of it as a transport system. They take my tax money and build roads I don’t use, need, or want. Unless you’d advocate for all roads being paid for by those who use them through tolls rather than taxes (which would be great for me because it’d cut my property taxes, and since I don’t drive much, I wouldn’t be paying the tolls), it’s not a fair or accurate comparison. If you compare the total percentage of GDP necessary to get people and goods where they need to be, you find that using tax money to secure the world’s shipping lanes, more taxes to build roads, and then having everyone buy cars is a really expensive way to build transport infrastructure. Cars are great fun and make sense in a lot of situations (North Dakota) but we can at least be comprehensive on how we think about it and take into consideration where the money goes.”–Dan in Denver

“I have to disagree /c the progressives here. Having a vehicle is freedom from government-subsidized mass transportation and being dependent on it. Your environmentalists have restricted areas in this country as well as inadvertently given the speculators in Wall Street the ability to inflate the price of a barrel of oil per the restrictions for domestic drilling (either conventional or in-situ means). If you like living like sardines on top of one another, then by all means go for it. However, the present administration you voted in will not keep the same ideas that me and all who fought for this country believe in. No rural settings in favor of stack housing, etc. I plan on keeping both of the Mercedes and living like our fore-fathers wanted us to live and not be restricted to where and how one should live. This administration is on its way to fulfilling its mission to ‘europeanize’ America but me and the people who think like me will vote this fool out of office this November.”–Desert Storm Vet

Which reminds me–Morris, what did Mr. Simitian say about the “deniers” at that meeting?

D. P. Lubic Reply:
April 20th, 2012 at 11:38 pm

One of the amazing things about the internet is that one path leads to another, and another, and still another:

http://www.theurbancountry.com/2012/04/car-once-symbolized-freedom.html

http://www.theurbancountry.com/2010/08/refusing-to-be-herded-like-cattle.html

http://www.theurbancountry.com/2011/05/we-are-addicted-to-automobiles.html

There’s still more, on just that site alone. . .amazing, simply amazing. . .

Peter Baldo Reply:
April 21st, 2012 at 7:26 am

You can have a car culture, without being roped to the damn thing. Driving to the beach or the mountains is the essence of being a Californian. Being stuck in traffic on the way to work every day, or driving the I5 for 300 miles? Not so much.

jimsf Reply:
April 21st, 2012 at 8:05 pm

article

lex luther Reply:
April 22nd, 2012 at 12:54 pm

LOL. yeah actually we do, just like YOU are expecting NE taxpayers to fund the CA HSR project. where do you think the Federal Government gets its money? only from California tax payers? WRONG

D. P. Lubic Reply:
April 22nd, 2012 at 5:06 pm

As always, there are following comments of interest:

“What bugs me to no end is the continual astro turfing on this issue by Propeller Heads who want their E-Ticket joy rides to wherever. If it somehow goes forward, Propeller Heads should bear the cost of this disaster, Propeller Head In Chief – Jerry Brown in particular.

“The quality of public transit within L.A. as compared to San Francisco is abysmal and I say we should fix that problem first before proceeding with such massive joy ride infrastructure as is currently proposed. Presently, one can board a subway train at Union Station in Downtown L.A. and proceed seventeen miles beneath Westlake, East Hollywood, downtown Hollywood, under the Santa Monica Mountains past Universal City and on to North Hollywood.

“If we can do that, why can’t we do the same all the way to Wilshire and Ocean Avenue in downtown Santa Monica (along the spine of the second most densely urbanized area in the U.S.)?

“But Jerry don’t give a Tinker’s Damn; he wants his futuristic joy ride.”–John Crandall

“Of course this has the potential to become a nightmare, a half-finished mass of twisted, rusting steel boondoggle that never hosts a single train. I think it’s more likely that California will once again lead the nation into the future by actually DOING this thing, learning hard lessons along the way but showing that it can be done and can benefit the entire community. I remember when BART was being planned, the predictions of disaster (rusting steel boondoggle) were rife. Now, the Bay Area couldn’t live without it.

“This said, before California makes itself more convenient it needs to take care of long-term water issues. I know it’s an unpopular stance, but we need more dams in the Sierras and a whole lot more conservation.”–Jim Bob

“I don’t know if you’ve seen recently, but the fleet of existing dams along the Western US trend towards silted-in masses of useless corroding concrete. They cost a fortune to remove or renovate at the end of their life. They also deprive fishermen of billions in lost salmon catch.

