Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

MO_Moderate

(377 posts)
102. Why? Because most don't want it
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 12:56 PM
Mar 2014

Heck, Kansas City had to rig the vote just to get a small line approved.

Yer darn tootin'! This is America, Pal. And we are damn proud of our military, quinnox Mar 2014 #1
We should have both. PhilSays Mar 2014 #2
All we need to do is claw it back from the billionaires Warpy Mar 2014 #5
What do you mean we? WHEN CRABS ROAR Mar 2014 #15
We don't NEED both. pangaia Mar 2014 #32
We don't need the bloated military we've wasted trillions on. Arugula Latte Mar 2014 #98
Can't allow the hoi polloi to travel affordably, yunno Cirque du So-What Mar 2014 #3
Hey, if ya can't afford your own jet, you DESERVE to ride with the riffraff. Jackpine Radical Mar 2014 #45
Huge K&R! hrmjustin Mar 2014 #4
Two words: Brigid Mar 2014 #6
I hope you meant "fucking" as an adjective. Scuba Mar 2014 #7
Now that's just cruel! thucythucy Mar 2014 #12
I thought you were talking about Austrians demwing Mar 2014 #16
You should see this town's Wikipedia page jmowreader Mar 2014 #31
ROFLMAO ... yuiyoshida Mar 2014 #81
I think you can appreciate this one jmowreader Mar 2014 #83
I have heard it before,...Thanks! yuiyoshida Mar 2014 #84
Hey, cool Art_from_Ark Mar 2014 #151
I know right? yuiyoshida Mar 2014 #152
I've read it's the case that sign is set in concrete to prevent thievery. Probably so. kairos12 Mar 2014 #48
I agree but I am not sure how that would "satisfy" him. just sayin'. nm rhett o rick Mar 2014 #69
I did. Brigid Mar 2014 #23
It was worth it! nt thucythucy Mar 2014 #144
And if any country needs high speed trains it's the USA npk Mar 2014 #8
Not really. Nye Bevan Mar 2014 #14
Yes really AlbertCat Mar 2014 #18
Nye has it correct. Most people don't want to take three days by rail to get where they need to Ikonoklast Mar 2014 #139
It takes 3 days now, with Amtrak. cui bono Mar 2014 #141
Indeed AlbertCat Mar 2014 #147
the first transcontinental railroad and others were built over people's property WHEN CRABS ROAR Mar 2014 #21
Are you saying that respecting private property rights... Lost_Count Mar 2014 #54
Not at all, just pointing out history. WHEN CRABS ROAR Mar 2014 #107
Public good supercedes private greed. We call it eminent domain. aquart Mar 2014 #153
WE (royal we) seem to be able to do anything WE want erronis Mar 2014 #28
yep - "we" don't seem to have a problem building a pipeline on people's property do we ?! Locrian Mar 2014 #110
While I agree on seizing property NewJeffCT Mar 2014 #41
The big problem with many of those routes is that you need a car to get to the station Nye Bevan Mar 2014 #46
Fortunately we all have an airport within walking distance of our homes. Scuba Mar 2014 #55
hah! pothos Mar 2014 #75
A+ ForgoTheConsequence Mar 2014 #78
With visionaries like this in the Democratic Party, who needs Republicans? Maedhros Mar 2014 #111
Dont forget California quakerboy Mar 2014 #80
I really, really, really, really want to ride on one of those trains some day.. yuiyoshida Mar 2014 #82
I would have included California NewJeffCT Mar 2014 #85
Last I read it was still being contested quakerboy Mar 2014 #145
Don't forget San Diego to LA, lots of people travel that route. WHEN CRABS ROAR Mar 2014 #108
High Speed from Atlanta to Nashville energumen Mar 2014 #109
OTOH, you can't fly a train into a building:) grahamhgreen Mar 2014 #65
This ^^^^^^^^^ treestar Mar 2014 #106
We need all the ground transportation we can get marions ghost Mar 2014 #114
The Northeast, the CA SD-LA-SF corridor, the great lakes region, Northwest Portland - Vancouver Warren Stupidity Mar 2014 #134
There's one primary point to this discussion that no one's mentioned ..... Plucketeer Mar 2014 #133
