Zeitgeist Posted April 12 Report Posted April 12 (edited) On 4/7/2026 at 8:54 PM, CdnFox said: So your solution is to spend all of their money on a freaking train? And then we can't afford infrastructure or roadway upgrades and people won't be able to afford to maintain a vehicle anyway Again I don't think you understand the scope of how much money we're talking about here. I don't think you get how badly this will deplete our federal ability to spend money on other things. Perhaps you think money is infinite and it's not possible to over spend? I assure you that is not the case. BC just had it's credit rating downgraded and the feds are on track for that. There is NO way this kind of expenditure makes sense even during good financial times, but right now? When our Debt to gdp is historically high? While the provinces are going broke as well? While the libs are set to rack up endless deficits around 80 billion or so for every year with just their CURRENT spending? WIth the trade war and the world facing an economic downturn? FFS, think about it! No I don’t think $90 billion is an exorbitant amount spread out over 20 years of construction. Keep in mind that a short light rail system on Toronto’s waterfront is $3 billion. The cost of the Gordie Howe Bridge is $6.4 billion, a single bridge. We’re talking about an 800km high speed rail line from Toronto to Quebec City that’s completely separate from the freight line that Via currently shares. Much of this work had to happen for high frequency rail, the simple separation of passenger from freight lines, but the reality is that there’s a significant difference in travel times that comes with HSR. Both highway and rail transportation are expensive. We need both, but we at least have a rail right of way for significant portions of HSR through Peterborough. We don’t have surface room in the GTA for new highways, which is why Ford has talked about tunnelling a second parallel highway under the 401. The longer we wait on transportation infrastructure projects in busy and growing urban areas, the costlier and harder they are to build. Edited April 12 by Zeitgeist 1 Quote
CdnFox Posted April 12 Report Posted April 12 2 hours ago, Zeitgeist said: No I don’t think $90 billion is an exorbitant amount spread out over 20 years of construction. Keep in mind that a short light rail system on Toronto’s waterfront is $3 billion. The cost of the Gordie Howe Bridge is $6.4 billion, a single bridge. We’re talking about an 800km high speed rail line from Toronto to Quebec City that’s completely separate from the freight line that Via currently shares. Much of this work had to happen for high frequency rail, the simple separation of passenger from freight lines, but the reality is that there’s a significant difference in travel times that comes with HSR. Both highway and rail transportation are expensive. We need both, but we at least have a rail right of way for significant portions of HSR through Peterborough. We don’t have surface room in the GTA for new highways, which is why Ford has talked about tunnelling a second parallel highway under the 401. The longer we wait on transportation infrastructure projects in busy and growing urban areas, the costlier and harder they are to build. 90 Billion is an insanely exorbitant amount. And we both know there's no way it stays at 90 billion. So ets not pretend. Yeah, a bridge that will allow about 40 thousand vehicles per day, 14 million cars a year to pass over it is worth 6 billion. it also massively improves commerce and transport allowing immediately for billions of dollars in goods to be moved to market. AND the tolls pay for it in just a few years, so it costs nothing. A rail system that will only benefit about 3 to 5 million people a year and will take a MINIMUM of 40 years to recover the costs AND POSSIBLY NEVER IF THE COSTS ARE HIGHER is NOT WORTH IT. 2 hours ago, Zeitgeist said: No I don’t think $90 billion is an exorbitant amount spread out over 20 years of construction. Keep in mind that a short light rail system on Toronto’s waterfront is $3 billion. The cost of the Gordie Howe Bridge is $6.4 billion, a single bridge. We’re talking about an 800km high speed rail line from Toronto to Quebec City that’s completely separate from the freight line that Via currently shares. Much of this work had to happen for high frequency rail, the simple separation of passenger from freight lines, but the reality is that there’s a significant difference in travel times that comes with HSR. Both highway and rail transportation are expensive. We need both, but we at least have a rail right of way for significant portions of HSR through Peterborough. We don’t have surface room in the GTA for new highways, which is why Ford has talked about tunnelling a second parallel highway under the 401. The longer we wait on transportation infrastructure projects in busy and growing urban areas, the costlier and harder they are to build. Oh and just for fun i'll leave this here MORGAN: Canada's high-speed rail dream is just a Liberal slush fund in disguise Quote "That which doesn't kill me... Had better start running."
