High Speed Train Coming?-split from boosting Canada’s military spending"

[ytz]

Engineering, and design, never really stops. It is a neverending iterative process.

Interesting to say this and then can't seem to understand why we should actually get cracking. A huge part of why all infrastructure is expensive in North America is the lack of consistency in simply building. All learning is regularly lost. Instead of building two subway stations every year, we'll do a giant 10 station extension that takes a decade to build and then do nothing for another decade while all that talent, experience and institutional knowledge is lost.

And heck, this isn't even just infrastructure. Same mentality contributes to the CAF struggle with procurement.

 

[ytz]

Highways require perpetual subsidy. Therefore they provide no economic benefit.

Exactly. If we really want to go this route, a lot of countries actually toll most of their freeways.

But really, a bunch of past scoping studies have found that any Ontario-Quebec HSR has enough population and GDP to at least be operationally profitable. Recovery on capital invested is more questionable. That's exactly why this design phase exists. They have to lay out detailed COAs that show the government what different levels of service can be built, at what cost and what subsidy. One of their mandates is to actually look at financing alternatives to the feds. Could just be, for example, infrastructure bonds with federal guarantees to lower the rates.

 

[Kirkhill]

How do you know it will require perpetual subsidy before the the design is even complete? That's some talent. Can you give me tomorrow's lottery numbers?

The reason why projects reach a grey zone during commissioning is that the world keeps turning and the situation keeps changing. The project assumptions that you agreed on 5 years ago are now no longer valid. The Vendor and the Customer are then presented with a challenge. Do you deliver the project as contracted and produce a product that no longer conforms to market requirements or do you adjust the project's outcomes through change orders to meet todays needs.

And who gets to pay for those changes. The Vendor will argue that the project has been delivered as contracted. The Customer will try to exploit commissioning variances to get as much out of the warranty period as possible before the Client has to face up to the needs of Continuous Improvement and go back to his board and his investors asking for more money before he has started to pay back their initial investment.

That is the reason that projects seldom come in on time and on budget. The only ones that have a reasonable chance of doing so are short term and small.

 

[Kirkhill]

Highways require perpetual subsidy. Therefore they provide no economic benefit.

No. Highways are communal property paid for by their owners out of taxes. The owners perceive a benefit in that they use those highways on a daily basis for business, pleasure and to respond to emergencies.

 

[Kirkhill]

Interesting to say this and then can't seem to understand why we should actually get cracking. A huge part of why all infrastructure is expensive in North America is the lack of consistency in simply building. All learning is regularly lost. Instead of building two subway stations every year, we'll do a giant 10 station extension that takes a decade to build and then do nothing for another decade while all that talent, experience and institutional knowledge is lost.

And heck, this isn't even just infrastructure. Same mentality contributes to the CAF struggle with procurement.

Here I can agree with you.

It is why I look for contractors with a long history of projects. And I will absolutely hire contractors who have failed, often multiple times. What I look for is how they managed those failures and recovered from them.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Interesting to say this and then can't seem to understand why we should actually get cracking.

Because we are worse then broke?? I'm not arrogant enough to say "look what we built for you future generations" while we just stiffed them with the bill. We get enough saved up after the debt is paid?,......have at 'er then.

 

[ytz]

Because we are worse then broke?? I'm not arrogant enough to say "look what we built for you future generations" while we just stiffed them with the bill. We get enough saved up after the debt is paid?,......have at 'er then.

If we're "broke" a lot of the discussions on here about defence spending are also moot. If we can't afford $5B/yr for a decade, paying $20B per year (and increasing) to meet the NATO target is going to be even more difficult.

Ultimately, these are spending choices. And I think it's time we made some hard ones. I would rather fund this than say pay OAS to military folks like us with defined benefits pensions. If you want to talk about what we owe the next generation, let's start with how we have screwed them over across the board and continue to do so:

By the way, underinvesting on infrastructure just so we can keep taxes low or give OAS to those who don't need it, is also a way of failing the next generation. Generational fairness groups like Gen Squeeze have called this out too.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

If we're "broke" a lot of the discussions on here about defence spending are also moot. If we can't afford $5B/yr for a decade, paying $20B per year (and increasing) to meet the NATO target is going to be even more difficult.

Ultimately, these are spending choices. And I think it's time we made some hard ones. In would rather fund this than say pay OAS to military folks like us with defined benefits pensions. If you want to talk about what we owe the next generation, let's start with how we have screwed them over across the board and continue to do so:

By the way, underinvesting on infrastructure just so we can keep taxes low or give OAS to those who don't need it, is also a way of failing the next generation. Generational fairness groups like Gen Squeeze have called this out too.

I'm all for investing in the current infrastructure, just not vanity ones for pure vanities sake.......

...and whataboutism's abound!!!!

 

[ytz]

I'm all for investing in the current infrastructure, just not vanity ones for pure vanities sake.......

...and whataboutism's abound!!!!

Weird how every other G7 country and a good chunk of developing countries don't think of HSR as vanities. Canadians must be uniquely smarter I guess.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Weird how every other G7 country and a good chunk of developing countries don't think of HSR as vanities. Canadians must be uniquely smarter I guess.