We could nationalize the petroleum and lumber industries. That alone would knock the Koch Cleita Mar 2014 #9
Well, those are OUR resources. Scuba Mar 2014 #10
They are and we need to reclaim them for our use. n/t Cleita Mar 2014 #40
Or at least get better royalties. Why are the Norwegians receiving four times the royalty as we? Scuba Mar 2014 #52
Yep, from Cheney who was taking his orders from Wall Street 1%ers. eom Cleita Mar 2014 #56
Scuba Diclotican Mar 2014 #120
Norway had a pro. Our side had literally coked-up shills, literally screwing Big Oil's whores ... Scuba Mar 2014 #121
Scuba Diclotican Mar 2014 #131
America would do well to study Norway. Scuba Mar 2014 #132
Scuba Diclotican Mar 2014 #137
You do realize, don't you, that when a company is nationalized fair compensation needs to be paid? Nye Bevan Mar 2014 #11
I'm Sure We Could Figure this all Out fascisthunter Mar 2014 #13
You do realize that at some point in the future our operating systems WHEN CRABS ROAR Mar 2014 #25
Have we always paid fair compensation when assets were seized? erronis Mar 2014 #30
Here's how you do it. Cleita Mar 2014 #39
As an alternative to government ownership there are always co-ops Jackpine Radical Mar 2014 #49
I agree. I actually once belonged to a telephone coop. It was so Cleita Mar 2014 #53
I belong to a power co-op, 2 credit unions, & a farm co-op. Jackpine Radical Mar 2014 #57
I think this how we take our government back and we start at a local Cleita Mar 2014 #58
Absolutely. Jackpine Radical Mar 2014 #61
We Don't Have to Renew Leases AndyTiedye Mar 2014 #72
When you throw in the taxes they should have been paying, but didn't... RC Mar 2014 #93
When we had to we put 2T on the table overnight. Warren Stupidity Mar 2014 #135
Now you're talking. mountain grammy Mar 2014 #42
It does. I have nothing against private companies doing the next step that is transporting Cleita Mar 2014 #44
We can't nationalize anything treestar Mar 2014 #64
Did anybody say anything about not paying some kind of reimbursement for Cleita Mar 2014 #66
The law here doesn't provide that treestar Mar 2014 #67
That's because the law is fucked up. We need to change those laws. Cleita Mar 2014 #68
Then nobody should own any land. treestar Mar 2014 #92
Believing in the commons, that certain things are commonly owned is not being Cleita Mar 2014 #95
How many feet down should people own the land they own? treestar Mar 2014 #100
So you would prefer that Chevron or Exxon gets it instead? Cleita Mar 2014 #101
Nonresponsive. treestar Mar 2014 #103
So let's start pushing them to pass a law. n/t Cleita Mar 2014 #104
How many miles out to sea do the people own? Cleita Mar 2014 #142
If your looking to the future and our rights to own the commons WHEN CRABS ROAR Mar 2014 #122
Private companies are already looking into commandeering fresh water resources, not only Cleita Mar 2014 #124
They are more than just looking into commandeering fresh water, WHEN CRABS ROAR Mar 2014 #129
I agree. It's how to get the PTB to do it. eom Cleita Mar 2014 #140
IF you own the mineral rights. maddiemom Mar 2014 #96
We already own the land. jeff47 Mar 2014 #97
You mean like Little george did for his baseball stadium? RC Mar 2014 #94
Not at all familiar with the seizure of assets from US citizens of Japanese descent, are you? mbperrin Mar 2014 #99
Is that the radiated carrier? dixiegrrrrl Mar 2014 #17
I see from the comments AlbertCat Mar 2014 #19
HSRail is electric.... and worse, socialist ErikJ Mar 2014 #20
+1 well said lunasun Mar 2014 #26
HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!! WillyT Mar 2014 #22
Why? We're sending our money overseas. 840high Mar 2014 #24
Because the 1% owns all your government. nt Zorra Mar 2014 #27
Civilization... bvar22 Mar 2014 #29
Bingo! And don't forget the tax money we're not getting from these. valerief Mar 2014 #33
^^^ marions ghost Mar 2014 #116