Zeitgeist Posted April 12 Report Posted April 12 (edited) 41 minutes ago, CdnFox said: 90 Billion is an insanely exorbitant amount. And we both know there's no way it stays at 90 billion. So ets not pretend. Yeah, a bridge that will allow about 40 thousand vehicles per day, 14 million cars a year to pass over it is worth 6 billion. it also massively improves commerce and transport allowing immediately for billions of dollars in goods to be moved to market. AND the tolls pay for it in just a few years, so it costs nothing. A rail system that will only benefit about 3 to 5 million people a year and will take a MINIMUM of 40 years to recover the costs AND POSSIBLY NEVER IF THE COSTS ARE HIGHER is NOT WORTH IT. Oh and just for fun i'll leave this here MORGAN: Canada's high-speed rail dream is just a Liberal slush fund in disguise Btw, it’s $60-$90 billion estimated cost. The original HFR proposal, which was pretty much a necessity, separated freight from passenger lines and included getting new train sets, had escalated in cost to $45-$75 billion without cutting travel times to nearly the same degree. HSR will basically make it possible to replace flights between these cities, which is both an environmental improvement and a reduction in traffic at our congested airports. It also creates the backbone of a Southern Ontario bullet train system through the addition of spurs to K-W, London, Barrie, even Hamilton and Niagara, which can be provincially funded (already studied for Toronto to Windsor). 40 year payback is fine. This is the kind of project that only government can do, much like the St. Lawrence Seaway or Confederation Bridge. No one today would call those projects wastes of money. Edited April 12 by Zeitgeist Quote
CdnFox Posted April 12 Report Posted April 12 6 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said: Btw, it’s $60-$90 billion estimated cost. Literally every other project this government has done that means the final price tag will come in around about 150 in today's dollars if we're VERY lucky. Based on some of their projects it could come in as high as 400 billion Now you're going to sit back and try and claim oh there's no way it could be that high. Conservatives were warning people like you the Justin Trudeau would double the national debt. Everybody said that's absolutely impossible there's no possible way he could borrow that much money it's alarmism it's nonsense. Guess what happened, he soared past that before he left. And carney is doing one better Now I'm telling you that there is no universe where this comes in at 90 billion dollars if they're saying that's the high end. Especially not if it's over 10 years. They will hire extra consultants, they will have committees, they will have special appointees, all of which will be friends of the liberals and will double or triple the price This is not what you think it is it will not end the way you think it will and it is not worth the money even if it did. Why the hell do you think the Liberals in Carney are so interested in moving this specific project forward? It is a massive cash cow for them personally Quote "That which doesn't kill me... Had better start running."
