It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out what happens to electric cars after we shut down a major source of electricity.

I'm guessing all the GRAPHENE OXIDE in the Fauci/Moderna clot shot will make batteries out of every human that gets "vaccinated" (I use the term loosely, of course) Kinda like what they do with trans-humans in the movie "The Matrix"

That's funny and scary all at same time.

You can still own a car but it'll be forever in your driveway like a Modern Art Sculpture and you'll be forced to use Public Transit, just like they've been pushing for 50 odd years

I'm not sure how they are going to power public transportation. The left astonishes me quite often. Some things they plan right down to the most minute detail but other things they make them up while their doing them.

I think this idea of shutting down electricity production and then forcing people to drive electric cars is one of those things someone just thought about for 2 second and then acted on it. It will mostly affect the eastern states. Electricity is produced using other methods from the Midwest to the Pacific Ocean.

But I'm sure Biden will make some other flippant decision and shut down nuclear and natural gas as well.

thanks to NIMBY, when was the last time the US Built a Nuclear Reactor?...

even money some one will declare certain plants as no longer viable and use that as 'Justification' for shut downs...

The ONLY thing I have heard negative about nuclear is that it is heavily subsidized by the government. I have never looked to verify that so I very well could be wrong.

Everything else has been positive. NIMBY happened because the left hated the idea of a truly clean form of energy. That is why they are pushing solar and wind so hard. Solar and wind can never ever provide enough electricity to meet our demands. But nuclear can. And ever since the first nuclear plant the entire amount of waste that all nuclear plants produce combined would fill a football field.

The problems with other nuclear plants were all caused by human error. It has been such a very long time since the last nuclear disaster it shows that processes have been put in place to prevent those human errors.

What I find very odd is that while Democrats are the ones who belly ache about nuclear the most, they are also the ones that keep trying to give Iran nuclear power.

I think the last nuclear plant we built was in the 70's. That was also about the last time the state of California built a dam.

And this stupid idea doesn't even mention classic vehicle collectors or people that have a gas vehicle but can't afford a new vehicle.

They think that because they can wave their magic wands everyone will just dump their gas vehicles and buy an electric. By 2030 I will be retired. I won't be able afford to just run down to my local car dealership and buy a brand new electric car.

because trains are better, and use energy more efficiently than cars do, electric or not. with rail infrastructure improved, electric cars will become trivial

But they only get you near your destination. Then you need some other type of transportation to get to your destination. Plus there are a lot of places where public transportation doesn't even go.

Public transportation is NOT the solution. It barely even a Band-Aid. So how the government will solve this problem is force everyone to live in the city and that is not a viable solution either.

Especially when climate change is not even science. It is political scam that is being used specifically for those kinds of draconian controls on the people. Every solution that has ever been proposed to fix climate change involves placing tyrannical controls on the people.

https://youtu.be/eDbNGMIosVU?t=395
i should also mention that private companies instead of the government can run railroads, such as they do in japan and europe. currently, brightline in florida is building a line between miami, orlando, and eventually tampa

I know that but that doesn't help because neither the government can build public transportation that is even close to being efficient as a car.

"neither the government can build public transportation that is even close to being efficient as a car."

apart from a single rail line. one train can carry upwards of 50 people, while the average car carries at most 5 people, but carries no more than one person in most cases. that's 50 cars. where are we going to put 50 cars in urban places? trains don't force people to park cars and comfortably fit underground, while even 50 cars demands a 10-lane freeway through where local businesses could thrive. where the train can't go, streetcars can go. where a streetcar can't go, buses can go.

there is also transit-oriented development, which is when businesses are encouraged to build where trains serve rather than where freeways exit due to not needing to build parking lots, thus cleanly using the space they have at their disposal.

it's also worth mentioning that until the right people are elected, the government still continue to pour subsidies into the automobile industry and maintain our freeways. expanding the katy freeway in Houston, TX, will cost 2 billion dollars. that's 1 billion for 1 lane. if there was ever a bandaid for our transportation, it's truly adding lanes to freeways. and yet, it's not even a good bandaid at that

"But they only get you near your destination"

good. we're capable of walking/biking. sedentary lifestyles are causing many problems in the united states. also, if parking lots were put in place, chances are that building the parking lot will involve demolishing the destination trying to be reached.

"Plus there are a lot of places where public transportation doesn't even go."

in rural places, maybe, but at least half of the population is in urban areas, and it's kind of important for them to prioritize their quality of life since they've got more access to vital jobs.

"Public transportation is NOT the solution"

explain what the solution is. meanwhile, japan and the netherlands have world-class public transit and have sustainable economies as a result. our car dependence has given us a shaky economy that depends on entering foreign nations for oil and wars.

"Every solution that has ever been proposed to fix climate change involves placing tyrannical controls on the people"

including electric cars. already, cars have tyrannical control on people. cars give us the illusion of freedom until many things prevent us from using them normally:

- driver's license: can't get this if you're blind
- the car breaking down: train and airline companies compensate for this. car companies don't
- the freeway's history: a while back, private train/streetcar companies dominated the united states' transportation. now it's government-subsidized car companies and taxpayer-funded freeways.
- congestion: oh no, the people who are on sidewalks, bike paths, or trains are getting home quicker than us car drivers during rush hour. nearly an hour of our lives every day that we will never get back.
- the car's cost: the cheapest cars cost the best part of a thousand dollars. the cheapest train tickets are < $20
- safety: i explained this in the thread, but basically cars in this country on arterial roads (and on freeways as well due to overuse) are more dangerous by a factor than irresponsible gun owners. it's so frequent that every car crash is only reported on local news.

imgflip.com/i/5h7kcr
oh no, an entire thread of me explaining why cars are trash and trains are gold.