“How about we just stop growing rice and cotton in the Mojave desert for starters?Surely there are some more appropriate crops for our location. I’m not saying to blow up the current dams, just not eager to run out and build a bunch of new ones. Same as nuke plants.

“Most importantly, we need not wait to do one great project at a time! We could (gasp) reform our water system and build a bullet train at the same time. These are pressing realities, after all- if we don’t deal with them right now we will forever look back and wish we had.”–Deep Range

“I think the high speed rail here is about 40 years too late. The internet has supplanted the need to commute. Not just because you can telecommute. But also because you can start a business anywhere. You can be just as connected in the middle of the Central Valley as you can in LA or SF.

“They need to take that high speed rail money and invest it in the future of jobs. I cringe every time I see someone want to bring back manufacturing jobs. Those jobs are gone. And we don’t want them back. We need high technology entrepreneurialism. We got to where we are today because we spent two centuries being the cutting edge. Because the government actually spent money on crazy schemes like going to the moon. Adjusting tariffs and corporate taxes to encourage domestic production of goods is bullshit.”–Any Prophet

“How can it be 40 years too late for high speed rail? The transportation problems have increased exponentially and now we have the global warming factor. Any time the economy shows any sign of life, fuel prices go through the roof. It’s hard to say that the high speed rail deal only gets any worse over time, though our ability to pay for it would seem to erode. Also, delay gives the political opposition time consolidate I suppose.

“But the internet does not displace people’s desire and need to travel for business and otherwise. It may change that demand, but if you’ve been on CA roads over the last two decades you know the internet hasn’t affected traffic patterns- except maybe to attract new commuters who work for the internet giants themselves. The age of the automobile’s dominance is over. That goes for aviation as well- the best days for traveling in a car or plane around California are behind us. In my experience traveling door to door by those modes of transportation is getting slower and definitely less pleasant over time. It’s bad for our economy, and frankly its bad for my mood.

“Without a bold solution this state is going to waste a ton of money on the status quo, building and maintaining new airport capacity and freeway lanes. How inspiring.

“And how is a bullet train not high-tech and entrepreneurial? It’s a lot like going to the moon, only the train is actually useful to the people who pay for it.”–Deep Range

“It will never happen. Here is why, honestly, TLE and SMR’s. the SMR of course is the requirement that 2/3rds of the legislature pass any money California should be putting into the project, that means it is dead on arrival. So then we get to the TLE, Tax Limiting Endeavors, at least 26 states have these types of measures. That means the state will never be able to raise the money they need to have to propel this project further. We can’t in Washington State either.

“This is also the reason California can no longer fund it’s college system and is the reason that K-12 is always in jeopardy there. I just have a feeling that since the late 70′s people have been convinced that government is evil and needs nothing to operate, in fact we must get rid of it, which inevitably hurts the middle class and the poor. But until the majority of voters are convinced somehow that those initiatives and referendums have hurt them personally, nothing will change.
This is how Republicans have won the message war.

“Ugh, Republicans hate progress, and the country has allowed them to make sure we make no more progress other than supporting the rich in their endeavors to make more money. Supply Side Jesus lives.”–teresamac0

Finally, this guy sounds like a relative to Richard M.:

“Americans are not smart enough nor technoligicaly competant enough to handle mid-20th century trains (Japanese Bullets) let alone 21st century trains.

“Americans are inherently inferior, except for their Rich, who are inherently superior but they can afford to take their own hello’s or private jets where ever they want to go, So they shouldn’t be allowed to have fast trains or health care for that matter. They should die as they live, dumb, broke, stupid and inmobile. The best investment we can ever make, therefore, is tax cuts for the rich. Invest in the rich, that’s the ticket – don’t waste money on infrastructure.”–T. M. Kane

VBobier Reply:
April 23rd, 2012 at 9:20 am

pfft…

D. P. Lubic Reply:
April 22nd, 2012 at 4:19 pm

I like the response the cartoon got:

“Equating the Titanic with high speed rail is ludicrous. Suggesting that construction of either was / is an act of hubris is historically ignorant. The Titanic failed because the construction of its watertight compartments were not completed according to the engineering design. Transatlantic passenger carrying ships were and still are highly successful technical undertakings. And just how many countries have successful high rail that has operated for decades? Lets count them: Britian, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, and now China. All of it hubris? Gee Tom, who pays you to draw this stuff, the RNC?”–distjl775

And I would add the good ole US of A, in the form of Amtrak’s Acela, even if it is a bit at the low end of true high speed operation. Even at that, it’s faster than driving, and faster than any other rail operation in North America.

