Drew Dowdell

I will also point out that Amtrak’s annual subsidy is less than the cost of a single highway interchange in a major metro area. Amtrak’s profits on the North East corridor help fund the rest of the system, though that’s a rather large cross for it to bare and that’s why I’d does need subsidies. when Amtrak started offering multiple daily trips to DC from Richmond VA, it quickly reached capacity because suddenly people could do easy day trips to the Capital. It wasn’t even high speed. People will use trains if given good service.

You just love being wrong like a dog loves a good rawhide.... and no amount of bolding will change your false statements into true ones. First, I'm not arguing in favor of socialism. I'm arguing in favor of capitalism with strong regulations, and direct oversight in situations where the company is providing a public good. Private companies should be running grids and health care, but the utilities should be heavily regulated and required to meet certain reliability and resiliency standards. What happened in Texas is exactly why your "ideal" does not work. It puts profits over people in emergencies, it fails to take appropriate measures to prepare for emergencies (Texas/ERCOT was warned of this exact scenario in 2011 in a comprehensive report, they did NOTHING because it would have cut into their profits) , and then it price gouges customers during the emergency. ZERO of the other grids that are heavily regulated (and in my opinion still not regulated enough) had the issues ERCOT had. FALSE - In areas where Amtrak offers high speed (Acela or North East Regional) Amtrak regularly serves more passengers than multiple airlines combined, plus they also serve many intra-trip stations. Not everyone in New Haven wants to drive to NYC to fly to Philly to get to Wilmington. As you point out, there is a whole country between the major metros and those are severely underserved by the airlines. Even here in Pittsburgh, going somewhere is always "Step 1. Fly to Charlotte, Chicago, Philly, or Atlanta. Step 2. Fly where I actually want to go. I can drive faster in under 500 miles than an airline can get me there because of the security waitlines, connections, baggage, etc. Unless I'm traveling directly to a hub, total travel time by car will beat nearly any flight under 500 miles. An Acela can do even better. But even Metro to Metro, the Acela will beat the airlines EVERY TIME. Going from Manhatten to Philly, the Acela will get you from New York Penn to 30th Street Philly before your taxi even pulls up at LaGuardia. Going out of NY, NO ONE, takes a flight if their destination is served by Acela or North East corridor. Amtrak makes a profit on these routes. Amtrak started offering higher speed service (110mph) out of Detroit to Chicago and before Covid, ridership was way up. You are correct that over 500 miles, Amtrak's usefulness starts to wain, but most Metros are within 500 miles of another Metro and those highway connections have a lot of traffic. A Dallas-Houston HSR would do very well because again, it's a 40-50 minute drive just to get from downtown Houston out to IAH to drop off the rental car. HSR could do the trip in 2 hours or less. People will use high speed rail if and when it is offered, and it wouldn't even need a subsidy to operate. (Airports are subsidized by the government, ours has a huge debt issue right now, so don't try to imply that airlines don't operate without a subsidy) False (kinda) - The insurance industry is the cause of the wacked out insurance rates. Further cause is the 30% of people who don't have insurance and defer treatment because of the lack of insurance. That means what starts as a small treatable lump turns into stage 3 cancer because the person is afraid to seek treatment due to costs. So when they get admitted for cancer care on Medicaid or whatever, they cost hundreds of thousands more to treat because they waited too long. An I would much rather pay for someone to go get treated early than pay for a full on cancer treatment. And don't be fooled, you're already paying for those people... that's why your insurance costs so much even if you're healthy. The F-35 program was a political action boondoggle. People in Canada pay around the same total tax that we do and they get healthcare for it while we have to pay extra to have insurance. And don't try to talk about rationed care, people in Canada with an emergency get treated promptly. We ration care also by letting 30% of the population die in the street. Companies are often-times actively your enemy. Texas power producers shut down power during the storm when they realized they weren't going to be able to make a profit. People died in that storm due to lack of power. The number of deplorable schemes companies come up with that actively harm you far exceeds what the government has done. I like the Defenders, but I have only ever gotten 40k out of them at best.... so that's why I keep buying them because I use that treadlife warranty.