"It is political scam that is being used specifically for those kinds of draconian controls on the people"

conveniently being charitable and ignoring the oil industry's lobbying power, how willing are you to bet money that next summer/winter won't be in the top 10 highest recorded yearly temperatures?

What about the elderly and handicapped. Are you going to make them walk or bike several miles to get to their destination.

Why do you want to impose such inconvenience on America? It's not up to you to decide if people stop being couch potatoes or not.

New parking lots? Not buying that a parking lot is going to destroy the destination. There just not enough new parking lots being built.

All of those things that you listed that "tyranize" car owners apply to public transportation as well. Have you ever had to spend the night in a hotel because the airplane you were scheduled to fly out on broke down?

So $20 per day, 5 days a week is $100. Times 4 weeks in a month is $400. In 2 1/2 months I will have paid for that $1,000 car. If I bought the car instead I could drive directly to the office building which is far more efficient than taking a train that has to stop at every train stop to pick up passengers. Then I have to make sure to change trains sometimes multiple times.

Where I work I would have to drive further to the train station than I would to work. And as far as I know there aren't any buses that go even close to where I work.

I can get to work in 20 minutes by car. Assuming a bus would get me in the ball park of where I need to be would take an hour.

Do you begin to understand the imposition you place on society by just saying use public transportation? Some people can get right to where they need to go but most people it would cause a problem and that effect the productivity of the business.

Public transportation, like I said before, is NOT the solution. It only helps about at most 10% of the people. Small town and rural areas will be destroyed

Regardless of those alleged "tyrannies" of car ownership, cars give far more freedom to the individual than public transportation ever will.

"Are you going to make them walk or bike several miles to get to their destination."

rental microcars exist and are used in holland for the disabled. it's worth mentioning that the handicapped have a hard time using a regular car.

"Why do you want to impose such inconvenience on America? It's not up to you to decide if people stop being couch potatoes or not."

because a third of our population is having heart disease

"New parking lots? Not buying that a parking lot is going to destroy the destination. There just not enough new parking lots being built."

correction: there are not enough streetcars and subways being built. removal of parking lots and arterial road lanes for the sake of streetcars and buses would improve the quality of life, while parking lots and large roads destroy quality of life.

"All of those things that you listed that "tyranize" car owners apply to public transportation as well.

apart from car crashes and driver's licenses. for every time amtrak has a train crash, there are over 20,000 car crashes.

"Have you ever had to spend the night in a hotel because the airplane you were scheduled to fly out on broke down?"

i'm mainly focusing on trains because trains are more efficient at going shorter distances than airplanes, and more efficient at going longer distances than cars.

"So $20 per day, 5 days a week is $100."

i said less than $20. streetcar tickets typically don't cost more than $5 a week.

"In 2 1/2 months I will have paid for that $1,000 car"

that's only if you're lucky that it costs $1000. that's without talking about car insurance, maintenance, gas/charging, etc; let alone if that car isn't a beater car (which it most likely will be) that will be cheaper to replace than fix if anything goes wrong with it.

"And as far as I know there aren't any buses that go even close to where I work."

mainly because the bus routes and services are planned by politicians, not the people.

"Small town and rural areas will be destroyed"

small towns with local businesses have already destroyed by freeways and large roads. as far as rural areas? they're fine. high-speed railroads and inner-city public transit have no impact in regards to the destruction of rural places.

"Regardless of those alleged "tyrannies" of car ownership, cars give far more freedom to the individual than public transportation ever will"

until a freeway is plowed through a person's house/business

Let me just sum this up. You're asking free people to give up yet another freedom and replacing that freedom with system that may work fine for a few but not for the majority.

Why must we given up more and more freedoms every time someone on the left comes up with a new idea? At what point do we stop calling ourselves the land of the free?

From day 1 of the United States of America everyone had the freedom to travel however they wanted with what was available. And now because of some idiot president we have to change all of that? BTW it is not just me calling him that, the majority of the US now thinks Biden is an idiot.

"You're asking free people to give up yet another freedom and replacing that freedom with system that may work fine for a few but not for the majority."

That is exactly what car-dependence is doing. We gave up walkable & sustainable infrastructure and replaced the freedom of not having a car with a system that may work fine for people with a car, but not for the people without a car, which is a surprisingly large number of people. Whereas replacing with trains, trams, and the like, while encouraging those with a car to sell the car and use public transit, doesn't remove their personal freedoms to go places. Of course, these people can still be couch potatoes, but only in the comfort of their own homes and not inflict their couch potato lifestyle on those who walk/bike. I've also talked with many people, and they say they'd take public transit and/or hate driving & parking, so long as public transit took them to a reasonable distance within their destination.

"Why must we given up more and more freedoms every time someone on the left comes up with a new idea? At what point do we stop calling ourselves the land of the free?"

eyyy fearmongering. public transit isn't this new phenomenon. it has worked in the country before the 50's, and continues to work in europe and japan.

