walker should have to pay the cost

You need two major conditions for successful high speed rail travel. First, you need target destinations approximately 3 to 4 hours apart by rail travel. If the cities are much closer, driving is more convenient for most people. Too far apart, and airline travel saves significant time.

Second, you need target destinations with either high quality public transport, or a large volume of traffic that doesn't need local transportation (such as a Disney World). A major problem with American cities was the extra space available and the Industrial revolution caused them to be able to accommodate automobile traffic, unlike the older, cramped cities of Europe or Asia, where high speed rail is closer to being self-supporting. It takes a huge population to support a decent subway, elevated railway, or trolley car form of public transit. Americans who can afford to travel don't want to rely on standing out in the rain or snow waiting for a stinky diesel bus to make an hourly pass (until 6 or 7 pm - reduced schedules on Sunday and holidays) by the bus stop which may be several blocks from their destination.

Hey V
(This high-cost rail to nowhere was terminated by the site staff)
And Scott Walker!
Thank you yet again Governor, voted twice in one term.

*I have traveled to countries with High Speed rail and it works wonderfully. BUT the only way it will work in the US is if we give up our current transportation. *

If your country is, say, the size of Great Britain, then yes. If your country is the size of the USA and your major metropolitan areas are so far-flung, not so much.

Woody sounds so much like Mouse, I wonder why. Mouse left the scene after the special election but I think may have come back as Woody.

I have traveled to countries with High Speed rail and it works wonderfully. BUT the only way it will work in the US is if we give up our current transportation. I do agree that a good High Speed rail system would be good for the country, but to do one that only travels 40 miles is not worth the effort. If you want to build on start on the coast and go through the country stopping at all major cities.

Crony Capitalism
.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crony_capit...

Doing great. Thanks for asking. I also know the high speed rail would have buried the taxpayer even deeper and was and was a joke to think that was a wise economic decision during the state we were in. It wasn't about political bashing like many can't seem to get away from. It was about common sense. Yes, California is a prime example. Fail.

I know exactly how the capitalists work.....
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocEEPi4Pm...

woody - Isn't it time you take a basic economics class
.
No, actually, I'm doing quite well, howbout you?

It would have been a better deal if the rail company would have picked up the maintenance cost themselves. But from taxpayers point of view I can’t justify the cost to the taxpayers it would have been too much. They can have rail in Wisconsin but the rail company must pay for all the track upgrade and maintenance building cost and the operating cost then that it would a better deal for Wisconsin.

woody - Isn't it time you take a basic economics class?

All I can say is look to the high speed train being built in CA. Triple the cost. Goes from nowhere to nowhere. Oh, and don't forget the other one in Nevada/CA. Out in the middle of nowhere and stops just short of somewhere. Yep, Just what WI needs! But if that is what you want, be prepared to pay.

Dang Republicans - Always bein' financially responsible.

If it were up to the Republicans we'd only have high speed horse and buggy

high speed rail or campaign contributors? hmmmm think i better give more "perks" to my political contributors..............easy decision.

"hammer and sickle" ??? It's time for your meds.

A great ending to Wisconsin's unsavory encounter with the 'railway to nowhere'. Even though Obama continues to spend money like it's going out of style, Wisconsin has shown that it can 'block' some of the madman's wild spending spree.

With the cost of flying ever soaring, (sorry, bad pun) travel by high speed train is getting more and more attractive. Just look at all the countries around the world who are building more tracks and high speed trains. I think we might have been too hasty.

The Koch bros are not into HS rail.

After reading the Journal Sentinel story I'm more convinced now than before that Governor Walker made the right choice in turning down the high-speed rail proposal. We would have been responsible for a 20 year, $5.8 million-a-year, maintenance contract. Further details in a linked article on the Journal Sentinel site http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepoliti...

How many disabled passengers would need to pay for the $19 million Milwaukee terminal renovation to meet new handicapped access requirements (increased from the $15 million estimate when Doyle signed the deal)?

If Amtrak or the state of Minnesota feels the revenue potential from rail travel is there, let them pay for the track upgrade and Talgo's facility maintenance. The Federal "grant" would have brought far more long-term debt and liability than it was worth for a small number of temporary construction and permanent railroad jobs.