- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Trump's 2018 Budget revealed
Posted on 3/16/17 at 12:48 am to joshnorris14
Posted on 3/16/17 at 12:48 am to joshnorris14
quote:
Arts and Culture: -1B (-100%)
I can't get over how spectacular that is.
This post was edited on 3/16/17 at 12:51 am
Posted on 3/16/17 at 12:53 am to joshnorris14
I thought he was investing in infrastructure, but i thought that would fall under transportation though? Maybe i am mistaken. Anyone know?
Posted on 3/16/17 at 1:02 am to Tiger Tracker
If I'm not mistaken, a lot of those projects (high speed rail for example) are seeking a cooperative with private industry. That would more than likely come next cycle.
I am hoping for high speed rail here, I would even give 2% of my income for up to 10 years to make it happen.
I am hoping for high speed rail here, I would even give 2% of my income for up to 10 years to make it happen.
Posted on 3/16/17 at 1:09 am to AUsteriskPride
quote:
If I'm not mistaken, a lot of those projects (high speed rail for example) are seeking a cooperative with private industry. That would more than likely come next cycle.
Thank you for clarifying. So like a toll road, but with rail?
quote:
I am hoping for high speed rail here, I would even give 2% of my income for up to 10 years to make it happen.
I wish more people here had that mentality. We couldn't pass bonds to get our rail extended. No one in Texas, not even Austin, wants to pay MORE real estate taxes to make it happen.
I moved out of the city. I am not sitting in that shite storm of traffic come 2020.
Posted on 3/16/17 at 1:10 am to AUsteriskPride
quote:I really want it here too, but the costs are often surprisingly high. And I can't help but wonder with technology, specifically the possibilities of driverless cars, if the value is less than a decade or two ago.
I am hoping for high speed rail here, I would even give 2% of my income for up to 10 years to make it happen
Posted on 3/16/17 at 1:29 am to Tiger Tracker
quote:
Thank you for clarifying. So like a toll road, but with rail
Yes, of course. It's a taxpayer investment, but the costs would be much cheaper than flying due to that. I feel it would also be beneficial in freeing up interstate traffic and continual maintenance there due to fewer vehicles.
quote:
I wish more people here had that mentality. We couldn't pass bonds to get our rail extended. No one in Texas, not even Austin, wants to pay MORE real estate taxes to make it happen.
They would if it were framed in the right dimensions. Just as global warming became this political frickery, it could have been easily avoided with terming it as "cleaner air". Everyone likes clean air, not everyone believes man is solely responsible for climate change.
Regardless, with high speed rail, you sell it as half the cost of a flight, no TSA, high speed internet and satellite TV while you travel, opportunities to exit early, you're grounded at all times, weather has little effect on travel times, you get to see the country..
I mean the marketing opportunities are endless here. It's really a no brainer.
Posted on 3/16/17 at 1:32 am to AUsteriskPride
quote:
I mean the marketing opportunities are endless here. It's really a no brainer.
Yeah I've been on board woth this. I personally don't like toll roads though. Maybe because i can be more picky due to the fact i work from home, but i hate the idea of paying more for something i am already contributing to in tax dollars.
Posted on 3/16/17 at 1:33 am to buckeye_vol
quote:
And I can't help but wonder with technology, specifically the possibilities of driverless cars, if the value is less than a decade or two ago
Until vehicles are almost frictionless, there is immense value when considering interstate maintenance costs, vehicle upkeep, emergency responders for interstate accidents, etc. Then you also have to insure your vehicle after you purchase it and supply it with fuel.
Couple in the fact high speed rail allows for socialization and a wide variety of activities while traveling, I don't think a driverless cars can offer the same options.
This post was edited on 3/16/17 at 1:35 am
Posted on 3/16/17 at 1:36 am to Tiger Tracker
Well it wouldn't really be a toll per-se, but a fare. I pay a fare everytime I drive my car to work through upkeep, fuel, car payment, and insurance.