"From day 1 of the United States of America everyone had the freedom to travel however they wanted with what was available"

that "with what was available" part is really funny, especially when that what was available in the past isn't available anymore, and our current infrastructure is ultimately taking away peoples' freedoms not to drive. the purpose of public transportation is to provide an alternative to people who don't want to drive or can't drive.

"BTW it is not just me calling him that, the majority of the US now thinks Biden is an idiot"

the united states' bad infrastructure isn't biden's fault. it's eisenhower's for taking money from the oil industry being fallible enough to build freeways using the tax dollars of railroads. the oil industry continues to funnel money down the pipeline to organizations willing to convince people that public transportation is bad. they'd pay the news to shut you up if your home was being bulldozed for a new bypass.

That is the most bizarre rationalization for public transportation I have ever heard of. We gave of the freedom of getting to our destination by walking by the tyranny of getting there in a tenth of the amount of time.

I am guessing you live in one of the major metropolitan cities in the US and your are one of those who would live no where else than right in the heart of downtown.

I HATE big cities and always have and I grew up in the LA area so I know about living in a big city. Public transportation is not going to work for me and everyone else like me.

We NEVER gave up the freedom of not having a car. No one is forcing us to buy a car. Even if we live very far away from everything we still are not forced to buy a car. You can live as car-less as you want to live. You can walk, run, crawl, skateboard, roller skate, pogo stick, bike or ride a horse anywhere you want to and no one will stop you. You have always had that freedom.

"Whereas replacing with trains, trams, and the like, while encouraging those with a car to sell the car and use public transit, doesn't remove their personal freedoms to go places."

I'm still flabbergasted by your definition of freedom. You're trying to justify tyranny as freedom.
It is fine if you want to encourage people but that isn't what Biden is doing. He is setting a system of failure that will force people to find alternate forms of transportation.

"eyyy fearmongering. public transit isn't this new phenomenon. it has worked in the country before the 50's, and continues to work in europe and japan"

It works in a few circumstances but not in the majority of cases. If it did then Europe and Japan would have no more need for cars. Yet they have tons of cars in both places. BTW have you ever ridden on a train in Japan? I haven't but my nephew lives in Japan. The pack as many people on the train as possible. It is not comfortable at all. It is jammed solid with people all crushed together. That is not what I call "working". I wonder what happened after the pandemic reach Japan and they enforced social distancing. They couldn't cram people together like sardines on the trains any more.

"that "with what was available" part is really funny, especially when that what was available in the past isn't available anymore"

What is funny about it. We still have horses. People still use horses and mules. My brother-in-law used to take mules with him when he went deer hunting.

"That is the most bizarre rationalization for public transportation I have ever heard of. We gave of the freedom of getting to our destination by walking by the tyranny of getting there in a tenth of the amount of time"

where are you going with this? these statements are more bizarre than anything i could've wrote.

"I am guessing you live in one of the major metropolitan cities in the US and your are one of those who would live no where else than right in the heart of downtown."

i actually live near brevard in western north carolina where there used to be a railroad. there isn't now, and it's a useless rail-to-trail. the downtown street is also difficult to cross, actively taking away my freedom to cross the street without fear of being hit by a ford f150.

"I HATE big cities and always have and I grew up in the LA area so I know about living in a big city. Public transportation is not going to work for me and everyone else like me."

ok. that's you're problem. not the rest of the country's.

"The pack as many people on the train as possible. It is not comfortable at all. It is jammed solid with people all crushed together. That is not what I call "working"."

if japan tried to build freeways to reach that capacity, then japan would be nothing but 20-lane freeways with no room for tokyo or osaka to expand their commercial space. a single bullet train in japan can carry upwards of a thousand seated people. it may not be comfortable, but it's simple logistics.

"I wonder what happened after the pandemic reach Japan and they enforced social distancing. They couldn't cram people together like sardines on the trains any more."

they shut down rail service for a little bit while people worked from home. then they thoroughly cleaned the trains and put in social distancing rules while having strict lockdowns and rules on masks that made the coronavirus vanish, and now japan is a mostly functioning society again. not to mention that despite covid spread in trains, trains are still safer than cars because the amount of car accidents during the pandemic increased because people drove faster on the empty roads. believe me, i can talk all day about the psychology behind that.

"What is funny about it. We still have horses. People still use horses and mules. My brother-in-law used to take mules with him when he went deer hunting."

what's funny about it? horses aren't a viable method of commuting to work. thanks for making it even funnier.

"I HATE big cities and always have and I grew up in the LA area so I know about living in a big city"

if big cities being noisy is your problem, remember that cars are the main reason behind that noise. if the cars were replaced with bikes (like they were in a few dutch urban areas), then the city would be much, much quieter. and more affordable to live in because bike roads are cheaper to maintain for the city than car roads

You really must re-examine your definition of freedom. Tyranny is not freedom. Forcing people to do what you want is not freedom. Making people's lives harder is not freedom.

There is no such thing as a freedom to not own a car. Thinking that you are improving someone's life by making them walk is NOT your right or responsibility. Nor is it freedom.

What you are calling freedom is just not defensible. Your definition is directly taken from Orwell's "1984". "War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength".

No one is forcing you to own a car. On the other hand, if you are planning on increasing the amount of public transportation you are creating a very costly boondoggle that will bankrupt cities or states. The cost of public transportation to taxpayers is exorbitant. To maintain tracks and trains is very costly. Even maintaining a fleet of buses is a huge cost.

