March 2019 Posts
Mar 05 09:13 Expanding NorthStar: the definition of insanity Mar 13 22:04 Questioning Rep. Omar's allegiance Mar 19 08:53 The Beto mirage Mar 22 22:48 The Democrats' major dilemma Mar 24 16:58 The ultimate bombshell Mar 25 04:23 There's no obstruction Mar 27 18:50 Democrats bad faith problem Mar 28 13:27 Chairman Schiff's reckoning? Mar 29 19:55 The Democrats' Patriot?
Prior Years:
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Expanding NorthStar: the definition of insanity
Northstar Departing for Insanity
John W. Palmer, Ph.D.
Last Friday I waited three hours to have 3 minutes to address the Minnesota House of Representative's Committee on Transportation Finance about the possible extension by rail the NorthStar Commuter Rail line. During my three hour wait, I heard many people express their opinions and desires to spend other peoples money on a project they want.
When my chance to speak came I focused on the economics of commuter rail (nowhere in the USA do the fares cover the cost of operation and the average public subsidy is 47% of operating costs). Then I reminded the committee of the widely known definition of insanity (Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and again and expecting a different outcome).
A brief review using a case study approach covering the last 100 years of commuter rail in the USA helps explain why spending taxpayer dollars on an extension of the NorthStar Commuter Rail fits the definition of insanity. The interurban, early commuter rail, was of great importance to the eastern half of the United States from about 1890 to 1925. Interurbans provided passengers service between cities and towns. Interurbans were a cross between a tram and a conventional train. In 1915, there were 15,500 miles of interurban rail in the US. http://chicagocityofbigshoulders.blogspot.com/2013/05/electricinterurbans.html
My home town (Kenosha, WI) was served by one of these rail lines. The Chicago, North Shore & Milwaukee Railroad (The North Shore Line) is representative of commuter rail's history. The North Shore Line was one of the most successful interurban systems ever put together. The history of the company dates to the 1890s and in terms of the passenger traffic it carried during its peak years of operations was the second busiest interurban in history. Unfortunately, the company's downfall was the plight of nearly all interurbans, the heavy reliance of passenger traffic could not sustain it forever and bankruptcy finally came after a long legal battle in the late 1950s and early 1960s.
The North Shore once stretched from downtown Chicago to Milwaukee. Today only one segment, the Skokie Swift, remains in use for Chicago commuter service. Given the fact that the company operated high-speed service and was located in a highly populated region it weathered the 1920s downfall of the interurban and initially did fine after the Great Depression hit.
World War II brought back traffic level comparable to that of the great years of the 1920s. Total passenger traffic climbed from barely ten million revenue passengers in 1940 to almost twenty-eight million by 1945. By November of 1946 after nearly fourteen years of bankruptcy, the North Shore came back. But, trouble and crisis returned swiftly at the War's end.
Passenger traffic dropped and kept on declining. In 1948, a prolonged strike lasting more than three months, shut down the system; only a better than 40 percent commuter fare increase enabled the company to meet the resultant wage increases and resume operations. In June, 1958, the North Shore asked for permission to abandon all operations. Five years later (1963) The North Shore ended service thus leaving only one passenger provider (the Chicago and Northwestern) serving Chicago's north shore communities. http://www.tmer.org/Section/History/ Chicago_North_Shore_and_Milwaukee/index.html
Prior to 1970 most railroads providing commuter service to Chicago were financially stable due to the benefits of increased traffic during the war years, expansion of suburbia and modernization of their fleets. By 1970 costs were rising and revenues were declining and in1974 the Chicago Regional Transit Authority (RTA) was formed and commuter rail service became publicly funded and government operated. By 1983 after recurring financial difficulties RTA was reorganized shifting commuter rail to a subdivision called METRA.
Today the old Chicago and Northwestern commuter rail service along the north shore of Lake Michigan is operated by METRA. The similarities of METRA's service from
Chicago to Kenosha, WI and the NorthStar are striking. METRA's service to Kenosha covers 51 miles and the current rail based Northstar is 40 miles. Both services us main line rails of private railroads. The similarity ends when covering cost with fares is examined. Fares collected on METRA cover 55% of the cost of operation. Northstar's fares covered only 20%. METRA's service had about 1.8 million riders in 2017 compared to 737,000 on the Northstar service.