This post was edited on 3/16/17 at 1:37 am
Posted on 3/16/17 at 1:39 am to buckeye_vol
quote:Well no shite. It's a government program. That's all of our's future healthcare until we get government out of it completely btw.
I agree, but if their intentional and probably self-serving limitations on treatment options is driving costs,
Posted on 3/16/17 at 1:39 am to AUsteriskPride
quote:
Then you also have to insure your vehicle
So I've been curious about this with driverless cars. If you get in to an accident is the blame on you, assuming the car's "intelligence" malfunctions? Seems like, from this standpoint, lawsuits would be a big issue.
If I'm not in control of the car, and it decides to swerve or change lanes without my authority and i hit someone who pays for it? The manufacturer or the driver?
Posted on 3/16/17 at 1:40 am to Tiger Tracker
Your insurance company
Posted on 3/16/17 at 1:47 am to Tiger Tracker
No doubt, there is a huge liability on the part of manufacturers for driverless cars, which means they are going to ridiculously expensive to cover those costs. Essentially, we'll pay their insurance premium during the purchase. It has to be that way, lest the insurance company of the car owner is always fighting with car manufacturers to compensate them.
With that said, over time I am sure accidents will drop to near zero fault in terms of technology in the vehicles and the costs will lower.
With that said, over time I am sure accidents will drop to near zero fault in terms of technology in the vehicles and the costs will lower.
This post was edited on 3/16/17 at 1:49 am
Posted on 3/16/17 at 1:47 am to joshnorris14
quote:
Your insurance company
frick that then. I'm not paying for a car's frick up, if that's the case.
Posted on 3/16/17 at 1:48 am to joshnorris14
All those cuts won't make up for the $52B increase in defense spending. Tell me why we need to increase defense budget by so much? This is nothing but white collar entitlement for the military industrial complex.
Posted on 3/16/17 at 1:49 am to AUsteriskPride
quote:
With that said, over time I am sure accidents will drop to near zero fault in terms of technology in the vehicles.
I agree. I just think this will be a long time in the making. I think for this to work it's an all or nothing thing. Either all cars are driverless or not. Seems a mix of driver and driverless on the road will cause huge liability issues no manufacturer would want to bear.
Posted on 3/16/17 at 1:53 am to AUsteriskPride
quote:But many of those costs aren't going to go away. Even we had mass transit I would still have a vehicle. Most places after like New York, where it's easy to not have one, and it's space is so limited that the costs can be ridiculous.
Until vehicles are almost frictionless, there is immense value when considering interstate maintenance costs, vehicle upkeep, emergency responders for interstate accidents, etc. Then you also have to insure your vehicle after you purchase it and supply it with fuel.
But the thing is that these projects take a long time to complete. Not only because of the planning and construction, but there are legal considerations and delays since eminent domain is likely.
So if we're going to create a transportation system that's expensive, and time consuming, then we better consider the future value of it in a rapidly changing society.
quote:Socialization, sure. But many people don't prefer to socialize, especially on their commute. But I don't know what activities you could do on a rail system, that you couldn't so in a driverless car (read, computer work, play games on phone, etc.).
Couple in the fact high speed rail allows for socialization and a wide variety of activities while traveling, I don't think a driverless cars can offer the same options.
So really the additional opportunity to socialize is a trivial benefit, since it's not something universally used or valued, and that can be attained elsewhere.
Posted on 3/16/17 at 1:55 am to Tiger Tracker
I don't think it will take long. Technology is advancing at such a high rate. As with any new technology, the wealthiest will benefit initially, and their ability to purchase above the middle class price point will advance the technology to drive down costs. Not too long ago, the wealthy were the only ones with AC and fuel injection in their vehicles. It'll be common place soon.
Posted on 3/16/17 at 1:55 am to stendulkar
Yes. That's my biggest concern too. I would like to see something revenue neutral instead of increasing spending overall.
Posted on 3/16/17 at 1:56 am to buckeye_vol
Ok, let me frame it this way, party cabooses with open bars.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News