Governor Kasich

• Writerbuckeye

  

  I Wear Pants;641977 wrote:Shopping and eating and concerts, etc are more the benefit of a high speed system though the business/work benefits are there too.
  
  Do you not support any infrastructure advances then because very few of them directly support themselves but there are many other economic benefits to them.

  
  I support what is most feasible economically right now (and necessary), which would include highways, bridges and existing rail lines that are used mostly to transport goods.
• Bigdogg

  Writerbuckeye;642009 wrote:I support what is most feasible economically right now (and necessary), which would include highways, bridges and existing rail lines that are used mostly to transport goods.

  
  So you are saying the highway system is more economically feasible then a high speed rail system and an enhanced fright rail system? I would like you to show me any study that agrees with you. Again, read the proposal that Kasich squashed. It was simple politics that killed it, not common sense. Kasich is off to a horrible start.
• I Wear Pants

  Writerbuckeye;642009 wrote:I support what is most feasible economically right now (and necessary), which would include highways, bridges and existing rail lines that are used mostly to transport goods.

  But we cannot simply stand still because we're in a tough spot. We need to continue to progress or eventually the EU or China or someone will start to eat our lunch.
  
  Sure we need to make smart choices about where to spend on advancement and new infrastructure and I agree that the exact proposal for "high speed" rail we had wasn't very good but I think it would be good to pursue an actual high speed rail.
• Writerbuckeye

  

  China has already bought our lunch and is preparing to eat it. That's why we can't keep going in debt on projects that don't pay for themselves or aren't within a budget.
  
  However, unlike the feds, Ohio has to balance the budget, which means making some hard decisions now. I'd prefer to get the budget in order and the state system healthy again before talking about projects that, at this point, are nothing more than pipe dreams.
  
  At least you understand the proposed project was bullshit and wasn't even high speed rail (Doggie is too partisan to admit that little bit of truth), which is why the prudent decision was to turn it down before the state got mired in even more debt it cannot afford.
  
  My general feeling about high speed rail is kind of like the airlines: if it's a really good idea and needed, then someone in the private sector is going to want to invest in it and make a profit.
  
  When those folks start coming forward and are willing to invest -- then we can talk.
  
  Government has a bad track record of building these expensive boondoggles, thinking they'll (save money, help the environment, enhance business prospects, etc.) and they don't do any of those things. All they end up doing is sucking money down an endless black hole (like Amtrak).
• I Wear Pants

  The problem is with some of these endeavors the private sector doesn't want to invest, for example, billions of dollars in Ohio.
  
  Some of them work out excellently though. Not every government sponsored infrastructure project ends up lik Amtrak. Which funnily enough probably would have worked if the trains were fast.
• believer

  

  Writerbuckeye;642156 wrote:China has already bought our lunch and is preparing to eat it. That's why we can't keep going in debt on projects that don't pay for themselves or aren't within a budget.
  
  However, unlike the feds, Ohio has to balance the budget, which means making some hard decisions now. I'd prefer to get the budget in order and the state system healthy again before talking about projects that, at this point, are nothing more than pipe dreams.
  
  At least you understand the proposed project was bullshit and wasn't even high speed rail (Doggie is too partisan to admit that little bit of truth), which is why the prudent decision was to turn it down before the state got mired in even more debt it cannot afford.
  
  My general feeling about high speed rail is kind of like the airlines: if it's a really good idea and needed, then someone in the private sector is going to want to invest in it and make a profit.
  
  When those folks start coming forward and are willing to invest -- then we can talk.
  
  Government has a bad track record of building these expensive boondoggles, thinking they'll (save money, help the environment, enhance business prospects, etc.) and they don't do any of those things. All they end up doing is sucking money down an endless black hole (like Amtrak).

  Agreed
• CenterBHSFan

  

  I don't think it's that people don't WANT a high speed railroad, I think it's a question of if it's feasible. There's the difference.
  
  I remember a thread talking about infrastructure - something like 50 years of deterioration? That America really needed to get busy on that?
  So, what are we to do? Invest in something like HSR or catch up (at least a little bit) on what we already have our hands full with?
  
  I think that's a logical question! Agree or disagree?
• Bigdogg

  Writerbuckeye;642156 wrote:China has already bought our lunch and is preparing to eat it. That's why we can't keep going in debt on projects that don't pay for themselves or aren't within a budget.
  
  However, unlike the feds, Ohio has to balance the budget, which means making some hard decisions now. I'd prefer to get the budget in order and the state system healthy again before talking about projects that, at this point, are nothing more than pipe dreams.
  
  At least you understand the proposed project was bullshit and wasn't even high speed rail (Doggie is too partisan to admit that little bit of truth), which is why the prudent decision was to turn it down before the state got mired in even more debt it cannot afford.
  
  My general feeling about high speed rail is kind of like the airlines: if it's a really good idea and needed, then someone in the private sector is going to want to invest in it and make a profit.
  
