Officials say NJ-NYC rail tunnel appe...

Officials say NJ-NYC rail tunnel appears doomed

There are 51 comments on the WSVN-TV Miami Beach story from Oct 27, 2010, titled Officials say NJ-NYC rail tunnel appears doomed. In it, WSVN-TV Miami Beach reports that:

The fate of the biggest public works project in the country -- a $9 billion-plus rail tunnel under the Hudson River -- appears to be sealed after officials said New Jersey Gov.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at WSVN-TV Miami Beach.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last

maddog2008

Since: Sep 08

Rochester, NY

#1 Oct 27, 2010
Boy-o-boy,I bet that will pi$$ off the union thugs and the rest of the scum that were in line to have their pockets lined with the taxpayers money.
TedsLiver

Milpitas, CA

#2 Oct 27, 2010
Obammy spent that stimulus money on acorn. Nothing left.
Buck

Livonia, MI

#3 Oct 27, 2010
maddog2008 wrote:
Boy-o-boy,I bet that will pi$$ off the union thugs and the rest of the scum that were in line to have their pockets lined with the taxpayers money.
Nice try, but if you had any clue as to what is really going on, you would understand that a tunnel bore of that size and length is a very difficult and expensive proposition.
Great

Pasadena, CA

#4 Oct 27, 2010
Rail projects are just a total waste of taxpayer's money!
Eleanor

Vernon Hills, IL

#5 Oct 27, 2010
Great wrote:
Rail projects are just a total waste of taxpayer's money!
Think again.

It is cheaper to ship products by rail than to ship via truck.

“JESUS WOULD IMPEACH THE GOP!!!”

Since: May 09

Lake Success, N.Y.

#6 Oct 27, 2010
First, fat ass loses 400 million dollars to the state Dept. Of Education by not having the paperwork filed on time - now he kills a project that would have created 6000 jobs immediately, and over 46,000 in 10 years.

Again, fat ass is looking short term - not long term.

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Raleigh, NC

#7 Oct 27, 2010
Eleanor wrote:
<quoted text>
Think again.
It is cheaper to ship products by rail than to ship via truck.
Shipping products is NOT what this tunnel/rail was for. It was for Commuters which was a Losing Proposition.
Will

Columbus, OH

#8 Oct 27, 2010
Bad decision. I'd heard there were overruns, and was sympathetic at first, but read this in the article:

"Lautenberg said that he urged the U.S. Transportation Department to give Christie options to minimize New Jersey's financial risk and that federal officials complied.

The governor was given four financial options for salvaging the project, including one that eliminated his state's risk for overruns, said one of the officials who spoke to the AP."

If that's true, this is outrageous. This is necessary infrastructure work, as anyone who's been through that small, old two-track tunnel could tell you. NJ Transit and Amtrak run a huge volume of passengers in and out of NYC, and that plus the jobs involved made this a good project.

This is what you get when you elect budget-cutting Republican morons to office. Note that Christie's done little to really reform Jersey or fix its atrocious property-tax structure.
Will

Columbus, OH

#9 Oct 27, 2010
The laughing liberal wrote:
<quoted text>
Shipping products is NOT what this tunnel/rail was for. It was for Commuters which was a Losing Proposition.
Losing in what way? Commuter trains cut traffic volume and parking problems and save energy, how is that a "losing proposition?" Are you only looking at this in terms of profit and loss, or what?

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Raleigh, NC

#10 Oct 27, 2010
TonyT1961 wrote:
First, fat ass loses 400 million dollars to the state Dept. Of Education by not having the paperwork filed on time - now he kills a project that would have created 6000 jobs immediately, and over 46,000 in 10 years.
Again, fat ass is looking short term - not long term.
First, 40 other states didn't get the money either moron.
Second, The $400 Million is ALL Borrowed Money from China.
Third, The rail routes were not self supporting. They were going to LOSE MONEY!
Fourth, We don't need to make work just to add onto the Debt Burden.

Christie is doing what a leader should do. Obama could learn everything from someone that good.