If you are planning on making all of those electric then you are running into the exact same problem this meme is talking about. Electricity has to come from somewhere and solar and wind just ain't gonna do it.

I live in Utah. 61% of Utah's electricity comes from coal. That is a pretty significant number. If you shut that down then something has to meet the current demands. The only other types of electrical production that is as efficient is nuclear, natural gas and hydro-electric. Utah is a desert with no big rivers flowing through the state, so hydro-electric is out of the question. Leftists HATE nuclear even though all of the problems were caused by human error and happened in the 70's. Nothing has happened since and nuclear is used everywhere except for a few places in the US.

So that leaves us natural gas and the left HATE fracking. So we would be totally screwed trying to set up windmills and solar panels on every square inch of land that is owned by the state. 68% of Utah is owned by the Federal Government and we can't touch that land. Biden is considering reinstating Obama's massive land grab in Southern Utah on the off chance that someone *might* build an oil well or refinery out there.

Anyway. Freedom is NOT slavery. Freedom means charting your own destination and choosing how you will reach that destination. When governments start putting up roadblocks or taking away tools to reach your destination then you are no longer free and most likely will never reach that destination. That is just not acceptable to me and half of this country.

"You really must re-examine your definition of freedom. Tyranny is not freedom. Forcing people to do what you want is not freedom. Making people's lives harder is not freedom"

so how are trains going to make peoples' lives harder? from my experiences, their ubiquity made going around europe easier.

"There is no such thing as a freedom to not own a car"

in what sane world does that way of thinking work? i should've probably said freedom to not need a car, which is something this country lacks.

"Thinking that you are improving someone's life by making them walk is NOT your right or responsibility. Nor is it freedom.
What you are calling freedom is just not defensible. Your definition is directly taken from Orwell's "1984". "War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength"."

lol 1984. weak tactic i should've seen coming. honestly, anyone who brings up that argument where it doesn't make sense has truly lost the plot, especially when debating (with me of all people) about transportation.

"On the other hand, if you are planning on increasing the amount of public transportation you are creating a very costly boondoggle that will bankrupt cities or states."

lol. the word "boondoggle" is a beautiful oil industry buzzword. so far, public transit hasn't bankrupted amsterdam yet. on the other hand, car-dependent suburban housing areas has caused cities such as detroit and oklahoma city to go bankrupt and entire neighborhoods to go unlivable.

"The cost of public transportation to taxpayers is exorbitant"

replace "public transportation" with "freeways" and this sentence would be correct. not to mention that most high-speed rail projects in this country aren't even government-run.

"Anyway. Freedom is NOT slavery."

not slavery, but just not true freedom.

"Freedom means charting your own destination and choosing how you will reach that destination."

i want to go to las vegas by train. but i can't. so i'm not free.

"When governments start putting up roadblocks or taking away tools to reach your destination then you are no longer free and most likely will never reach that destination. That is just not acceptable to me and half of this country"

apart from younger conservatives, liberals, and libertarians like myself. urban freeways and suburbia are the result of boomers not standing up to the oil industry.

Part 2.

I am a certified Scuba diver. I got my certification back in 1985 and I got my advanced open water certification in 1989. Both are through PADI. PADI, if you are not familiar with it, it is private internationally recognized scuba organization. Their only purpose is to teach people how to safely scuba dive without killing yourself because the biggest danger to yourself is not sharks, it is you. There are other organizations such as NAUI who are also internationally recognized.

Dive shops where I grew up (So. Cal) would sell you all the dive gear you wanted but they would not fill your tanks until you showed them your certification.

The government was not involved in any of that. It was a voluntary decision of dive shops to not let you kill yourself through ignorance.

Many firearms stores strongly encourage you to take a firearm safety course from the NRA if you are purchasing a firearm. They don't enforce that because unlike scuba diving, a whole lot of people can get training through other means, like being former military or a police officer. Responsible parents, like my dad, teach their kids firearm safety as well.

So there are ways to ensure safety without involving the government. In fact that is exactly how we used to think in this country until people started giving up on private, more efficient and less costly means and demanding that the government get involved.

Driver's licenses can be easily justified because for the most part the government builds the roads. And I really don't have a problem with that.

I do have a problem with annual car taxes, forced auto insurance and force safety/smog checks. I think that is all a big scam. There are two things that for some reason we allow the government to tax AFTER we paid an initial sales tax and a whole bunch of other taxes the government throws in. Houses and cars. What would you think if the government annually taxed your TV, your computer, your microwave, your refrigerator, and so on. You would think that is insane. I think it is insane to tax property and cars on an annual bases.

The less the government is involved in our daily lives the better our standard of living is. That will always be the case. It doesn't matter how many government programs to "help" people that are passed, they cannot compensate for letting people make their own decisions.