The difference in population density along the two routes probably accounts for the large difference in cost recovery since ridership and population density are highly correlated. The rail line from Kenosha to Chicago traverses some of the USA's most densely populated corridors. The Northstar corridor has many miles of undeveloped land.
With commuter rail's long history of decline that lead to unprofitability and now government subsidy to cover shortfalls in revenue and with clear evidence that ridership and fares are not going to cover the cost of operation, investing money in commuter rail clearly meets the definition of insanity. With the brief history of Northstar showing an inability to even come close to covering operating cost at the fare box, spending more money on the failing experiment with Minnesota commuter rail is crazy.
Posted Tuesday, March 5, 2019 9:13 AM
Comment 1 by Crimson Trace at 05-Mar-19 11:29 AM
Dr. Palmer has clearly articulated a well reasoned argument showing a serious indictment against the financial viability of Northstar. Running through predominantly rural areas in a culture where the automobile is 'the standard' is simply a recipe for indefinite public subsidy of Northstar. Period...end of discussion.
Comment 2 by Chad Q at 06-Mar-19 05:56 PM
Why someone like this had to explain to people why NorthStar should not be expanded is exactly why NorthStar will be expanded. Public and elected officials are stupid and don't care about costs for shiny new things even when they cost millions and billions of dollars to build and operate.
Questioning Rep. Omar's allegiance
Last week, Rep. Omar tweeted out another tweet questioning politicians allegiance to the United States. Later last week, the House passed a watered-down resolution condemning hate. This week, Democrats tried pretending that Rep. Omar's statement wasn't anti-Semitic:
[Video no longer available]
Speaker Pelosi must think that we're totally gullible if she thinks we'll believe that crap. Pelosi is also trying to get people to believe that Rep. Omar's statement about allegiance to foreign governments was just a comment about special interest groups.
Rep. Omar sent a letter to a judge asking for leniency for men trying to become ISIS terrorists. If Rep. Omar is questioning the allegiance of Americans who also support Israel, it's only fitting that we can question her allegiance to the US while she supports leniency for ISIS.
Posted Wednesday, March 13, 2019 10:04 PM
Comment 1 by Chad Quigley at 14-Mar-19 05:08 PM
If the MSM had done there job, I don't think we would need to question this anti-Semite because she never would have been elected. Well then again it is CD-5. Glenn Beck has been digging up a lot of dirt on this despicable woman lately and maybe the MSM and even the democrats will start to take notice of her and the other foul-mouth anti-Semite from Michigan.
The Beto mirage
It's been funny watching DC pundits discuss Beto O'Rourke's political gifts. Democrats, of course, are giddy, with some saying he's "Kennedyesque." Seriously, Beto isn't at all like JFK or RFK. He's an intellectual lightweight who hasn't figured out what he stands for.
One thing that's immediately apparent is that Robert Francis O'Rourke isn't a marketing genius. That's apparent in a brief trip to O'Rourke's campaign website . O'Rourke's slogan of "We're all in this together" sounds too much like Hillary's "Better together" slogan.
Seriously, if Robert Francis O'Rourke is apologizing to the press for making improper comments about his wife and his white privilege, imagine how he'd melt during negotiations with Putin or Kim Jung Un.
[Video no longer available]
Posted Tuesday, March 19, 2019 8:53 AM
No comments.
The Democrats' major dilemma
When Special Counsel Robert Mueller transmitted his report to US Attorney General William Barr, speculation started as to what the report might say. Some speculation stated that there might be sealed indictments against President Trump sitting in New York's Southern District. Other speculation said that President Trump had been vindicated, though those rumors were a bit tempered because of potential investigations in state courts as well as in federal courts in New York and Virginia.