VBobier Reply:
April 23rd, 2012 at 9:19 am

That’s cause a ship is small and cheap, HSR is big and rail by nature involves lots of land and land is not cheap as it isn’t being made anymore in the continental USA, so naturally HSR is not something Private Enterprise can build by itself, Government builds big Mega Projects by contracting out to Private Industry who has the skills, just not the money, Private Industry is simply incapable of those feats as their not Governments as they do not have the wherewithal to equal Government, nor would You want them too either, although some ignorant crazies would I’d imagine.

BruceMcF Reply:
April 23rd, 2012 at 10:33 am

And the Titanic was not competing against subsidized intercity travel across the Atlantic, as HSR would be competing against car and air transport.

J. Wong Reply:
April 23rd, 2012 at 7:58 am

Your lede is wrong: There is no “new” push to revote just the same dead-on-arrival proposals from LaMalfa and Harkey. The article also makes clear that no initiative is likely on the November ballot and that initial allocation of Prop 1A funds will likely be passed as well. So construction will start.

Public opinion is fickle. Once voters get to see that it’s happening they’ll be more supportive, and the odds of the Federal gov’t providing more funding is better than of my winning the lottery so I’m happy about that.

Tony d. Reply:
April 23rd, 2012 at 8:50 am

There’s also no need for a re-vote. The Authority has listened to the concerns of CA citizens with its new emphasis on urban areas, initial link to SoCal AND ICS. I had my doubts when all funding and emphasis initially focused on the Central Valley only; not any more.

VBobier Reply:
April 23rd, 2012 at 9:13 am

Lex, It isn’t going to happen, If It were to happen It will not pass, ever…

Jack Reply:
April 23rd, 2012 at 3:41 pm

Your new here; allow me to explain, as if you were a small child.

The people who don’t want to build the train try new ways to stop it about every six weeks. So far none of their reasons have “stuck” Just a few examples: Shift funds to 99 (against the law), It’s not legal (Court hasn’t stopped the train yet), We’re broke and can’t afford it (Lie)… It goes on…. and on…

Declinist are even more enraged that their cause célèbre “Blended Plan” was co-opted and is now being used against them.

Build, Baby, Build!

D. P. Lubic Reply:
April 23rd, 2012 at 7:44 pm

As always, the following comments are sometimes interesting and amusing:

“Not much fun driving these days; too many large trucks on the Am. roads. They are much larger than previous years. Better to hit the back trails for ATVs, than to play tag with a giant truck.”–burgesswv

“I just bought a nice big 2005 mercury station wagon. Leather seats fully equipped. I can afford the gas because I save a fortune in insurance, depreciation and initial cost. I am pushing 60 years old and just refuse to drive some cramped sardine can in the final years of my life.”–xraybrain

“When I first began driving I remember putting two bucks worth of gas in the car and driving around all weekend. My first car that I actually owned was a 1958 De Soto with a Hemi, it was my Fathers and he gave it to me. Fast for its time but got decent gas mileage, probably around 16 mpg for that big car. Am 62 now and still love driving but gas tickling four bucks a gallon, well, my drives are a bit shorter.”–arenadood

“Hey it just ain’t the kids… we old farts are completely turned off by the ugly little weenie cars forced on us today. We remember the good times when cars were an expression of life and vitality… now sadly they have become boring examples of “economy and trendy add-ons”… heated seats, power mirrors, air bags, moonroofs, power locks, computer plugs, cramped interiors, lawn-tractor engines… ALL BS!! Keep that crap!!… give us a roomy monster with power and style… then we will buy again!!”–papadon.don

“Oh, the memories of the early 60′s when gas was about 27cents a gal and you could cruise around town on a Sat night for a dollar. You could buy a an old used car for $100 or less. Cigarettes were 30 cents a pack, Soda pop for 10 cents a bottle. Just a memory now.”–Steven

“Gas was cheap and a cruising culture developed due to it. We also did not have instant communications and actually had to drive to see certain people. Cheap gas triggers independence, and that is the last thing this government wants. They want us on top of each other. In a forced utopia.”–Kortney Dunkle

“I can find a few faults with this article. Number one: if this generation has taken to more walking and biking, then why are they all so overweight? All one has to do is take a seat in a shopping mall and watch the people walk by. 90% of them are overweight, whether city dwellers or otherwise.