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Raleigh, NC

#11 Oct 27, 2010
Will wrote:
<quoted text>
Losing in what way? Commuter trains cut traffic volume and parking problems and save energy, how is that a "losing proposition?" Are you only looking at this in terms of profit and loss, or what?
The routes & ridership revenue would NOT support itself. It would need annual gov subsidies. That's Not the kind of projects that make any sense.
YouHelpFixIt

Scottsdale, AZ

#12 Oct 27, 2010
Will wrote:
Bad decision. I'd heard there were overruns, and was sympathetic at first, but read this in the article:
"Lautenberg said that he urged the U.S. Transportation Department to give Christie options to minimize New Jersey's financial risk and that federal officials complied.
The governor was given four financial options for salvaging the project, including one that eliminated his state's risk for overruns, said one of the officials who spoke to the AP."
If that's true, this is outrageous. This is necessary infrastructure work, as anyone who's been through that small, old two-track tunnel could tell you. NJ Transit and Amtrak run a huge volume of passengers in and out of NYC, and that plus the jobs involved made this a good project.
This is what you get when you elect budget-cutting Republican morons to office. Note that Christie's done little to really reform Jersey or fix its atrocious property-tax structure.
So now its outrageous to not spend money you don't have?

Which one of the options did you think he should choose, and why? personaly I can't say if any of them were any good because I have not seen them, but then I'm guessing you have not either.

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Raleigh, NC

#13 Oct 27, 2010
Will wrote:
Bad decision. I'd heard there were overruns, and was sympathetic at first, but read this in the article:
"Lautenberg said that he urged the U.S. Transportation Department to give Christie options to minimize New Jersey's financial risk and that federal officials complied.
The governor was given four financial options for salvaging the project, including one that eliminated his state's risk for overruns, said one of the officials who spoke to the AP."
If that's true, this is outrageous. This is necessary infrastructure work, as anyone who's been through that small, old two-track tunnel could tell you. NJ Transit and Amtrak run a huge volume of passengers in and out of NYC, and that plus the jobs involved made this a good project.
This is what you get when you elect budget-cutting Republican morons to office. Note that Christie's done little to really reform Jersey or fix its atrocious property-tax structure.
Overruns are only one source of financial pain.

1- It's budget money NJ didn't have in the first place.
2- If the Overruns aren't being picked up by the State, Guess who Picks it up? The FEDERAL TAX PAYER!!!! No Way!
3- The Ridership Revenues still do not support the rail costs. It's a loser.
4- It's Unnecessary Work once you realize the project & upkeep is a drain on Tax payers for its Entire Lifetime.

Christie is Right Again. Tell Obama to focus on the Oil Pipeline work from Canada to Louisiana.
Will

Columbus, OH

#14 Oct 27, 2010
The laughing liberal wrote:
<quoted text>
The routes & ridership revenue would NOT support itself. It would need annual gov subsidies. That's Not the kind of projects that make any sense.
That's what I thought. Another profit-oriented Rightie who puts profits ahead of the public good.

Bleah!
Will

Columbus, OH

#15 Oct 27, 2010
YouHelpFixIt wrote:
<quoted text>
So now its outrageous to not spend money you don't have?
Which one of the options did you think he should choose, and why? personaly I can't say if any of them were any good because I have not seen them, but then I'm guessing you have not either.
If you haven't seen them, why pretend you know anything about the subject?

ALL public and private entities, including the average citizen, "spend money they don't have" from time to time. You do that every time you buy a house or car, for instance. It's called a "loan."

Duh!

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Raleigh, NC

#17 Oct 27, 2010
Will wrote:
<quoted text>
That's what I thought. Another profit-oriented Rightie who puts profits ahead of the public good.
Bleah!
There's no public good when government creates another burden on the Taxpayers for the rest of their life and their childens life.

Profit? It's a gov rail dumbarse. If there's extra money from revenues (Not), they spend it on other gov BS. That's how gov works (doesn't work actually).

Sorry but you truly are a stupid person. I pity you.

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Raleigh, NC

#18 Oct 27, 2010
Will wrote:
<quoted text>
If you haven't seen them, why pretend you know anything about the subject?
ALL public and private entities, including the average citizen, "spend money they don't have" from time to time. You do that every time you buy a house or car, for instance. It's called a "loan."
Duh!
You want to spend money for things we don't need and can't pay for ALL THE TIME. This is why the Budget Deficits and National Debt are swallowing us you stupid idiot.