No Canadians live in Canada. No matter how much you may want us to be some other country in whatever topic you post in, we're not.

 

[ytz]

No Canadians live in Canada. No matter how much you may want us to be some other country in whatever topic you post in, we're not.

Okay Boomer.

I'm pretty secure in my identity as a Canadian that a choo-choo is not going to change that. But I guess you're a bit more fragile.

 

[ytz]

Having been to Germany and having ridden DB extensively, it was fun listening to the Germans bitch about DB service.

One of the things that actually does disappoint me about Canada is just the low standards we accept for public services. Shit service is so normalized in this country, that people think demanding better is offensive.

 

[Kirkhill]

Okay Boomer.

I'm pretty secure in my identity as a Canadian that a choo-choo is not going to change that. But I guess you're a bit more fragile.

You are right. It is absolutely a Boomer thing.

Boomers together @Bruce Monkhouse

 

[RangerRay]

Having been to Germany and having ridden DB extensively, it was fun listening to the Germans bitch about DB service.

Ok-they left me in the lurch once with a missed connection due to construction. Otherwise, I thought they had a pretty sound rail system.

Germans: "The 4th train this hour was 5 mins late. Somebody needs to be fired."

Canadians: "You guys get more than one train a day?"

Back in 1991, I booked a trip on DB in western Germany. Not only did the itinerary tell me what trains to take to what stations at what times, but also what busses and S-Bahns to get from doorstep to doorstep. I found that amazing and still do.

Meanwhile my German friends pissed and moaned about the train being 10 minutes late.

I was like “Dude, where I’m from, there is one line and the train comes once a week, if that!”

They looked at me like I was an Ossi.

 

[JLB50]

This guy was a European....

https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/joe-davidson

I almost forgot about Davidson. Almost. Yeah, Davidson along with Jean Claude Parrot. I remember Bryce Mackasey in the mid ‘70s saying in Parliament: “Those bastards just don’t want to work.” They’ll be forever in my bad books…just behind John McCallum.

 

[YZT580]

Weird how every other G7 country and a good chunk of developing countries don't think of HSR as vanities. Canadians must be uniquely smarter I guess.

maybe it is because it is 1000 km from Dunkirk (north France) to Marseilles (south France) and there are 66 million people between those points to pay for it whilst it is 2000 km from Winnipeg to Ottawa and, at a guess, not much more than 2 million between those points to pay for any form of transportation improvement. It is a lot easier to justify the expense when most people can access it and not so easy when it is only good for a select few. Think of it: run 12 trains a day each way, each train holds 600 people, assuming they are at capacity. That is a maximum of 10 million riders per year or one ride for everyone in the greater Toronto area for which you are spending over 4 billion just to complete a thorough feasibility study. Big number, until you look at it for what it is: that is only 14,000 a day, both directions included. For comparison, the people in Barrie make almost 400,000 car trips per DAY. So, nice idea, but we cannot afford it. The liberal/NDP government have driven us too deeply into a fiscal hole to justify what is at best a vanity project. They have just announced another investment in infrastructure: the Gimli/Churchill rail structure which is an essential service. They only get 80 million. Where is your priorities? Pipelines, defense, northern infrastructure, or boutique service in southern Ontario for liberal voters.

 

[ytz]

Back in 1991, I booked a trip on DB in western Germany. Not only did the itinerary tell me what trains to take to what stations at what times, but also what busses and S-Bahns to get from doorstep to doorstep. I found that amazing and still do.

Meanwhile my German friends pissed and moaned about the train being 10 minutes late.

I was like “Dude, where I’m from, there is one line and the train comes once a week, if that!”

They looked at me like I was an Ossi.

Dude. Why do you want to make Canada like Germany? Don't you know? Shit public transport is what makes Canada what it is.

 

[Brad Sallows]

How do you know it will require perpetual subsidy before the the design is even complete? That's some talent. Can you give me tomorrow's lottery numbers?

My state was "if X, then Y", and anything requiring subsidy to pay its capital and operating costs by definition isn't recovering them out of profits. We can play the game of simply describing "subsidy" as part of "revenue", but that misses the point.

Based on the way most transit operates, it's a safe bet that a bespoke line for a particular ridership isn't going to pay its own way.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Highways require perpetual subsidy. Therefore they provide no economic benefit.

That just means that non-tolled highways don't (can't) recover costs, which is not the same as providing no economic benefit.

 

[RangerRay]

We don’t even have the Greyhound anymore. If you’re low income and don’t have a vehicle, it’s hard to leave your community to better you situation.

But that has nothing to do with HSR in the Golden Horseshoe. Just an observation of shit public transportation in this country. I have no delusions of seeing more frequent rail service here in the west, but if HSR makes sense anywhere in this country, it’s Windsor - Quebec City.

Although I personally won’t see any direct benefit to it out here, if it is actually an economic multiplier in that part of the country, I can see how that might benefit the country as a whole.

But, we’ll see.