“The fact is, as long as petroleum companies continue to strife American’s pockets for ever increasing profits and our government continues to allow it, people will travel by car less. “It’s the gas prices stupid!”

“Secondly: America used to produce great cars. All one has to do is remember that years ago (when I was a kid) one could name a car from a distance. They were distinctive. Now, every car on the road looks just like the next, whether they are produced here or some other country. The romance of the American automobile is over because car design is unimaginative and repulsive. It will take more than a series of even more boring color choices on boring wedge-shaped car bodies for the romance to be reborn.

“Thirdly: My recent visit to the DMV was enlightening. My wife and I overheard two early twenty-somethings discussing that everyone seems to be, “getting in on the ripoff and out for the take,” as one of them put it. Gas prices, the high cost of new cars (car companies are just as guilty as petroleum companies), and the DMV ripping off the public with fees, taxes, and any number of cost prohibitive shady tricks to dig deeper in everyone’s pockets.

“To those two twenty-something gals; yes girls, you are right. Today, everything is a scam, and our government, (both democrats and republicans, independants or otherwise) sit at the top of the heap awaiting your money. We are the well….and they are the bucket.

“Welcome to the new world. Where everything is boring, unimaginative, uninspiring, and costs five times higher than it should so “others” can grow bank accounts as a hobby. I noticed that the article didn’t touch on the increased suicide rates and the epidimic of depression that this generation is plagued with. Is it any wonder?”–Thom

“Remember that flashy finned “chick magnet” and cruising round and round the hamberger joint? Remember a long ride in the cool country on hot summer days? Remember your honey’s hot thigh pressed next to yours on those wonderful bench seats? Remember Saturday Eve, cruising with the top down, and parking with your best gal? Remember an occassional drag race, when 360hp could be unleashed? Remember 30c gasoline? Remember the gorgeous colors?… coral, baby blue, yellow, torquoise, fire engine red?? Sorry kids!!… your little look-alike little toys of today just can’t cut it.”–papadon.don

“Gee, why are todays youth driving less? Perhaps its because the cars being produced today are hideous little sardine cans with all the power of a rubberband that cost more in relative dollars than what a Rolls Royce would have cost their grandparents? Or the fact the nanny culture has conditioned them for their entire lives to believe driving a car is evil and destroying the planet? Or perhaps there are so many who live in the urban concrete jungles they reject the idea of trying to go anywhere at 3 mph? or maybe because the urban concrete jungles have so many bicycling leeches clogging up the roads its faster for them to walk? Something tells me if todays youth had a car similar to a Chevelle SS 396, GTO, Firebird or even a Gremiln available at a reasonable cost they would be just like the youth of the 1950′s, ’60′s or ’70′s – they just don’t have anything to get excited about!”–Remarks 208

“I’m sorry to say that the ‘happy days’ of motoring on the open road with a hot chick in a beautiful, big finned beast is a thing of our past…Cars are now non-descript, and all of the prohibitive costs associated with driving have seriously diminished the thrill…. If you’re in the city, the sheer volume and traffic jams are a daily occurrence. If you’re out on the interstates, the volume of truck traffic clogging up the open roads is a danger and a major annoyance. . I’m glad that I got a chance to live and appreciate the golden age of cheap gas and beautiful machines! Went to a classic car auction recently in Kansas City….. Viewing all those beautiful classics together was, to me, like being in an art museum..”–cmdr06vue

Gee, and I thought I was a throwback.

Although somewhat hand-picked, these comments are actually pretty average for that article. There are very few from the pro-transit crowd. It’s interesting that so many of the comments have the writers either deliberately or casually revealing their ages, and that the ages seem to be from the late 50s on up (tail end of the big driving bunch). That this demographic has this collection of ideas (and nostalgic memories) is no surprise, but the lack of apparently younger people writing in sort of is, at least for me. I wonder if the Daily Finance “Motley Fool” doesn’t have a young audience, or if the young audience really doesn’t read “establishment” media anymore.