  When those folks start coming forward and are willing to invest -- then we can talk.
  
  Government has a bad track record of building these expensive boondoggles, thinking they'll (save money, help the environment, enhance business prospects, etc.) and they don't do any of those things. All they end up doing is sucking money down an endless black hole (like Amtrak).

  
  The project was a first step in the right direction. You either want to invest in infrastructure that will have a positive economic benefit or you don't. You can't have it both ways Writer fake buckeye. As far as looking at it through partisan eyes, I suspect it is more your problem then mine. I never vote a straight ticket, I have been the campaign manager for a republican county commissioner, and I actually look at both the pros and the cons of any issue before I make up my mine. This was a great opportunity to use federal dollars to jump start this idea. There is no chance that Ohio or any private enterprise is ever going to do this by itself. I guess we will see how it works out when the other states that move forward with this.
• I Wear Pants

  CenterBHSFan;642383 wrote:I don't think it's that people don't WANT a high speed railroad, I think it's a question of if it's feasible. There's the difference.
  
  I remember a thread talking about infrastructure - something like 50 years of deterioration? That America really needed to get busy on that?
  So, what are we to do? Invest in something like HSR or catch up (at least a little bit) on what we already have our hands full with?
  
  I think that's a logical question! Agree or disagree?

  So what are we to do? Merely keep our same infrastructure and watch as other countries improve while we stay the same?
• CenterBHSFan

  

  Pants, I don't know. Perhaps replace some water lines, repair/replace some bridges and all that sort of stuff first just MIGHT be a good idea.
  We will always need roads, bridges, water, etc. We do not need high speed railroad right this very minute. IMHO
  
  Admittedly, I've never been one of those "keeping up with the Jones'" type of person anyway (especially if I didn't have the money for it lol), so that obviously bears on my thoughts on the race to HSR.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  In other words, I'd MUCH, MUCH, MUCH rather Ohio be practical than in debt.
• BGFalcons82

  

  Back to the Kasich angle and away from HSR...I see where his administration is going to consider allowing oil and natural gas exploration and capturing the product on state property. The monies collected would be used to pare down our state debt. The usual suspects against this idea are saying it will potentially harm nature and it's not safe. I'm for it as the technology to do this safely and without harm is certainly available. If the state can claim some economic gain without hurting anything or taxing anyone, then whom would be against it?
• Bigdogg

  BGFalcons82;642554 wrote:Back to the Kasich angle and away from HSR...I see where his administration is going to consider allowing oil and natural gas exploration and capturing the product on state property. The monies collected would be used to pare down our state debt. The usual suspects against this idea are saying it will potentially harm nature and it's not safe. I'm for it as the technology to do this safely and without harm is certainly available. If the state can claim some economic gain without hurting anything or taxing anyone, then whom would be against it?

  
  I am for it if it can be safely done, and the taxpayers can get a fair contract with the oil company developing it.
• Writerbuckeye

  

  CenterBHSFan;642539 wrote:In other words, I'd MUCH, MUCH, MUCH rather Ohio be practical than in debt.

  
  This is the bottom line on the bottom line, for me.
  
  Oh and doggie, I might be "fake" in your eyes, but I've got more common sense in my little finger than you've got in your entire mange infested body.
• Bigdogg

  Writerbuckeye;642668 wrote:This is the bottom line on the bottom line, for me.
  
  Oh and doggie, I might be "fake" in your eyes, but I've got more common sense in my little finger than you've got in your entire mange infested body.

  
  Now you went and hurt my feelings with your poison words. LOL
• Cleveland Buck

  

  If Ohio voters want to vote for someone who is going to raise the state income taxes to pay for this boondoggle, then so be it. The federal government has nothing to do with it and needn't contribute one penny toward it. They have much more important things to spend my money on.
• Bigdogg

  Cleveland Buck;643431 wrote:If Ohio voters want to vote for someone who is going to raise the state income taxes to pay for this boondoggle, then so be it. The federal government has nothing to do with it and needn't contribute one penny toward it. They have much more important things to spend my money on.

  
  Hey Buckey, you do realize the federal government collects Ohioan's taxes right? It's our money already, last stats I saw, we are a donor state. You know what that means, right? First thing Governor Reagan did after he got elected in California was to make sure they got their money back from the Federal government.
• Cleveland Buck

  

  Bigdogg;643730 wrote:Hey Buckey, you do realize the federal government collects Ohioan's taxes right? It's our money already, last stats I saw, we are a donor state. You know what that means, right? First thing Governor Reagan did after he got elected in California was to make sure they got their money back from the Federal government.

  
  Do you realize what the federal government's purpose is? A high speed or low speed or any speed rail isn't in their job description. If they can't put the money they seize from my paycheck towards the debt or something that they are supposed to do, they should just let me keep whatever they want to spend on this other nonsense. I will vote for state representatives that support this project if I want it done.
• believer

  

  Cleveland Buck;643734 wrote:Do you realize what the federal government's purpose is? A high speed or low speed or any speed rail isn't in their job description. If they can't put the money they seize from my paycheck towards the debt or something that they are supposed to do, they should just let me keep whatever they want to spend on this other nonsense. I will vote for state representatives that support this project if I want it done.