Trey Gowdy set things straight on what's about to happen during his interview with Harris Faulkner. During the interview, Gowdy said that he had seen the exact same evidence as Rep. Adam Schiff and that Rep. Schiff had reached a totally different conclusion than Gowdy. Gowdy then explained that the only way that that's possible was if Schiff was viewing things through a totally political lens:
[Video no longer available]
Later in the evening, a report came out that there weren't any additional indictments and that Robert Mueller was leaving the office of special counsel and that only a handful of low-level staffers would be sticking around to finish closing the office. If that's true, the Democrats' 'bombshell' just blew up in their face.
Nonetheless, Corey Booker is attempting to raise money off the report, first telling supporters to sign a sheet if they think Attorney General Barr should release the entire report. If they sign up to have Gen. Barr do what he's promised to do, then the supporter is directed to a page where they can contribute to Sen. Spartacus's campaign.
One final thing worth noting:
In the second paragraph, it's stated that nobody in the Trump administration interfered with Mueller's investigation. Now that we know that there wasn't collusion, that the Trump administration didn't get in Mueller's way and that the special counsel investigation is essentially finished, Democrats are in a helluva pickle.
Posted Friday, March 22, 2019 10:48 PM
Comment 1 by John Palmer at 24-Mar-19 11:22 PM
Tina Smith also sent a "petition" out that looks just like Booker's. I wonder how many other Ds used the same approach?
The ultimate bombshell
For the past 2 years, we've heard one "bombshell" report after another, often reported on the pages of Buzzfeed. Friday afternoon, Robert Mueller delivered his report on alleged Russian-Trump collusion. Now we know that the Democrats' last great hope of impeaching President Trump fizzled out, though Democrats are certain to keep attempting to find the bombshell that finally takes President Trump down.
Good luck with that.
In the end, William Barr's summary of the Mueller report turned into an historic dud. Think of the crow that CNN, MSNBC, Adam Schiff, John Brennan and Buzzfeed will have to eat as a result of Attorney General Barr's summary report to Congress. For them, it's truly a bombshell. Buzzfeed should take the heaviest hit because they ran major stories that couldn't be verified. First was the article about the dossier. Finally, they published the article saying that President Trump told Cohen to lie to Congress. That went over like a fart in church.
Adam Schiff once said that he had evidence of collusion:
Rep. Schiff (D-Calif.) said in multiple TV interviews he had direct evidence of collusion. Any interviews moving forward should demand that evidence be presented along with an explanation how he has such evidence when the Special Counsel & all of its resources couldn't find any.
- Joe Concha (@JoeConchaTV) March 24, 2019
Chairman Schiff should be censured for lying to Congress. What he's done is beyond disgraceful:
[Video no longer available]
Pelosi and Schumer are failing in their attempt to spin this:
Pelosi/Schumer: Barr's letter raises as many questions as it answers. The fact that..Mueller's report does not exonerate the president on a charge as serious as obstruction of justice demonstrates how urgent it is that the full report and underlying documentation be made public
- Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) March 24, 2019
The Mueller report stated clearly that they didn't find any evidence of collusion between President Trump's campaign and Russia. That's dramatically different than saying President Trump isn't guilty. Saying that he and his investigators couldn't find any evidence is especially strong.
Posted Sunday, March 24, 2019 4:58 PM
No comments.
There's no obstruction
Now that the Mueller Report has morphed into the Barr Letter, it's time to put 2 and 2 together. First, the Mueller Report emphatically stated that the Trump administration didn't interfere with any request from the special counsel. Next, Attorney General Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein announced in their letter that Special Counsel Mueller hadn't reached a decision on obstruction of justice. Then they announced that they had concluded that President Trump hadn't obstructed justice.
Immediately, House Judiciary Chairman Nadler hinted that Barr and Rosenstein were stooges for President Trump:
[Video no longer available]
I can't wait to hear Chairman Nadler explain how a president (or any other member of the executive branch) could obstruct justice when a) there wasn't an underlying crime and b) the special counsel's funding requests were granted each time he made one. It's difficult to obstruct when the acting AG is saying yes all the time.
There's no doubt that Mueller should've made the decision on whether President Trump had obstructed justice but it's also true that he all but made that determination that President Trump didn't obstruct justice in his Friday report.
