BR to NO high speed rail not happening

Good, it is was waste of money that should be spent on more needed projects in Louisiana.

Really shocked

If they got a private sector provider to take most of the risk but for a small tax, I could maybe (big maybe) get behind that. But the idea of a broke state trying to pull off a speculative infra project is pure insanity.

As nice as this project could have been if run competently (it wouldn’t have been), this was nothing but a scam on the taxpayers perpetrated by the railroad. The railroad has been putting off replacing the old, dilapidated, wooden trellis bridge across the Spillway. The vast majority of the upfront cost associated with this project was to replace that bridge. The current bridge is in such bad shape that trains have to travel extremely slowly to avoid shaking it to pieces. Replacing the bridge is needed to raise the speed limit on that stretch. The railroad company stood to profit via faster freight lines while the taxpayers footed the bill. The railroad was just trying to make taxpayers pay for improvements that should be their responsibility, improvements they have for far too long neglected due to their near protected monopoly status.

quote:

---

Why not look for a private sector financier?

---

About 12-13 years ago while I was still working for a railroad, the district manager of the maintenance-of-way department was in the same building as I was. We were talking one day about the cost of laying track. He told me when all costs were factored in it cost about a hundred dollars per crosstie to lay track - and that was for wooden crossties. That included the rail, ballast, machinery and labor. I'd think the cost would substantially be more in today's time especially with concrete ties now being the first choice of tie options.

That's a helluva lot of money for a private outfit to forego.

quote:

---

Why not look for a private sector financier? If it's feasible, they may build it. If it's not, that's a good indication the government shouldn't be trying to do it. Seems simple, right? Why does the government have to have a hand in every infrastructure project in this state?

---

I find it a bit funny this standard is only applied to rails, and not bridges or highways.

What private financier is going to foot the bill for a new BR loop or interstate expansion?

A number of them if the economics make sense. Private infrastructure is a rapidly growing asset class. The U.S. is behind the curve, but catching up.

It probably isn’t profitable. That’s why the private sector should be involved, because if it’s not profitable they wouldn’t do it. The government thinking they can do something that the private sector can’t is simply laughable. Bring someone in who has expertise in these things.