Not so friendly reminder that musk specifically came up with, and pushed, for hyperloop knowing that it would never be made, as an effort to stop the development of highspeed rail in America and shift all political discussions of it because “something better is around the corner”:

As I’ve written in my book, Musk admitted to his biographer Ashlee Vance that Hyperloop was all about trying to get legislators to cancel plans for high-speed rail in California—even though he had no plans to build it. Several years ago, Musk said that public transit was “a pain in the ass” where you were surrounded by strangers, including possible serial killers, to justify his opposition.

source: new york times

Also: 2024 update, the total length of China’s high-speed rail tracks has now reached well over 45,000 km, or 28,000 miles, by the end of 2023.

They are additionally five years ahead of schedule and expect to double the total number within ten years. And, before someone inevitably complains about “how expensive it is”, they are turning over a net-profit of over $600M USD a year.

Via

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -522 days ago

    California’s ENTIRE ANNUAL REVENUES are something like $150-150 billion. You’d have to dramatically increase taxes, and if you’re going to do that, why not spend it on education, or homelessness?

    • @explodicle
      link
      English
      222 days ago

      Because we can dramatically increase taxes for those too. Land value taxes don’t distort prices and we’ve barely scratched the surface.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        122 days ago

        I don’t know if I agree with raising taxes that substantially, but at least it’s a reasonable argument.

        • @explodicle
          link
          English
          122 days ago

          Why not substantially? The surplus from land ownership is “unearned income” - we’re basically giving a goverment handout to landlords right now. Land value is different from acreage, so your house would see very little increase in taxes.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -122 days ago

            Look, I’m not gonna bother with your evangelist tax pitch. Increasing the tax revenues of California by at least 30% is A LOT of new taxes, regardless of the source.

            • @explodicle
              link
              English
              122 days ago

              Ok but who cares? We should increase them even more than 30%.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                122 days ago

                …a lot of people care. An extra 30% lost would be financially ruinous for a lot of people.

                • @explodicle
                  link
                  English
                  122 days ago

                  It’s fortunate that increasing California’s taxes by 30% doesn’t necessarily impact a lot of people, then.

                  Land value is different from acreage, so your house would see very little increase in taxes.

                  I’m not evangelizing the woke narrative at you. This is just how land value taxes have always worked.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    122 days ago

                    It would absolutely affect Californians. 30% is a lot. The money has to come from somewhere

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          222 days ago

          The federal government pays Californian companies to make bombs. They also enlist and pay Californian residents to use those bombs, or otherwise get them in the hands of someone that will.

          Instead, the federal government should pay Californian residents to do peaceful things. Like build trains.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -222 days ago

            Ok, whatever, but it’s not.

            So, as I said in my initial comment, we’re building what we can, as we can afford it.