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

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      3 months 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?

        • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

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

          • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months 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.

            • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              3 months 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@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    3 months 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.

          • doubtingtammy@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months 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.

            • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              3 months 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.