The Mayor tells us that spending $810 million on high-speed rail will create thousands of new Wisconsin jobs, but according to the federal government's own estimate, the total number of permanent jobs created will be 55. That's $14.5 million per job, not including any hidden costs!

But then you think about ATL, where white people don't ride Marta except to Braves games, and if the terminus was downtown....it might not be as attractive an option.

I suppose "If you build it, they will come" could apply. But shit, any GARvernor turning down money from anyone, for any project, is a fucking idiot.

100%. I'm in New Orleans at least once a year. Charlotte around 2-3 times a year and Charleston around 2-3 times a year.

I'd gladly pay a decent price point ($75-$150) to hop a train, DRINK HEAVILY the entire way, and get there in 2-4 hours.

A group of Wisconsin lawmakers blocked passage of a sweeping anti-union bill Thursday by ignoring orders to attend a vote and instead left the state to force Republicans to negotiate over the proposal.

As ever-growing throngs of protesters filled the Capitol for a third day, the 14 Democrats disappeared from the Capitol. They were not in their offices, and aides said they did not know where any of them had gone.

Hours later, one of them told The Associated Press that the group had left Wisconsin.

Sen. Jon Erpenbach said Democrats fled to slow down consideration of the bill in the hopes that Republican Gov. Scott Walker and GOP lawmakers would discuss changes.

"The plan is to try and slow this down because it's an extreme piece of legislation that's tearing this state apart," Erpenbach told the AP in a telephone interview.

He refused to say where he was. Other Democratic lawmakers sent messages over Twitter and issued written statements, but did not say where they were.

The Democrats failed to show up when the Senate started its business around midday Thursday, and the sergeant at arms began looking for them. If he's unable to find them, he's authorized to seek help, including potentially contacting police.

Democratic Minority Leader Mark Miller released a statement on behalf of all Democrats urging Walker and Republicans to listen to opponents of the measure and seek a compromise. His statement did not address where Democrats were or when they planned to return.

"Today they checked out, and I'm not sure where they're at," Republican Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald said. "This is the ultimate shutdown, what we're seeing today."

100%. I'm in New Orleans at least once a year. Charlotte around 2-3 times a year and Charleston around 2-3 times a year.

I'd gladly pay a decent price point ($75-$150) to hop a train, not worry about shit, and get there in 2-4 hours.

In any case, its hard for me to think that this sort of project should be a priority for public funds when in a budget crisis situation.

What would $5/gallon gas do to that feeling, should it ever happen? (Curious)

In other words, you'd gladly pay a price much less than the break even price for providing rail service from Atlanta to New Orleans. It's not like the cost of the service suddenly goes away when you have taxpayers fund the difference. You just pay for it indirectly through taxes rather than directly through the price.

In any case, its hard for me to think that this sort of project should be a priority for public funds when in a budget crisis situation.

So what would you charge? I think the cost should be competitive if not better than flying.

That cost is for one way. I actually like train travel and would pay $200 for a round trip.

Just checking Eurail. Paris to Munich is roughly the same distance as Atl to NOLA and you can find round trip tickets for under $200.

I also think many Europeans would be more apt to explore the US with a decent rail system.

This is an oversimplification but Amtrak charges $120 for a one way ticket from ATL to N.O. and loses $1 billion per year or over $0.40 for ever $1 in revenues. If the ATL to N.O. route was no more or less profitable than any other that would suggest the breakeven for a one way ticket is about $170. I'm guessing high speed rail would if anything be more expensive but what do I know.

I like the idea of cheap rail fine if it was economical. I just don't think it is and hiding the true cost of it by shifting the burden on the taxpayer doesn't really help anything. I've looked at taking trips by rail but when I looked at the pricing it just didn't make sense to take the train rather than drive or fly and that was with it subsidized to the tune of 40 cents on the dollar.

It's even worse, Billy...when looking at the regional services' financials, you need to strip out the northeast corridor results. Intercity other than NYC-PHL-WAS performs far worse.

But Drinky apparently knows all about finance and the transportation industry, so all is well.

Quasi-seriously, does anyone really think companies aren't flocking to WI because there's no way to get people quickly beteeen MKE and MSN?

I doubt that. I think its more about the Wisconsin Governor trying to force the unions to the bargaining table over pensions.

Its hardball and I'm fine with that because if you aren't going to be part of the solution, you are a BIG part of the problem.

Wisconsin's new Republican governor has framed his assault on public worker's collective bargaining rights as a needed measure of fiscal austerity during tough times.

The reality is radically different. Unlike true austerity measures -- service rollbacks, furloughs, and other temporary measures that cause pain but save money -- rolling back worker's bargaining rights by itself saves almost nothing on its own. But Walker's doing it anyhow, to knock down a barrier and allow him to cut state employee benefits immediately.

Furthermore, this broadside comes less than a month after the state's fiscal bureau -- the Wisconsin equivalent of the Congressional Budget Office -- concluded that Wisconsin isn't even in need of austerity measures, and could conclude the fiscal year with a surplus. In fact, they say that the current budget shortfall is a direct result of tax cut policies Walker enacted in his first days in office.

I couldn't tell you if companies are or are not coming to the area because of the lack of the light rail or some other kind of system, what I do know there are lots of people, including myself, that travel between the two cities as well as Minneapolis and Chicago on a regular basis that would benefit from it.

I couldn't tell you if companies are or are not coming to the area because of the lack of the light rail or some other kind of system, what I do know there are lots of people, including myself, that travel between the two cities as well as Minneapolis and Chicago on a regular basis that would benefit from it.

I'm not sure about your math here - how full are those trains currently? If they had twice as many people riding for $120 they should be making money, right? I don't think Amtrak's problem is a expense problem, it is a demand problem. They need to get more people interested in riding trains instead of driving.

There seems to be a fundamental difference in philosophy here. I don't see how anyone could not say that a rail system like this between two areas where there is frequent traveling would be a bad thing in the long run. It's probably the most efficient way to travel between the these places, right?

The problem is, would it make money? Especially in the short run, while budgets are in crisis and education funding, etc. is being cut across the board. But is that really the final measure of its worth? I mean, this is a long term investment, putting something in place for the future rather than trying desperately to put band-aids on right now. Doesn't the fact that the state shouldn't be spending money on a rail system start to seem a little irrelevant when you consider they were being given the money to do it by the federal government? I mean, am I wrong about this? Was that money a loan? The governor claims there will be immeasurable, mysterious "hidden costs", but surely anyone with any interest in the project and its actual viability could investigate what any hidden costs could actually be. Surely there has to be some kind of feasible range. But this guy doesn't come across like he was ever interested in giving the idea a chance. Returning the federal money is simply a partisan political move.

The real difference between Billy G and ShamWow (formerly Billzebub) and the rest of is, most of us go "hmm, if they built something like that, I might use it." Those guys go "there has to be a fucking market for it, so that a businessman or group of investors would build it, or the gubmint wouldn't be printing money to make up a service that we're not sure people want, and might not have a sustainable business model."

They are, at heart, free market absolutists, whereas the rest of us neo-liberal namby-pamby dumbies think that right now, in AMGERGIKAG, we might seriously be at the "throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks" phase of forced economic recovery.