The naysayers have been wrong all along. They were either declaring that "the walls are closing in" on President Trump or that some journalistic rag had just published "a bombshell" report that would surely sink President Trump.
Posted Monday, March 25, 2019 4:23 AM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 25-Mar-19 08:45 AM
Absolutely no doubt in my mind that Trump obstructed INjustice.
Democrats bad faith problem
Tuesday night, after President Trump said that Republicans would become the party of health care, leftist pundits laughed. What's funnier is the thought that Democrats will negotiate in good faith on health care. Health care is the Democrats' holy grail. Without that, Democrats wouldn't exist.
It's important that Republicans put a serious health care plan together. What's more important, though, is that they highlight the differences between their philosophy and the Democrats' philosophy. Let's recall that the ACA shoved a specific policy down our throats. If people didn't purchase QHPs (Qualified Health Plans), they had to pay a fine, aka the individual mandate. The only difference, let's remember, between Bronze Plan policies and Gold Plan policies was the price of the premium and the size of the deductible.
With the ACA, picking out policies that fit the individuals' or families' needs was forbidden. That fits with the Democrats' philosophy of shoving unpopular policies down our throats, then using the force of government to tell families what they must do.
Republicans are capitalists. They rely on selling quality products at a reasonable price. There's no need for individual mandates because (surprise) people actually want to buy the product. Imagine how perplexed Democrats must be when they see people buying a product because they like it. After all, Democrats have long believed that they knew best.
This philosophy isn't limited to health care, either. It's certainly in play with fixing our immigration system. Democrats consistently insist that there isn't a crisis. That's foolish:
[Video no longer available]
I'd love hearing Sen. Schumer explain how letting 1,000,000+ illegal aliens into our country isn't a crisis. This isn't just a problem in Texas and California. It's a crisis in every state in the union because the children of those illegal aliens go to schools. That raises property taxes for people here legally. How is that fair?
Further, let's ask another sticky question, namely why Democrats won't pass legislation that will actually stop illegal aliens from entering the United States? You can't honestly say that you're for border security if you sit idly by and watch 1,000,000 illegal aliens enter our country in 2019.
It's time to start calling Democrats like Speaker Pelosi, Sen. Schumer and Rep. Swalwell liars. After all, that's what they are. A minute into this interview, Rep. Swalwell insisted that he and the country "had seen evidence" of President Trump colluding with Russia. Then he said that "Mueller said that he can't prove collusion beyond a reasonable doubt."
That's a bald-faced lie. Mueller said he " found no evidence " of collusion or collaboration between Russia and President Trump or anyone in his campaign. There's a huge difference between not being able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt and finding no evidence of collusion.
It's time for Republicans to tell Americans that Democrats aren't interested in working in America's best interests. That's what the resistance movement is about. Democrats are only interested in passing legislation when Republicans give them everything they want. That isn't patriotism. That's the opposite of patriotism. The only way to move America forward is to defeat Democrats in droves in the House and Senate and keep President Trump in the White House.
Electing more Democrats only moves America back to the failed policies of the Democrats and President Obama.
Posted Wednesday, March 27, 2019 6:50 PM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 28-Mar-19 08:46 PM
Why would Chucky or any democrat think that 1 million illegals is a crisis? More than likely illegals will vote democrat when given the chance so in the democrats eyes, there's no crisis. One man's crisis is another man's windfall.
Chairman Schiff's reckoning?
After this morning's House Intel Committee meeting, it's impossible to think that Democrats will be able to defend Committee Chairman Adam Schiff much longer .
The article opens by saying "Every Republican on the House Intelligence Committee is calling on Chairman Adam Schiff to resign Thursday, accusing the California Democrat of weaving a 'demonstrably false' narrative of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia and 'undermining' the credibility of the panel."