That, and the fact that we at least nominally respect labor and environmental rules. Brickbat Mar 2014 #34
K&R! This post should have hundreds of recommendations! Enthusiast Mar 2014 #35
Nail....Head.... Junkdrawer Mar 2014 #36
What distinguishes our civilization is the inability to change. zeemike Mar 2014 #37
Those high speed trains are pretty comfortable, too NewJeffCT Mar 2014 #38
Are you sure about that combination of times and stops? muriel_volestrangler Mar 2014 #43
pretty sure NewJeffCT Mar 2014 #50
We have, I believe, fifteen nuclear-powered Super Carriers now . . . another_liberal Mar 2014 #47
Well no wonder we need more! Scuba Mar 2014 #59
We are most definitely still building them. another_liberal Mar 2014 #60
Ten. A HERETIC I AM Mar 2014 #62
The rest of the World . . . another_liberal Mar 2014 #87
I think it's only 10 in service but we have 3 under construction. rhett o rick Mar 2014 #71
Thank you for posting this! That's exactly why. nt Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2014 #51
California is supposed to be getting a bullet train mackerel Mar 2014 #63
Is that the train that the taxpayers are going to pay for so the wealthy can shuttle back and forth rhett o rick Mar 2014 #70
No. And for general info, the "wealthy" FLY to Vegas. Freight has the right of way down Cajon Pass cherokeeprogressive Mar 2014 #77
You could drive without as much traffic tho marions ghost Mar 2014 #117
I plan on using it. Especially when my family from Australia comes over. mackerel Mar 2014 #150
Actually, it is absolutely nothing like what was voted for. That is the problem. Throd Mar 2014 #73
Yes. A high speed train to Nevada JimDandy Mar 2014 #126
Carlin nailed it... Spitfire of ATJ Mar 2014 #74
GM and Southwest made a fuss--but now the shoes are all on the other foot MisterP Mar 2014 #76
Bullet Train Envy is getting to be like what I've read about Penis Envy. cherokeeprogressive Mar 2014 #79
Not an entire new rail system seabeckind Mar 2014 #91
Boeing actually did make a train once. BlueEye Mar 2014 #115
Yep new or radically improved high speed systems marions ghost Mar 2014 #118
Hell I would just be happy to have our gravel road paved! B Calm Mar 2014 #86
Let me tell you about "our cannon fodder" from Iraq and Afghanistan. dotymed Mar 2014 #88
Exactly! ctsnowman Mar 2014 #89
Indiana legislature is working on a mass transit bill seabeckind Mar 2014 #90
Why? Because most don't want it MO_Moderate Mar 2014 #102
The best part of this is that the Chinese are loaning us money Hoppy Mar 2014 #105
Did anyone mention the corruption involved in all this railway spending and the poor construction? sammytko Mar 2014 #112
vanity fair article sammytko Mar 2014 #113
we have "nice things". it's just that ours kill people. nt Javaman Mar 2014 #119
I Can Haz War? tomm2thumbs Mar 2014 #123
Cuz we can't "defend" ourselves from bogeymen with sissy trains. Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2014 #125
China plans to have both hack89 Mar 2014 #127
Yes, they're doubling their fleet, from one to two, neither of which will be nuclear powered. Scuba Mar 2014 #128
Their "aircraft carriers" aren't much more than helicopter platforms. Warren Stupidity Mar 2014 #136
In our future world we can't have both. WHEN CRABS ROAR Mar 2014 #130
YEP. Rex Mar 2014 #138
Two aircraft-carrier task forces for each of the seven oceans is an essential element to indepat Mar 2014 #143
no! it is to defend us from, ummm, nobody else's navy. Warren Stupidity Mar 2014 #148
The only times I've ridden trains (bullet or otherwise) has been on European vacations. Hamilton Felix Mar 2014 #146
City center to city center in comfort all the way. Warren Stupidity Mar 2014 #149
It's not because we have a military jmowreader Mar 2014 #154
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why can't we have nice th...»Reply #102