Our freedoms and rights come from God. Man does not have the authority to take them away.

aight, sounds fun. problem is, no one's scuba diving or even swimming to work, and a boat works only in obscure situations.

the problem with driving is that large amounts of people might want or have to do it. the other problem is that it requires cooperation with everyone involved to listen to yellow diamonds on sticks (warning signs) and acknowledge another driver's existence, even if the other driver is navigating a big rig on a 2-lane freeway and being a complete ass. someone has to certify approval for a driver to be comfortable with all that, and be familiar with the tools the car has such as indicator lights and cruise control. no private company's going to make money doing that since, due to america's car-dependence, charging fees on a driver's license while trying to be profitable will force high prices that prevent the common person from having a car, and further down the line, having a job. i consider myself a libertarian, but i know the line between feasible & unreasonable. unfortunately, the government has to step in to make driving work, otherwise it works for no one.

this is why train companies do well: they serve everyone no matter what. a train company has to train (pun not intended) one driver in navigating a behemoth with no steering wheel necessary, while having the ability to take hundreds of ordinary people. they can even become restaurants on wheels, since restaurants with high quality food are going to succeed, no matter the costs. it's also such a fantastic idea to run long-distance trains with catering, amtrak won't do it because their company has a history of bad ideas. believe me, i can tell you all about that

"due to the oil industry almost entirely wiping out competition, new companies with new ideas have had a hard time getting off the ground."

How are they doing that? I don't think there is anything they can to do prevent it. Chevron is working overtime trying to come up with their own alternative energy.

None of the oil companies have the ability to shut down another business. They can try to buy them out. If the business is publicly traded then they can try to buy controlling interest and shut them down.

No one is stopping Elon Musk. The government gets in his way all of the time but they are the only ones causing Musk any grief.

"they subsidize the oil industry and the auto industry."

No, they are not subsidizing the oil industry. Obama, being the good little commie that he is, try to take over the auto industry and now the government and the unions own controlling interest in Chrysler and Chevrolet.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/06/140616093317.htm
~... a wind turbine with a working life of 20 years will offer a net benefit within five to eight months of being brought online.~

All of the sudden I got real sleepy. I couldn't read that article right now and keep my eyes open at the same time. I'm going to have to read it later.

"Japan's trains are moving human sardine cans."

Europe is less than half the size of the United States and it is more densely populated. Trains might work for Europe but not the USA.

"How are they doing that? I don't think there is anything they can to do prevent it"

lobbying.

"None of the oil companies have the ability to shut down another business"

oil companies (and airlines) are lobbying texas politicians against the construction of a high-speed rail line done by a private company, that being texas central railway. even politicians who live nowhere near the line's construction site are fighting it. truly cuckservatives who hate the private sector.

"All of the sudden I got real sleepy. I couldn't read that article right now and keep my eyes open at the same time. I'm going to have to read it later."

aight. i brought the main point out of the article anyway, so that doesn't matter to me.

"Trains might work for Europe but not the USA"

why wouldn't that be? last time i checked, places such as seattle, portland, salt lake city, sacramento, san francisco, los angeles, las vegas, phoenix, tuscon, albuquerque, santa fe, colorado springs, denver, cheyenne, lincoln, omaha, duluth, minneapolis, milwaukee, chicago, detroit, indianapolis, st. louis, cincinatti, columbus, cleveland, louisville, pittsburgh, philadelphia, new york, boston, new haven, baltimore, washington dc, richmond, roanoke, charlottesville, lynchburg, raleigh, greensboro, charlotte, greenville, atlanta, savannah, jacksonville, orlando, tampa, miami, tallahassee, mobile, birmingham, little rock, baton rouge, new orleans, oklahoma city, dallas, austin, houston, and many more have pretty big urban densities. if they didn't invest in unprofitable urban sprawl or prioritize car parks and freeways over downtown local businesses, they'd be able to easily afford high-speed rail links to the city nearest in a 200-300 mile range. a bunch of those cities i named are close together enough for a high-speed rail link. ideally, going from miami to orlando, or chicago to indianapolis wouldn't take over 3 hours without flying. but it does because, let's face it: cars are not fast.

"'IT DOESN'T HAVE TO WORK!!! Freedom is the right to completely fall flat on your face.'

uh oh, i just heard the economy yelp in massive pain"

If you understood free market economics then you would have said the exact opposite. There is no such think has too big to fail. People and businesses must be allowed to fail. It is through failure that we learn. If a business large, medium or small cannot offer a good product at a fair price and pay a fair wage to their employees then they will fail and they deserve to fail.

When they fail they get out of the way of someone with a better idea and/or a better product.

The economy always, always, always, always does better with less or no government intervention. The government is the exact reason why economies suffer. They take money out of the economy and people suffer as a result.

"'How are they doing that? I don't think there is anything they can to do prevent it'

lobbying."

Then whose fault is it for what the oil companies are begging Congress to do?

So when an oil company lobbies Congress is there nothing we can do to counter that? Can we not also lobby Congress? Sure oil companies have lots of money but if you can prove that they are bribing Congress then all of the sudden you are in the driver's seat not the oil companies.

Most importantly, if your senator or congressman or woman is accepting bribes, then stop voting for them. Campaign against them. Inform others that they are corrupt. Even if that person is your favorite politician. I have no love for any politician. The moment I hear a guy I voted for did something wrong is the moment I stop voting for that guy.

It is our responsibility to only put the most honest people in public office. If they are not in your party then find another party. That is why I am no longer a Republican. I left the GOP about 10 years ago.

"oil companies (and airlines) are lobbying texas politicians against the construction of a high-speed rail line done by a private company, that being texas central railway."

Did you ever stop and think about the cost involved in building a rail line? And how many people will use it? California spent billions to study putting in a commuter rail line between SF and LA. Did it matter that anyone was going to use it? Newsom, as far as I know, still wants build it regardless that they can never hope to recoup the expense of building it. There is just no demand for it.

