$64b just isn't that much money when applied to CA housing costs. 640k units IF fully leveraged 5:1 with tax credits, etc.
-
-
-
640K is 6-7 years of production. That's a lot.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The choice is not HSR or do nothing. Not doing HSR necessitates expensive highway/airport expansions; these would not be good for housing.
-
Bay Area is also locally benefiting from HSR with upgrades to Cal Train line, extension into SF city center
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
I don't agree. There are issues with high speed rail but it's part of the future for CA.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
If we want to talk about blending the stuff HSR does with Hyperloop, fine. But much of HSR spend is needed *local transit*
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I feel like this is ignoring the potential in having better connection between Central Valley and urban centers
@samaThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@kimmaicutler My take: Apply systems-level thinking to maximize the results of the existing HSR project.https://twitter.com/asmallteapot/status/895353773031251968 …Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
hyperdupe
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Why not both? Their source of funding is separate. Local rails are also not using their finding appropriately
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.