TreeBeard Posted April 12 Report Posted April 12 1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said: HSR will basically make it possible to replace flights between these cities, which is both an environmental improvement and a reduction in traffic at our congested airports. This is why Air Canada is one of the investment partners in this. They don’t want to do short domestic flights as it doesn’t make as much business sense. They don’t want airports operating at full capacity for less profitable short runs. 1 Quote
suds Posted April 12 Report Posted April 12 5 hours ago, Zeitgeist said: This is the kind of project that only government can do, much like the St. Lawrence Seaway or Confederation Bridge. No one today would call those projects wastes of money. The St. Lawrence Seaway allowed our exporting of materials get to market faster and cheaper not to mention the added hydro electric power the seaway provided. The Confederation Bridge was built mainly because the federal government was tired of paying all of PEI's ferry bills which they had to do by constitutional agreement, and it only cost $1.3 B. Earlier in this thread, you mentioned the 1976 Olympics. In 1973, Montreal's Mayor Jean Drapeau announced...'These games can no more have a deficit than a man can have a baby'. It took until December 2006 for the taxpayers of Quebec to pay off the final bill. We're going to have to start getting a little more sensible with our spending don't you think? I agree we need subs, fighter planes, a larger properly equipped military, military bases in the north, doubling our electrical energy capacity by 2050, getting our resources to market, not to mention doctors, housing, hospitals, schools, etc. We don't really need a vanity project like high speed rail. 1 Quote
Zeitgeist Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 (edited) 33 minutes ago, suds said: The St. Lawrence Seaway allowed our exporting of materials get to market faster and cheaper not to mention the added hydro electric power the seaway provided. The Confederation Bridge was built mainly because the federal government was tired of paying all of PEI's ferry bills which they had to do by constitutional agreement, and it only cost $1.3 B. Earlier in this thread, you mentioned the 1976 Olympics. In 1973, Montreal's Mayor Jean Drapeau announced...'These games can no more have a deficit than a man can have a baby'. It took until December 2006 for the taxpayers of Quebec to pay off the final bill. We're going to have to start getting a little more sensible with our spending don't you think? I agree we need subs, fighter planes, a larger properly equipped military, military bases in the north, doubling our electrical energy capacity by 2050, getting our resources to market, not to mention doctors, housing, hospitals, schools, etc. We don't really need a vanity project like high speed rail. But don’t you see the absurdity of the situation? Canada has few international enemies. Most of our NATO involvement, like our previous military interventions, have been about helping other countries. We’re now going on a military big spending campaign that’s going to blast past 2% of GDP and cost hundreds of billions. Most of that equipment will end up in the scrap heap in 40 years. I’m not saying we didn’t need to boost military spending, but at least once we build HSR, we’ll have it for a very long time and people can use it. I can tell that a lot of the criticism of HSR is coming from less populated areas of Canada. Central Canadians have come to understand that Toronto is one of the biggest cities in North America and it remains one of the fastest growing urban areas in the West. We can’t sustain this economy on insufficient transportation infrastructure. It’s not like this project is going to happen overnight. We need to get serious about our own worth. Not everything can or should be done on the cheap. Edited April 13 by Zeitgeist Quote
suds Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 When it comes to core duties/responsibilities of government, you seem to be putting high speed rail at the top of the list. That's the only absurdity that I see. 2 Quote
WestCanMan Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 On 4/12/2026 at 6:55 AM, Zeitgeist said: No I don’t think $90 billion is an exorbitant amount spread out over 20 years of construction. the costlier and harder they are to build. Correct, but with Libs $90B means $300B, with $150B of wasteful cronyism. Eg: "How did Freeland/Zelensky Construction Inc, which was only in business for 2 months, with 3 employees, land a $400M contract? And what did they do in 3 months to earn all that money?" - the type of question that CBC will never ask Quote If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. "I don't hate American's, I pointed out the literacy rate to Uncle Sam." - LinkSoul "It's just a parable about rocks and trees talking to muslims to help them kill Jews who are trying to hide. It's open to interpretation." - robobigot
Zeitgeist Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 (edited) 15 hours ago, suds said: When it comes to core duties/responsibilities of government, you seem to be putting high speed rail at the top of the list. That's the only absurdity that I see. As an Ontarian, I’d put it alongside developing the Ring of Fire and above tunnelling a new highway under the 401, which looks much more like Boston’s Big Dig than HSR. Hell, I’d rather bury the Gardiner. Edited April 13 by Zeitgeist Quote
Zeitgeist Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 3 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: Correct, but with Libs $90B means $300B, with $150B of wasteful cronyism. Eg: "How did Freeland/Zelensky Construction Inc, which was only in business for 2 months, with 3 employees, land a $400M contract? And what did they do in 3 months to earn all that money?" - the type of question that CBC will never ask Okay but we don’t know. We definitely need to build in cost-overrun guarantees. Quote
John Johnston Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 Personally I would rather see our present deplorable passenger service fixed up long before pie in the sky investments. Quote
Zeitgeist Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 (edited) 49 minutes ago, John Johnston said: Personally I would rather see our present deplorable passenger service fixed up long before pie in the sky investments. What’s pie in the sky for Canada comes standard in Europe, Japan, China, and the US, I guess. This is why we can’t have nice things, the second rate mentality. Edited April 13 by Zeitgeist Quote
CdnFox Posted April 13 Report Posted April 13 9 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said: What’s pie in the sky for Canada comes standard in Europe, Japan, China, and the US, I guess. This is why we can’t have nice things, the second rate mentality. No, there is no business case for this here. Japan has 123 million people in a country Less than half the size of British Columbia. So they have the population to make it make business sense Same with Europe. It makes sense. It does not make sense here. We do not have the business case, we do not have the population to support it, there is no indication it will ever be used anywhere even remote and if it does it'll be 40 years down the road. Which means we should be building at 30 years down the road Again, i haven't seen you present a single fact or figure, never mind an actual business case, to show why we will have a net benefit from this or a timeline. So far it's just been crying about how all the cool kids have one and you want one too but that is NOT A GOOD REASON. Quote "That which doesn't kill me... Had better start running."