Then there was this insane idea of building a subway in LA. I grew up in LA. They built it after my wife and I moved out of California. I know about So. Cal earthquakes. I know about liquefaction. There was an article in the LA Times back in the 80's or 90's that had a map of LA showing how about 80% to 90% of the ground in the LA area would liquify in a major earthquake. What that means is not that the ground would turn into quicksand, but rather the intense shaking would loosen the ground so much that it would have the same properties as quicksand.

The absolute last place I would want to be is in a subway train in LA during a 8.0, 9.0, 10.0 or higher earthquake.

"Most importantly, if your senator or congressman or woman is accepting bribes, then stop voting for them"

easier said than done. what a lot of texans didn't know in 2018 was that ted cruz and beto o'rourke received hundreds of thousands of dollars from the oil industry.

"Did you ever stop and think about the cost involved in building a rail line? And how many people will use it?"

younger generations are more transit-focused than the car-oriented generations prior. the only reason people don't use trains is because there is no train in many cases, or the existing amtrak service isn't very fast. transit does have to expand to a variety of places, and since local transit isn't great, hsr might have a hard time getting off the ground. regardless, texas hsr will still take cars off of the road since it'll be faster than driving and more convenient than flying, while not costing the taxpayers a penny.

"There was an article in the LA Times back in the 80's or 90's that had a map of LA showing how about 80% to 90% of the ground in the LA area would liquify in a major earthquake."

the entire country of japan is also earthquake prone. despite this, there has never been a passenger fatality on the bullet train system, and the tokyo subway trains have measures to deal with earthquakes. tunnels are also safer than skyscrapers due to being less vulnerable to shaking. not to mention that LA needed the subway to help travelers without a car get around the traffic-congested city.

"The absolute last place I would want to be is in a subway train in LA during a 8.0, 9.0, 10.0 or higher earthquake"

it'd be safer than being in LA's tallest buildings. even the elevated freeways will suffer more damage than the subway trains.

"California spent billions to study putting in a commuter rail line between SF and LA. Did it matter that anyone was going to use it?"

trains aren't never used provided they're built for and in the right circumstances. the reason CAHSR was expensive was for a variety of factors.
A) Consultants insisted on building in the Central valley which would've been a longer, pointless stretch to build compared to building the first stretch of the line between LA & San Diego. The Amtrak between LA & San Diego is one of the most used train services in the nation outside of the NYC-Washington D.C. metro area. If CAHSR was built between LA & SD, people would most certainly have used it.
B) California has mountains. Japan also has mountains, however, and this shouldn't be anything to stop the CAHSR from being built.
C) San Fran to LA is a longer distance than Tokyo to Nagoya. However, it's not long enough for airplanes to make sense.

"Newsom, as far as I know, still wants build it regardless that they can never hope to recoup the expense of building it. There is just no demand for it."

apart from the millions of californians that voted for the HSR to be built back between 2008 & 2012.

"And how many people will use it?"

another fact i forgot to brought up was that after a year of running, the company known as Brightline (in Florida) reached a million riders despite not operating in Orlando yet. despite that, the fake news (funded by airlines and big oil) reported them as operating empty trains

"aight, sounds fun. problem is, no one's scuba diving or even swimming to work, and a boat works only in obscure situations."

Huh??? I wasn't even suggesting anything like that. What I was talking about was an industry that self regulates without government inference. If I knew of another industry I would have used them as an example. I know about Scuba because I am a certified Scuba diver.

"biden's "forced" public transportation that he hasn't built yet."
"last time i checked, we're still allowed to drive our cars"

I never said Biden was going to force us to use public transportation. He's just going to make it impossible to drive a car. And more than cars, he's going to make it impossible for some people to turn on a light in their home, keep their food cold in a refrigerator, what him make a fool of himself on TV, use my computer to make comments wondering why people seem eager to throw their freedom away, heat or cool your home, and everything else that is powered by electricity.

This meme is about cars and electricity production. If you force car manufacturers to make only electric cars at some point then at some point after that gasoline powered cars will be mostly in the hands of collectors.

He won't outlaw owning a gasoline powered car after 2030, he's just outlawing the manufacturers from giving us the choice to buy a gasoline powered car.

Then he is causing a massive shortage of electricity production. So no only will all those new electric cars be the only new car you can buy after 2030 but only the rich will be able to afford the electricity to recharge those cars.

The rest of us will have to walk or ride a bicycle. Public transportation will also be over with with because there won't be enough electricity to operate trains or electric buses. So your whole point about public transportation is moot.

Biden is doing this because he thinks this is how you save the planet. I guess he is far more interested in controlling the planet's temperature than saving the people who live on this planet.

"And more than cars, he's going to make it impossible for some people to turn on a light in their home, keep their food cold in a refrigerator, what him make a fool of himself on TV, use my computer to make comments wondering why people seem eager to throw their freedom away, heat or cool your home, and everything else that is powered by electricity."

this is an illusion created by the fact that there aren't any innovative power sources out there. back in the day, capitalism was about innovation. nowadays, the oil industry has a monopoly & is subsidized of all things. who knows, maybe we'll get something better than solar powers or wind power, though i should add that wind power has been enough to power the country of scotland several times over. japan also depends on nuclear power, which i have mixed feelings towards. although the meltdown risk is low, and it's an effective non-polluting power method, nuclear waste still exists.