Hole in the ground projects that are projected to Lose Money from DAY 1 are to be canceled upon sight by good governance! Sorry but we tried it your way and have an unsustainable Mountain of Debt to show for it. Nothing else. You've had your chance and proved your theories suck.

Time to kick you to the curb. Adios. Good Man Christie!

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Raleigh, NC

#20 Oct 27, 2010
Obama good intentions go astray when it comes to federal student loans

Another piece of bad legislation signed into law (Did he even read it?)

By Stephen Jerome and Karen Smith
Wednesday, October 27th 2010

Belkis Abreu, a young mother of three, was determined to set a good example for her kids by getting a college education. With one associate's degree in hand, she earned another at the College of Westchester, a proprietary college. From there, she transferred credits to Fordham University and received a bachelor's degree in business administration in 2009. She used the College of Westchester's job placement office to help find her current job and checks in there often. No longer is she simply working the front desk of a local hotel - now she's managing the entire property.

Students like Abreu are at risk of losing access to the programs that make their success possible, and she is on the verge of being seen as a deadbeat in the eyes of the Obama administration. To pay for her degrees, Abreu took out $30,000 of student loans. As federal loan rules allowed - in fact, encouraged - Abreu deferred payment on the loans until she was fully on her feet and financially stable. Most consider this kind of student loan flexible, thoughtful policy, and for good reason - by making an "investment" in Abreu's education, she will get a better job, repay the loans, and, over time, contribute more to society as a taxpayer. Indeed, Abreu will begin making payments next month, according to plan.

So why the deadbeat status?

New rules proposed by the Obama administration would essentially count Abreu in default. The rules require that graduates of these programs repay principal, as well as interest, in the years immediately following graduation. With the good intention of assuring that study at proprietary colleges, institutions run by private owners or investors, leads to gainful employment and that taxpayer-provided student loans are repaid, these so-called "gainful employment" rules seem sensible.

But in an effort to fix one problem, these new rules create a far bigger one.

The rules' unintended but very unfortunate consequence will be to deny millions of nontraditional students like Abreu access to a higher education and better job opportunities. Under new regulations, if students in proprietary college programs do not meet the new loan-repayment requirements, the schools will no longer be able to offer the Pell Grants that make college affordable and accessible. Ironically, it is students of proprietary colleges who need this financial assistance most. Proprietary colleges make strides to welcome students who are economically disadvantaged and therefore rely on student aid to attend school.

Without large savings or parental support, proprietary college students like Abreu typically need more loans than other students. The default rate on these loans is no higher than that of similar student groups at other colleges.

This is where the Obama administration's good intentions go astray. Default rates have everything to do with the type of student, not the type of school. By depending on complex formulas and bad data that count student loan deferments as defaults, the new rules punish good students more than bad schools.
Where there are bad practices - for example, predatory recruiting and degree misrepresentation - the U.S. Education Department should act. But it should avoid a double standard that applies to proprietary colleges but not to community and traditional colleges. The Obama administration should set aside the proposed rules and instead get back to promoting policies that get more people like Abreu into the classroom and then the workforce.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2010/10/2...

Everything Obama touches is a disaster.
YouHelpFixIt

Scottsdale, AZ

#21 Oct 27, 2010
Will wrote:
<quoted text>
If you haven't seen them, why pretend you know anything about the subject?
ALL public and private entities, including the average citizen, "spend money they don't have" from time to time. You do that every time you buy a house or car, for instance. It's called a "loan."
Duh!
I didn't pretend to know which option was best, you did.

BTW. Thanks for the confirmation by ommission that you did not see any of the options. Exactly as I thought.

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

Raleigh, NC

#22 Oct 27, 2010
Yes, Will struggles with the facts but loves distortions.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Monmouth Junction Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Church vs. state: More than a battle of Christm... (Nov '16) Aug '17 samt 5
News Princeton researcher explores Southern Ocean pa... (Oct '13) Aug '17 Madison 6
News Changes in the air at two radio stations (Aug '06) Jul '17 Lewis H 1,036
Looking for birth mom May '17 Angela 2
Susan Sunday (Dec '09) May '17 jjk 26
Did you know NJ adoptees can request their orig... (Jan '17) Jan '17 joanNYadoptees 1
Basement Waterproofing (May '14) Feb '15 jordennancy23 2

Monmouth Junction Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Monmouth Junction Mortgages