  Correct....but some folks still believe the Feds were created by God to nanny our asses to the grave.
• I Wear Pants

  CenterBHSFan;642528 wrote:Pants, I don't know. Perhaps replace some water lines, repair/replace some bridges and all that sort of stuff first just MIGHT be a good idea.
  We will always need roads, bridges, water, etc. We do not need high speed railroad right this very minute. IMHO
  
  Admittedly, I've never been one of those "keeping up with the Jones'" type of person anyway (especially if I didn't have the money for it lol), so that obviously bears on my thoughts on the race to HSR.

  Keeping up with the Jones(es?) is dumb in a "we're buying a pool too now" way. It's not dumb in a "we don't want our country to fall behind way". We have to play that game in education, infrastructure, technology, defense, etc, etc. We're losing at a lot of it right now except really defense and perhaps technology.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  I Wear Pants;643960 wrote:Keeping up with the Jones(es?) is dumb in a "we're buying a pool too now" way. It's not dumb in a "we don't want our country to fall behind way". We have to play that game in education, infrastructure, technology, defense, etc, etc. We're losing at a lot of it right now except really defense and perhaps technology.

  ALL of that is not Ohio's fault. If you are making $6,000 per month and your bills are $12,000 a month, would it make sense to go in debt even further to buy another car?
  
  Believe it or not, state government is based on that principle also (or at least it should be).
  
  It makes sense to clean up what we already have FIRST, as I stated above,
  

  
  Perhaps replace some water lines, repair/replace some bridges and all that sort of stuff first just MIGHT be a good idea

  
  before venturing into something we just cannot afford, even with the federal governments help. Once we clean ourselves up, I see no problem AT THAT POINT in considering/planning for HSR, if it's feasible and practical.
• QuakerOats

  Kasich admin just issued a much-needed epa permit in less than 48 hours after Strickland held it up for 20 months.
  
  Now THIS is ................ change we can believe in!!!!
  
  Plain Dealer: 20 Month EPA Permit Snag Solved in 48 Hours
  January 14, 2011 | Tags: Governor Kasich, Ohio EPA, Scott Nally — admin @ 6:35 pm
  Governor John Kasich held a press conference on Friday with new Ohio EPA Director Scott Nally. You can read more in the article below from the Cleveland Plain Dealer:
  
  COLUMBUS, Ohio – A bureaucratic delay that kept an Eastern Ohio energy project in limbo for 20 months was sorted out in a week by the new Ohio Environmental Protection Agency team installed by Gov. John Kasich.
  
  That was the story line from Team Kasich on Friday as a new permit to operate a gas-fueled, co-generation facility was signed at state EPA headquarters in Columbus. The permit allows Mingo Junction Energy Center, which supplies steam and electricity to Severstal Wheeling, to use a waste gas piped over from a coke-making facility in West Virginia that otherwise would be flared off.
  
  At a news conference, Kasich credited new EPA Director Scott Nally.
  
  “This is a fact — it was over 20 months they couldn’t get an agreement. He did it in 48 hours, and the air is cleaner as a result, and they make more money as a result,” Kasich said.
• I Wear Pants

  CenterBHSFan;643987 wrote:ALL of that is not Ohio's fault. If you are making $6,000 per month and your bills are $12,000 a month, would it make sense to go in debt even further to buy another car?
  
  Believe it or not, state government is based on that principle also (or at least it should be).
  
  It makes sense to clean up what we already have FIRST, as I stated above,
  
  
  
  before venturing into something we just cannot afford, even with the federal governments help. Once we clean ourselves up, I see no problem AT THAT POINT in considering/planning for HSR, if it's feasible and practical.

  It would perhaps make sense to go in debt more to buy a pair of shoes so you can walk to your job.
  
  We need to balance things out and that's definitely a priority. But we cannot simply halt everything to do such or else we're going to be a middle of the pack country in every regard really quickly.
• Bigdogg

  Cleveland Buck;643734 wrote:Do you realize what the federal government's purpose is? A high speed or low speed or any speed rail isn't in their job description. If they can't put the money they seize from my paycheck towards the debt or something that they are supposed to do, they should just let me keep whatever they want to spend on this other nonsense. I will vote for state representatives that support this project if I want it done.

  
  Well lets tear up the federal highway system if what you say is true.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  I Wear Pants;644230 wrote:It would perhaps make sense to go in debt more to buy a pair of shoes so you can walk to your job.
  
  We need to balance things out and that's definitely a priority. But we cannot simply halt everything to do such or else we're going to be a middle of the pack country in every regard really quickly.

  Not necessarily. When/If we get ourselves cleaned up and then decide to build a HSR, ours will be newer. Everybody likes shinies!