"The rest of us will have to walk or ride a bicycle. Public transportation will also be over with with because there won't be enough electricity to operate trains or electric buses. "

see my statements in regards to nuclear power and wind power. it's worth mentioning that the energy used by a shinkansen bullet train carrying a thousand passengers is less than the combined energy usage of a thousand Teslas with 1 occupant each. adding to that, battery cars are also really inefficient due to depending on lithium mines and the energy decaying over time. electric trains typically have a method of collecting power from the infrastructure. also, rubber tires have nothing on the durability of steel wheels

"what is so tyrannical about advocating for public transportation or even building it?"

Because you are not just advocating for public transportation, you are supporting Biden's forced public transportation.

If Biden was just advocating for public transportation we wouldn't be having this discussion. I don't care in the slightest if the government, some people or both just tried to encourage the use of public transportation. That is perfectly fine. There are people who are driving to work when they live close enough and their work is close enough to get on and off of a train or bus. And if someone pointed that out they might decide to leave the car at home... maybe.

What I am vehemently opposed to is taking people's choice away from them. That is exactly what the communists, nazis, fascists and socialists do. The argument is not weak. I pointed out those evil regimes specifically because they all took people's choices away from them.

It is about freedom of choice. If I live right next to a train/bus line and my work is right next to a train/bus line and I choose, for whatever reason, to drive my car instead of using public transportation then that is my choice. You can encourage me to use public transportation until you are blue in the face but you just cannot take that choice away from me. It is not your right, it is not your responsibility, it is none of your business.

We already have waaaaaaayyy too much thinking like yours in our government and that is why we are less free now than when the colonists wanted to break from from England. And our loss of freedom is just getting worse and worse.

Even owning a car is not as free as it once was. You have to get a driver's license, you have to register your vehicle, you have to pay taxes on your vehicle, you have to buy car insurance on your vehicle, you have to keep your vehicle in good enough shape to pass either a smog or safety check or both (depending on what state you live in).

Yes a whole lot of good things came out of those requirements but are they all necessary? I do believe that a person must learn how to safely operate a car, truck or motorcycle in traffic. I think basic driving courses should be mandated prior to driving a car. You need to know the driving laws of the state you live in. However, there are ways to do that without government force. Here is what I mean... in the next part.

"Because you are not just advocating for public transportation, you are supporting Biden's forced public transportation"

biden's "forced" public transportation that he hasn't built yet. ahahahahahahaha.

"What I am vehemently opposed to is taking people's choice away from them"

last time i checked, we're still allowed to drive our cars

"It is about freedom of choice. If I live right next to a train/bus line and my work is right next to a train/bus line and I choose, for whatever reason, to drive my car instead of using public transportation then that is my choice"

ok. be sure to appreciate the amount of cars taken off the road because of people who did use public transit.

"We already have waaaaaaayyy too much thinking like yours in our government"

oh no one politician who is critical of israel and the oil industry is one too many. lol. that sentiment is laughable because i hate nearly everyone in congress.

"The economy always, always, always, always does better with less or no government intervention"

that's why japan's rail network is so good. most if not all of the operators are private companies.

"If you understood free market economics then you would have said the exact opposite. There is no such think has too big to fail"

the methods of transportation does have to work for a functioning economy. otherwise we are depending on military spending and continuous sprawling house building outside of urban centers.

"What would you think if the government annually taxed your TV, your computer, your microwave, your refrigerator, and so on. You would think that is insane. I think it is insane to tax property and cars on an annual bases."

what if you ran a business and the government used your tax dollars to build a tax-free competitor alongside you? well, that's what happened with the railroads. i don't know the justification for believing biden's "forced" public transportation, but juxtaposing that sentiment next to eisenhower's legislation in the 50's, i have reason to believe that there was forced car usage.

"this is an illusion created by the fact that there aren't any innovative power sources out there."

Where are those "innovative power sources"? I haven't seen any? I've looked. All that is out there is wind and solar and those cannot even come close to meeting the demands of the American people.

I suppose that if Biden forced everyone to put solar panels on their roof or a windmill in the backyard then the problem would be solved. Except for one thing. Solar cost a huge chunk of money but when has forcing people to pay for something they might not want, ever stopped a Democrat. They all know what you need and they are going to force it down your throat.

"back in the day, capitalism was about innovation."

That never changed. The only thing that has changed is the government cannot stop itself from controlling a regulating everything. The government is killing innovation. I've heard Steve Jobs and Bill Gates both say (back in the 2000's) that if either tried to start up their business during that time they would not be able to. The government is just too controlling and it is killing new start up's every day.

"nowadays, the oil industry has a monopoly & is subsidized of all things."

The oil industry is big and they do have lobbyists. But all oil companies hire union workers. And who has the much bigger strangle hold on the government, the oil industries or the unions? What I don't understand is why the Democrats are so in love with unions? Biden is even talking about overriding state laws that give the individual the right to work for a non-union company. He wants to force union dues on non-union workers. Screw that!!

"though i should add that wind power has been enough to power the country of scotland several times over."

I have no doubt about that. Scotland gets winds that are hurricane force winds. It is insane to think that just a wind storm can reach speeds of up around 173 mph in Scotland. Maintaining a wind farm can cost more than the profits from selling the electricity.

"japan also depends on nuclear power, which i have mixed feelings towards."

I don't. Aside from them being heavily subsidized they are the most efficient form of energy production. Meltdown risks are not just low but are zero.

Japan's trains are moving human sardine cans.

"Where are those "innovative power sources"? I haven't seen any?"

due to the oil industry almost entirely wiping out competition, new companies with new ideas have had a hard time getting off the ground.