You always run to extremes. Private companies have done horrible things in the name of profit and you should be every bit as wary about rampant capitalism as you are socialism. We had an excellent example last month of why letting for-profit companies run essential things like monopoly utilities with close to zero regulation and oversight is a bad idea. We can’t have decent passenger rail in the US, even just regionally, because of private companies. we can’t have decent, low cost healthcare in the US because of private companies. For profit companies aren’t your friends. You are merely something they can extract money from while paying their employees as little as possible. The energy company I worked for added ZERO value to the product they sold. The bought up capacity at low prices and sold it at high prices. It is literally traded like the stock market. All they did was extract money from their customers to pay exorbitant executive salaries and fancy marketing campaigns. They could have shut down over night and nothing of value would have been lost.

Well if I agreed with you then we’d both be wrong. I stand by my well documented 13 years in the energy industry, specifically, this part of the industry. I’ve been through the audits of the company because of what Enron did. Many/Most for-profit energy companies have to go through those audits yearly. I’m not saying that for profit companies shouldn’t run the grid. I’m saying that they shouldn’t be able to set the grid rules and that there must be competition. Stand by your wrong statements all you like. The Forbes link disagrees with you.

Again, you’re wrong. Solar hasn’t been 3 times the cost of traditional generation for years. Same for wind. Additionally, the fossil fuel industry gets loads of subsidies too in the form of socializing external costs. I worked in the energy industry for over 13 years. I can go buy wind power for my home right now at equal or lesser cost than coal or gas. Furthermore, a significant amount of those high California costs is the result California’s decades long boondoggle of selling their grid off to private for-profit companies to run, those companies putting profits ahead of reliability and upgrades, and way back when forcing blackouts to drive up energy prices through market manipulation. California is still trying to catch up on years of grid neglect. And we’ve seen what can happen when you turn a power grid over to a for profit company in Texas.

Well that's simply, flat out, false. I'm not sure if you're intentionally lying because of your anti-green agenda or if you're simply using data from 15+ years ago. LCOE is the levelized cost of generation after all of the construction, generation, maintenance, and decommissioning of a project is completed. Basically every dollar that goes into building, running, and then tearing down that generation. It's reflected as dollars per megawatt hour. Projected LCOE in the U.S. by 2025 (as of 2020) $/MWh Plant Type Min Simple Average Capacity weighted average Max Solar photovoltaic (PV) 29.75 35.74 32.80 48.09 Geothermal 35.13 37.47 37.47 39.60 Combined cycle 33.35 38.07 36.61 45.31 Wind, onshore 28.72 39.95 34.10 62.72 Hydroelectric 35.37 52.79 39.54 63.24 Combustion Turbine 58.48 66.62 68.71 81.37 Ultra-supercritical coal 65.10 76.44 NB 91.27 Advanced Nuclear 71.90 81.65 NB 92.04 Biomass 86.19 94.83 NB 139.96 Wind, offshore 102.68 122.25 115.04 155.55 Those are 2025 estimated numbers, but they're based on today's numbers and a prediction on the direction of costs. However, this time last year On-Shore Wind and Photovoltaic both fell below fossil fuels in lifetime costs. Solar And Wind Costs Continue To Fall As Power Becomes Cleaner (forbes.com)

Is electric that much near you? I’m at like 14c/KwH total, and I’m on renewable energy.

My Avalanche has these chrome body strips that were added by the previous owner and I quite like them now. That and the chrome wheels would need to match for the bike if I do this.

Sorta kinda? BMW does make the R nine T in a very similar color to my Avalanche. But that's not the Scrambler and I wanted the Scrambler. If I do it it will be blue and chrome.

Private purchase. And I want to have the bike in my hands before I hand over the check.

2 problems with that, though the idea sounds amazing. 1. Its a 10+ hour trip non-stop. I haven’t ridden regularly in 20+ years, and only once or twice a year since I got my motorcycle license 4 years ago. I think tackling a trip that long on my first road bike wouldn’t be wise. 2. I won’t have a plate for it until I get it back to PA. I did find the Mototote I wanted at a very good price last night, so I’ll be getting that and canceling the U-Haul. I didn’t want ramps really, I was just looking for an alternative to the U-Haul.