suds Posted April 14 Report Posted April 14 7 hours ago, Zeitgeist said: As an Ontarian, I’d put it alongside developing the Ring of Fire and above tunnelling a new highway under the 401, which looks much more like Boston’s Big Dig than HSR. Hell, I’d rather bury the Gardiner. According to the IEA (International Energy Agency) world demand for critical minerals could rise anywhere between 25 -40 times present demand by 2040. You should know that any major transition to clean energy technologies relies heavily on these critical minerals. Do you see where I'm going with this? If you happen to be a country that has to import these minerals, then Canada is usually seen as a stable reliable country to deal with. If we were to start right now with development in the Ring of Fire, we should be well on our way to having mines operational by 2040 and making tremendous profits. The IEA also sees nuclear power as an essential source for low emission energy for the world to achieve net zero by 2050. They figure that nuclear generating capacity will have to increase by at least 2.5 times present capacity. As far as energy goes, the Ontario government seems to have a handle on things with developing the Ring of Fire and increasing nuclear capacity. Quote
suds Posted April 14 Report Posted April 14 6 hours ago, Zeitgeist said: What’s pie in the sky for Canada comes standard in Europe, Japan, China, and the US, I guess. This is why we can’t have nice things, the second rate mentality. As far as I know, the US doesn't actually have any true high speed rail. They haven't laid any track in California, and the line between Boston and Washington mainly runs on old rail infrastructure. It's faster than our Via Rail, but that's about it. Anyways, who the fuk cares? Quote
suds Posted April 14 Report Posted April 14 (edited) On 4/12/2026 at 2:06 PM, TreeBeard said: This is why Air Canada is one of the investment partners in this. They don’t want to do short domestic flights as it doesn’t make as much business sense. They don’t want airports operating at full capacity for less profitable short runs. Who the fuk cares what Air Canada thinks? We have to spend hundreds of billions because of Air Canada's bottom line? Jeez, I don't think so. Edited April 14 by suds Quote
TreeBeard Posted April 14 Report Posted April 14 1 hour ago, suds said: Who the fuk cares what Air Canada thinks? We have to spend hundreds of billions because of Air Canada's bottom line? Jeez, I don't think so. No one said we care what they “think”. I explained why they are one of the investment partners. But it makes sense not to fill up airports with short runs that should be serviced by train. Quote
TreeBeard Posted April 14 Report Posted April 14 1 hour ago, suds said: As far as I know, the US doesn't actually have any true high speed rail. They haven't laid any track in California, and the line between Boston and Washington mainly runs on old rail infrastructure. It's faster than our Via Rail, but that's about it. Anyways, who the fuk cares? USA isn’t known for their advanced transportation infrastructure. In fact, they’re a dismal example of how transportation should be built. Quote
August1991 Posted April 14 Report Posted April 14 On 4/12/2026 at 9:55 AM, Zeitgeist said: No I don’t think $90 billion is an exorbitant amount spread out over 20 years of construction. Keep in mind that a short light rail system on Toronto’s waterfront is $3 billion. The cost of the Gordie Howe Bridge is $6.4 billion, a single bridge. ... I tend to agree, Zeitgeist. IMHO, wlll the CPR/CNR, local jurisdictions agree to the rights of way? Can the federal Liberals -Carney- get everyone to agree? ==== Harper, Fortier, Charest got everyone to agree to build the Champlain Bridge. Quote