"The only thing that has changed is the government cannot stop itself from controlling a regulating everything. The government is killing innovation"

precisely: they subsidize the oil industry and the auto industry.

"But all oil companies hire union workers. And who has the much bigger strangle hold on the government, the oil industries or the unions? What I don't understand is why the Democrats are so in love with unions?"

ultimately, unions don't have that much to do with our poor public transit.

"Maintaining a wind farm can cost more than the profits from selling the electricity"
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/06/140616093317.htm
~... a wind turbine with a working life of 20 years will offer a net benefit within five to eight months of being brought online.~

"Japan's trains are moving human sardine cans."

ok. i've also been to germany, belgium, and holland. not only are those places train-oriented, but the trains there aren't "sardine cans" either. either way, "sardine cans" (traveling at 180+ mph) are a better method of transit than full 5 lane highways with no speed greater than 15 mph

None of your rationalizations for tyranny give any choice to the individual. Everything you are saying requires people to do what you want them to do. That is not freedom, that is the very definition of tyranny. You want people to change for you and then you claim that they are not free to do what you want them to do. The problem is they clearly are free to live exactly like you want them to live. But that does not make them free. That makes you a tyrant for controlling their actions.

"so how are trains going to make peoples' lives harder? from my experiences, their ubiquity made going around europe easier."

Because there are a whole lot of people who absolutely hate public transportation. They think they are big petri dishes full of all sorts of viruses and bacteria. Some don't like sitting that close to other people. And if you get your way then our public transportation is going to be overloaded just like Japan.

Not to mention COVID-19. That virus will be with us forever now. The vaccine and any other medicines are not going to get rid of the virus. Neither will masks because if masks worked we would have killed off the virus by now. So we're just going to have to get used to it unless it mutates into a milder strain. It happened with SARS-CoV-1 so it could with SARS-CoV-2 (aka COVID-19).

"in what sane world does that way of thinking work? i should've probably said freedom to not need a car, which is something this country lacks. "

IT DOESN'T HAVE TO WORK!!! Freedom is the right to completely fall flat on your face. A controlled society based on what someone else thinks works is not free in the least. It is not yours or anyone else's right to make someone do something that you think "works". And give the extremely dismal track record of all tyrannies throughout history not even the most brilliant minds can ever get what works right, especially at the individual level. That is why communism, nazism, fascism and all other forms of socialism always create poverty and then collapse in on themselves.

"lol 1984. weak tactic i should've seen coming."

Weak???? Weak would be if I brought that up as an insult that had no relation to what you are saying. I brought it up because this is EXACTLY what you are saying. You are telling me that freedom is slavery. That is a 1 to 1 comparison.

I am not saying that you are trying to create a dystopian world like 1984. I am just saying that you are using the same logic.

"Because there are a whole lot of people who absolutely hate public transportation"

ok, but facts don't care about their feelings. they're largely outnumbered by people who need it.

"They think they are big petri dishes full of all sorts of viruses and bacteria."

chances of dying in a car crash are infinitely higher than dying from the common cold deployed by the sneeze of the person you're sitting with. secondly, they really aren't. japanese people are actually pretty clean.

"And if you get your way then our public transportation is going to be overloaded just like Japan."

ok, good. currently our freeways are overloaded. even if the trains are full, at least they're fast. no one gets anywhere quickly on an overcrowded freeway.

"IT DOESN'T HAVE TO WORK!!! Freedom is the right to completely fall flat on your face"

way to come at the expense of less fortunate americans. jesus, i pray for anyone trying to defend our bad transportation and infrastructure methods against me, since this must be the ultimate way of draining the life force out of any soul, forcing the most desperate measures. it's not us americans falling flat on our face either; it's our politicians who keep our bad infrastructure in place. the people we're allegedly """"""hiring"""""".

"That is why communism, nazism, fascism and all other forms of socialism always create poverty and then collapse in on themselves."

uh oh, bringing up regimes and such. another weak move

"Weak????"

Yes.

"Weak would be if I brought that up as an insult that had no relation to what you are saying. I brought it up because this is EXACTLY what you are saying."

it would also be bringing up george orwell to protest the building of a 1km-long streetcar line. talking of which, let's bring it back to the crown jewel of this debacle.

"None of your rationalizations for tyranny give any choice to the individual. Everything you are saying requires people to do what you want them to do. That is not freedom, that is the very definition of tyranny"

jesus wept. what is so tyrannical about advocating for public transportation or even building it? no subway is going to threaten the existence of your ford f150. you can still drive it to the downtown areas you hate. the presence of subways and such is simply to encourage its use. most likely, it'll resonate with americans who hate driving in places like atlanta (i've been there. the MARTA saved my life). i genuinely don't know why you're getting so panicky

"IT DOESN'T HAVE TO WORK!!! Freedom is the right to completely fall flat on your face."

uh oh, i just heard the economy yelp in massive pain

Windmill farms capable of powering NY? lol. The entire Northeast is powered by coal. Windmills and solar can't begin to match that output unless you used up almost every patch of land to build them...and just how much would that cost?

Wow! You don't know what you're talking about. Wind and solar can only make up about 10% of the electricity demands of this nation. Then if you add recharging car batteries then you've just increased the demand.

Next time know what you're talking about before you start calling people names. I am not opposed to wind or solar, I just use my brain about it.