Literally, for years, Chairman Schiff insisted that he'd seen proof that President Trump had colluded with Russians during the 2016 election. After Mike Conaway read the GOP letter, Schiff responded "A visibly emotional Schiff, who did not know this broadside from Republicans was coming, had a strident response. At times raising his voice, he listed a litany of known and controversial interactions between the Trump campaign and Russia - including Donald Trump Jr.'s involvement in the Trump Tower meeting and former campaign chairman Paul Manafort's sharing of polling data with a Russian associate. "You might think it's OK," Schiff said. 'I don't.'"
Actually, Mr. Schiff does think it's ok -- if Democrats are employing those tactics. If he thought these things were wrong, why didn't Schiff present legislation making President Trump's actions illegal? As chairman of a powerful committee, that legislation, at minimum, would get a hearing. Most likely, that legislation would pass the House.
At this point, there's no reason to think this isn't just a stunt. Watch this video and tell me he wasn't playing to the cameras:
[Video no longer available]
Speaker Pelosi issued this preposterous statement in defense of Schiff:
[Video no longer available]
I'd love to know what type of drugs Ms. Pelosi is taking because they must be powerful if she thinks that a liar like Schiff is a patriot.
Posted Thursday, March 28, 2019 1:27 PM
Comment 1 by Gretchen L Leisen at 28-Mar-19 09:03 PM
There is only one adjective to describe Adam Schiff. It is PATHETIC.
Comment 2 by Fantasys at 13-Apr-19 01:44 AM
So the public looked to the Senate Intelligence Committee for a comprehensive, bipartisan examination of Trump's Russia ties - a reputation the panel's Republican chair, Richard Burr, who had served as a senior national security adviser to the Trump campaign, has largely upheld by keeping the investigation scandal-free. 'Nothing in this town stays classified or secret forever,' Burr told the Associated Press last August. 'And at some point somebody's going to go back and do a review. And I'd love not to be the one that chaired the committee when somebody says, 'Well, boy, you missed this.' So we've tried to be pretty thorough in how we've done it.' Though Burr and Mark Warner, the committee's Democratic vice-chairman, have largely agreed on the parameters of the investigation, they have recently begun to disagree more publicly on what the facts they've collected add up to: Conspiracy? A series of coincidences and bad decisions? Or something in between?
The Democrats' Patriot?
Yesterday, Nancy Pelosi insisted that Adam Schiff was a patriot. That's laughable. It's more likely that I can beat Hulk Hogan in an arm-wrestling match than it would be to find a consensus that Schiff is a patriot. PS- There's no chance I'd beat Hulk Hogan.
Democrats are simply prolonging their lie about Russia. Mueller said that he didn't find any evidence that anyone in the Trump campaign colluded or collaborated with the Russians despite multiple attempts by the Russians.
Here's something that Pelosi hasn't answered. A couple months ago, she said that there wasn't a crisis at the border. With 1,000,000 illegal aliens expected to invade the United States, how can she say that this isn't a crisis? Only a dingbat from San Francisco could think that. It's worth noting that San Fran Nan thinks that Kirstjen Nielsen's figures were a lie.
Now Bill Barr's report is a lie, too? Just how far does this conspiracy go in San Fran Nan's mind?
[Video no longer available]
This is proof that a little paranoia goes a long way. Either that or she's flipped out and can't be trusted. At this point, who knows? With someone from San Francisco, it could mean anything.
Posted Friday, March 29, 2019 7:55 PM
Comment 1 by Gretchen L Leisen at 30-Mar-19 01:48 PM
Well, yesterday Jeh Johnson, Obama's Homeland Security head, was on MSNBC and he declared that the numbers of illegals crossing the southern border now is definitely an emergency. The BIG QUESTION IS: will the leftist dingbats on MSNBC and all the other brainwashed liberal networks finally admit that our POTUS had a point when he says we need a wall? With this bunch of losers, it is still not likely.
Comment 2 by Chad Q at 31-Mar-19 07:40 AM
This bunch of losers wants those illegals so they will vote democrat in the coming elections so there really is no emergency in their eyes.
As for Schiff, he should resign or be forced to put his money where his mouth and prove the accusations he is claiming. My money would be on him having to resign as he has no proof and even got suckered by a couple cech comedians. What a tool of the left he is.