I pretty much only like standards, not cruisers and not overdone sports bikes. So that pretty much rules out Harleys. One thing I dislike is the feel and performance of any V-Twin. It hasn't mattered if it's a Harley, Indian, or Kawasaki. They're rough, unrefined, have mediocre performance for their size, and loud. Engines I've liked are the Honda inline-4, the Kawasaki inline twin, and of course the boxer twin. My second choice was the Kawasaki Vulcan S which is sort of a modern take on a sporty cruiser... it's in a weird category in that it looks cruiser-ish, but it also is modern and streamlined. It's also powered by a modified version of the Ninja inline twin. But as I was telling @A Horse With No Name in chat, I decided to aim for exactly what I wanted rather than going for my second choice. The Vulcan S is generally 50% of what the R nine T cost me. I do like R nine T Scrambler the way it is, but I may add a few protective accessories like engine guards and an oil cooler guard. The oil cooler tends to get banged up with road debris. It's supposed to be a sacrificial part, but I'd like to delay the inevitable as long as possible. It is coming with an extra set of mirrors and a small luggage kit, so I could use it to commute to work without having to have a backback on my back the whole way. I may get pricing on what it might cost to have the tank vinyl wrapped.... just because I'm Extra, I might try and get it in a scheme that would match my truck. I already have all the riding gear I need for now, but I might also start looking for a pair of riding sneakers to supplement my riding boots I already own. I have the U-haul reserved, but I'm debating if I will go buy ramps instead and put it in the bed for the trip back.

Hope it gets all of its computer chips

You won't have to be... the costs of all autos is increasing dramatically. So much so that even Hyundai and Kia dealers are putting $10,000 of superfluous upcharges on the Palisade and Telluride. Did you ever think you'd see the day where a big Kia crossover could have Additional Dealer Markup slapped on it?

I get that this is funny, but that's Pope Benedict... the retired Pope who always has a handsome younger secretary in tow.

@ykX gets it! I put my deposit down on this 2019 BMW R9T Scrambler with 2900m on the clock. Heated grips, advanced stability control, ABS, cruise, luggage accessories. It has an 1170cc air/oil cooled flat twin boxer engine. The BMW boxer design goes back to the 1920s and was also used in aircraft. As far as bikes go, these are torque monsters for their size, and in fact have a slight issue with twisting under hard throttle. It’s the biggest CC I could buy in a standard bike under 500lbs. which means I can put it on the hitch of the Avalanche without needing a trailer ( though this trip will be completed with a U-Haul). I have to sort out some logistics with PA DMV here first, but I’m planning on driving down to Huntsville AL on April 9th to pick it up on the 10th.

The world is flat.

Moto2 is an inline 3 and that can be had in any number of chevys or fords. The engine configuration is uncommon, but this engine itself is legendary, with roots going back further than the Chevy 350.

The unconventional engine configuration, but not unheard of, should be a clue.

It’s a 2019 and has only 2,400 miles on it. No turbos involved. Though it does use air slightly different than most other vehicles.

One of our members already knows what it is, so I’ll ask him to not tell for now. @A Horse With No Name

Again. Further update: Credit Union approved the loan. Deposit has been sent to seller. Plans are in the works to travel to Alabama to get it on April 10th. This will be the first non-American vehicle I will purchase. Import brand and built in its home country. Edit: This is an addition to the fleet. Nothing is being replaced. It has an uncommon but not unheard of engine configuration. However, this engine is legendary in its own segment.

A thing might be being did. Negotiations have started, FaceTime video inspections have been done, insurance quotes have been obtained, credit union has been contacted.

Absolutely, and they are externally identical (on the Olds at least), so unless you’re looking a block casting numbers you can tell everyone it’s an all original 307 but really be running a 350.

Yeah, no, they’re not spritely. But in normal traffic they barely break a sweat. They just go about their business nearly silently. Way better than spinning a tinny little 4 cylinder up to 6000 rpm just to keep up.