Zeitgeist Posted April 14 Report Posted April 14 (edited) 14 hours ago, August1991 said: I tend to agree, Zeitgeist. IMHO, wlll the CPR/CNR, local jurisdictions agree to the rights of way? Can the federal Liberals -Carney- get everyone to agree? ==== Harper, Fortier, Charest got everyone to agree to build the Champlain Bridge. Part of the reason the Peterborough route was chosen is because of the unused old rail right of way. It was also felt that routing through Ottawa instead of Kingston would bring more passengers and service to the popular Montreal-Ottawa route. We have to be able to expropriate the necessary gaps and build infrastructure like this. Edited April 14 by Zeitgeist Quote
August1991 Posted April 17 Report Posted April 17 On 4/14/2026 at 8:18 AM, Zeitgeist said: Part of the reason the Peterborough route was chosen is because of the unused old rail right of way. It was also felt that routing through Ottawa instead of Kingston would bring more passengers and service to the popular Montreal-Ottawa route. We have to be able to expropriate the necessary gaps and build infrastructure like this. Peterborough route? We are not Osaka-Tokyo. WashNyBaWash. It makes no sense to build a Quebec-Windsor train. ====== Like Tesla cars, this is a virtue signal. Unlike Tesla cars, this will never been built. Quote
blackbird Posted April 17 Report Posted April 17 (edited) Ottawa is spending billions of dollars on infrastructure on Quebec, their favourite liberal stronghold. Ottawa is now going to fund a high speed rail system between Toronto, Ottawa, and Quebec city and also fund seaport expansion in Montreal. Also they provide millions of dollars in subsidies for the ferry service in the maritimes, but very little for BC ferries on the west coast. Their reasoning is because the maritimes ferries run between provinces (Nova Scotia, PEI, N.B. and Newfoundland), while BC ferries runs between Vancouver Island and the lower mainland within B.C. Sounds like a phony excuse to not provide funding to B.C. ferries and its users. B.C. Ferries vessels are old and breaking down all the time and rates are going up. Lots of subsidies for Quebec and the maritimes but little or nothing for B.C. residents. Should the western provinces, which provide billions in equalization payments to Quebec, really be part of Canada or would we be better off separate? Confederation is costing the west billions of dollars a year. Edited April 17 by blackbird Quote
Zeitgeist Posted April 17 Report Posted April 17 7 hours ago, August1991 said: Peterborough route? We are not Osaka-Tokyo. WashNyBaWash. It makes no sense to build a Quebec-Windsor train. ====== Like Tesla cars, this is a virtue signal. Unlike Tesla cars, this will never been built. Canada should think smaller, right? It’s all you deserve. Quote
CdnFox Posted April 17 Report Posted April 17 5 hours ago, Zeitgeist said: Canada should think smaller, right? It’s all you deserve. Canada should think smart. We're not building a bridge between the mainland and Vancouver Island. It would be great to have one and really improve tourism and security for those who live on the island because the fairies go down regularly. But we're not building one And do you know why? Because we could replace the entire fleet of fairies twice for what it would cost. So you look at it and you say this is stupid. And that is the problem with your rail. It's stupid. It is insanely expensive, there is an excellent chance that it'll wind up never getting built in the end, it will probably run at least double possibly triple what they're estimating, and there is no reason to believe it will ever see enough traffic to make it worth the money spent even if it was $110 of the price Intelligent adults don't throw money away just to look cool to their friends. Especially when they're already broken living on their credit card I know you desperately want to turn this into some weird bizarre argument how mommy and daddy never give you nice things but the reality is it just doesn't make sense and you have never provided a single drop of information or data coming from a source this verifiable to say otherwise Quote "That which doesn't kill me... Had better start running."
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.