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
    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

                • @explodicle
                  link
                  English
                  121 days ago

                  And yet, it wouldn’t be 30% on a lot of Californians. The ones who would pay the most are landlords who would not be financially ruined. You need to read the Wikipedia article.