Re: $35 billion Mars vs. $68 billion California rail
Author: Q
Date: 07-17-2017 - 07:30

> Why would space exploration be cheaper than old rail tech on earth?


That question assumes facts not in evidence.

That $35 billion figure to go to Mars does not even include most of the tasks needed to get there. But even if it did, it is still just a spitball number put out there by the project's proponents - no actual evidence presented!

Same thing with the high speed rail - except that the $68 billion number has already long been proven to be Bullsh!t. Even so, anybody with any brains already knew it from the getgo anyway - no evidence there either!

It's not that Cal- Rail couldn't have been built for that, or even for less; but that given all the BS politics in California, it never would get built at all - at any price; also that what few fragments did get built, would be useless segments from no-where to He!!-N-gone.


Oh well - it's only money. And it does grow on trees - just ask any California politician!
Too bad the tree species Californicus Monetarus has been put of the endangered species list because of over harvesting.



Subject Written By Date/Time (PST)
  $35 billion Mars vs. $68 billion California rail Papandrano 07-14-2017 - 17:05
  Re: $35 billion Mars vs. $68 billion California rail read again 07-14-2017 - 17:15
  Re: $35 billion Mars vs. $68 billion California rail Dick Zellerbach 07-14-2017 - 18:00
  Re: $35 billion Mars vs. $68 billion California rail synonymouse 07-14-2017 - 19:28
  Re: $35 billion Mars vs. $68 billion California rail synonymouse 07-14-2017 - 19:30
  Re: $35 billion Mars vs. $68 billion California rail synonymouse 07-14-2017 - 21:07
  Re: BS and more BS in response...... Just Sayin 07-14-2017 - 21:18
  Re: $35 billion Mars vs. $68 billion California rail An Observer 07-14-2017 - 19:32
  Re: $35 billion Mars vs. $68 billion California rail Peter D. 07-14-2017 - 19:37
  Re: $35 billion Mars vs. $68 billion California rail synonymouse 07-14-2017 - 20:08
  Re: $35 billion Mars vs. $68 billion California rail Clem 07-14-2017 - 20:43
  Re: $35 billion Mars vs. $68 billion California rail An Observer 07-15-2017 - 10:53
  Re: $35 billion Mars vs. $68 billion California rail . 07-15-2017 - 13:35
  Re: $35 billion Mars vs. $68 billion California rail HUTCH 7.62 07-15-2017 - 18:36
  Re: $35 billion Mars vs. $68 billion California rail An Observer 07-15-2017 - 20:20
  Re: $35 billion Mars vs. $68 billion California rail PGE 07-16-2017 - 15:04
  Re: $35 billion Mars vs. $68 billion California rail on the other hand... 07-15-2017 - 20:31
  Re: $35 billion Mars vs. $68 billion California rail An Observer 07-16-2017 - 10:30
  Re: The cost of everything and the value of nothing..... BOB2 07-16-2017 - 12:32
  Re: The cost of everything and the value of nothing..... An Observer 07-16-2017 - 12:48
  Re: The cost of everything and the value of nothing..... BOB2 07-16-2017 - 13:40
  Now about this high speed rail thing... Commenter 07-16-2017 - 15:18
  Re: Now about this high speed rail thing... synonymouse 07-16-2017 - 19:25
  Re: Now about this high speed rail thing... Commenter 07-16-2017 - 21:16
  Re: $35 billion Mars vs. $68 billion California rail Q 07-17-2017 - 07:30
  Re: $35 billion Mars vs. $68 billion California rail Juan Million More 07-17-2017 - 11:52


Go to: Message ListSearch
Subject: 
Your Name: 
Spam prevention:
Please enter the code that you see below in the input field.
 **    **  **    **  **     **  **     **  ******** 
 **   **    **  **    **   **   ***   ***  **    ** 
 **  **      ****      ** **    **** ****      **   
 *****        **        ***     ** *** **     **    
 **  **       **       ** **    **     **    **     
 **   **      **      **   **   **     **    **     
 **    **     **     **     **  **     **    **     
This message board is maintained by:
Altamont Press Publishing Company